Summary Analysis of data received regarding outsourcing success I was not allowed to present at May 21, 2013 meeting.

1. BOE meeting May 21, 2013 www.slideshare.net/WMfood

2. Source: Cafe Revenue-Disbursement Reports-2Years.pdf received 4/23/2013
District Managed
09-10
District Managed
10-11
Pomptonian
11-12
Pomptonian
12-13 Mar
Revenue $ 1,168,978.27 $ 1,091,900.12 $ 1,141,203.77 $ 736,296.49
Expenses $ 1,216,988.42 $ 1,219,294.20 $ 1,308,703.81 $ 955,200.43
Profit/Loss $ (48,010.15) $ (127,394.08) $ (167,500.04) $ (218,903.94)
Food Cost $ (418,440.35) $ (440,611.46) $ (327,339.59)
Pomp Fee $ (82,485.15) $ (63,029.12)
FSS S+B $ (49,233.41)

3.  Cafeteria Revenue and Disbursements memos
indicate:
 2009-2010 yearly losses of $48,010 (without Pomptonian,
includes all District employee salaries and benefits)
 2010-2011 yearly losses of $ 127,394 (without Pomptonian
includes all District employee salaries and benefits)
 2011-2012 yearly losses of $167,500 (with Pomptonian
includes all District employee salaries and benefits)
 2012-2013 (Sep-Mar) losses of $218,900 (with Pomptonian
includes all District employee salaries and benefits).
We could easily surpass last year’s total by 60%+ !

4.  Almost all 2011-2012Cafeteria Revenue and
Disbursements reports "summarize" the increasing
loss is due to management fees paid to Pomptonian.
 All 2012-2013Cafeteria Revenue and Disbursements
"summarize" that the increasing loss is due to lower
revenue due to lower food sales.
 The use of Pomptonian has not increased the number of
lunches being served, even with the BOE significantly
lowering the lunch prices in 2012-13.
 The District has paid Pomptonian Management fee of
$82,485 in 2011-12 and $63,029 through March of 2012-13
(estimated to be on track at $82,000 again by year-end).

5. Source: Cafe Revenue-Disbursement Reports-2Years.pdf received 4/23/2013

6.  CafeteriaWorkers same pay 2008-2011
 Voluntary wage freezes and increase in benefits
contribution
 Pomptonian 2011-2012, renewed 2012-2013
 Supposedly better purchasing power for food
 $0.0948/$3.25 HS lunch (2.9%) in 2011-2012
 Recommended Price decrease for 2012-2013
 $0.0967/$2.75 HS lunch (3.5%) in 2012-2013
 Why No-Cost first year (~ $82k Mgt costs)?

7.  Under federal and State Law, even with
outsourcing food Services, the District “Local
EducationAgency” (LEA) is still responsible
for the Oversight and Supervision of Food
ServiceOperations.

8.  Questions
 By contract, if the Supervisor of Food Services is not an employee of
the District, the expense of replacing this employee will increase
Pomptonian’s operating costs. How much will this increase be?
 Who supervises/manages district employees without a Supervisor of
Food Services?
 Will all District cafeteria employees be replaced by Pomptonian
employees? (This seems to be the direction.)
 Who does State reporting, Free/Reduced Lunch Program, etc.? (This
can not be done by a private company.)
 Who will assume these duties and responsibilities if there is no
Supervisor of Food Services position?

9.  Questions
 At what cost and loss of efficiency will someone else in the District assume
these duties?
 What training, experience or expertise does any other employee have in Food
Services?
 Based on the facts, what are the economical and operational efficiencies that
justify eliminating the position of Supervisor of Food Services and continuing
to pay Pomptonian a management fee to operate at higher losses than
keeping our food services in-house?
 What plan/proposal has been presented to provide Food Services after July 1,
this year?
 Until the Board has answers to all of these questions, it would be
premature and ill-fated to eliminate the position of Supervisor of Food
Services at this time.

10. Revenue: Expenses: 2012-March 2013 Loss ~$219k !
BOE Internal memos of Cafeteria Revenue and Disbursements do not
support the Superintendent’s Recommendation to eliminate the
Supervisor of Food Services Position for reasons of efficiency and
economy, nor does it support the Superintendent’s recommendation
that the District will be able to continue to adequately provide food
services to the students after the elimination of the position.
This doesn’t even seem to make economic sense, let alone address
operational issues. Please take a closer look at all the facts and
financials figures before making a decision that will eliminate not
only the Supervisor of Food Services position, but also many options
the District currently has for providing Food Services to our children.