Behind the Bid: Investigating the RIFAC Preschool Catering Decision
- Annika OMelia
- 1 day ago
- 8 min read
On February 27th, Rock Island Fitness and Activity Center (RIFAC) Preschool Director, Kathryn Bailey, emailed her supervisors the following:
To: John Gripp, Todd Winter, Nikki Smith
From: Kathryn Bailey
Date: 02/27/26
Subject: Catering Bid
I have received and reviewed three bids for the 2026-2027 school year catering contract from Hy-Vee, Main Event Catering, and Bridges Catering. All three providers submitted quotes of $4.50 per child per meal.
Following discussions with each vendor, I would like to work with Main Event Catering (Holiday Inn).
Best regards,
Kathy Bailey
So, how did Bridges Catering end up with the staff recommendation to receive the contract on April 27th? Good question. Not a super clear answer.
The Initial Vendor Outreach
In January of 2026, Bailey, the Preschool Director, decided to explore catering options for the program. She reached out to Bridges, Main Event and Hy-Vee and asked if they'd be interested in providing a quote for lunches. Bailey was transparent with each company about what RIFAC was currently paying and shared information about menus, portion sizes, and other requirements that would meet the preschool's needs.
By February 4th, Bailey had gathered enough information from each vendor and sent an email to her direct supervisor, Nikki Smith, letting her know, "I have three quotes. Who do I show them to?"
Nikki replied, "Me. And then we decide together."
The City Issues a Formal RFP
On February 9th, Bailey emailed Todd Winter, Parks and Recreation Department Assistant Director, the following:
Bid for 40 student lunches delivered daily with 4 gallons of milk delivered weekly. Starting August 2026-May 2027. No lunches during RIMSD breaks or summer. Bid for food only, we have plates and utensils. Must meet DCFS serving sizes.
This email suggests that some conversation had taken place that moved the informal bid process to a formal one. Per the City of Rock Island's Purchasing Policy, any contract over $15,000 is subject to a formal bid process and the lowest price returned must be selected.
Another email on February 10th, between Bailey and Main Event Catering, provides further evidence that a formal process was initiated as Bailey writes, "I found out that since this would be over a certain amount of money, we have to technically bid it out. So Todd (Parks and Rec Assistant Director) from RIFAC will be getting ahold of you for how to put your bid in."
The same day, Winter sent an email to Bailey and Smith with a draft of the Request for Proposals (RFP) for the preschool meal catering. Throughout the day, Winter and Bailey went back and forth clarifying and fine-tuning the RFP. How would the food be delivered? What kind of storage container? When was the Rock Island Milan School District on break? What size servings does DCFS require? Should the bid be live for two weeks or three weeks?
The resulting bid is below and can be located on the city website here: RIFAC PRESCHOOL RFP
The RFP was live for two weeks, from February 13 - February 27. Three companies submitted bids which are included below.
Bailey Selects Main Event
Once the formal bidding process closed, Bailey made her recommendation: Main Event Catering. She included notes with her recommendation. She indicates she preferred Main Event for their responsiveness and ease of communication.
Hy-Vee | Main Event | Bridges |
40 meals @ $4.50 | 40 meals @ $4.50 | 40 meals @ $4.50 |
Milk subject to shelf price | 4 gallons milk weekly | 4 gallons milk weekly |
Will adhere to DCFS guidelines for serving sizes | Licensed dietician | |
Will do monthly menu | Gave sample menus of Active Adult Daycare and Mercer County Jail | |
Guaranteed for school year |
Of note: In the original bid, which included a one-year term, Bridges Catering started at $4.50 but indicated that price was only good through 12/31/26 and that their price would increase to $4.75 after 01/01/2027. The RFP specified that the price should not increase during the contract period.
Gripp Introduces New Evaluation Criteria
The day Bailey submitted her recommendation for final approval, March 10th, Parks & Recreation Director John Gripp emailed Todd Winter and wrote:
“After further consideration, we need to issue an official RFP for this project.”
However, City records show the formal RFP process had already taken place between February 13 and February 27.
In the same email, Gripp wrote:
“Since the total pricing exceeds $10,000, our purchasing policy requires a formal RFP process. This is especially important to ensure compliance given that an elected official is among the bidders.”
Gripp then directed staff to require vendors to meet three additional criteria:
“Do you follow DCFS guidelines for serving sizes?”
“Are you able to lock in pricing for two years?”
“Do you have a licensed dietitian on staff overseeing the menus?”
The original public RFP did not require vendors to coordinate with a licensed dietitian but the bidding process revealed that Bridges was the only bidder who noted a dietician was available. The RFP had already required vendors to comply with DCFS serving standards and to maintain firm pricing throughout the contract term. The original RFP was only for one year.
A formal RFP process had already been completed between February 13 and February 27. No new RFP was issued.
The Second Round of Questions
The next correspondence identified is an email from Smith providing Bailey with a message and questions to send to each vendor:
We have received multiple competitive bids for our RIFAC Preschool Lunches. We have some follow up questions to help discern which company will be the best fit?
Is this $4.50 price guaranteed for the August 2026 - May 2027 school year?
Is this price guaranteed for the August 2027- May 2028 school year? If not, what is the anticipated price increase?
What is the projected daily delivery time?
How will the food be kept at the DCFS and State serving temperature?
What flexibility is there with canceling meals for school cancellations? (Example - school closed for weather emergency, can we cancel our meal with a refund by a certain time of day?)
What location will the food be prepared at?
What is the billing address?
Of note: The question about a dietician does not appear here.
At this point, Bailey points out to her colleagues that Bridges already confirmed in their bid that their price would increase in the contract year, writing:
This is the first bid they sent me on January 14 before it went public showing that the price would indeed increase in 2027 to $4.75. See attached.
There is no response on record to her clarification and she proceeds to send the email questions to the vendors as directed. At 11:07 am (Hy-Vee), 11:08 am (Main Event), and 11:09 am (Bridges) on March 11, 2026.
The Second Round of Responses
At 11:30 am, roughly 20 minutes after receiving the follow-up questions, Bridges responds indicating not only will they now lock their price in year one, they will guarantee that same price in year two - a year not included in the RFP.
Hy-vee answers that they can't guarantee year two pricing but will hold their cost steady in year one at $4.50
Main Event will also hold their price steady in year one but can't guarantee year two pricing at this time.
Through the follow-up process, Bridges went from being the most expensive option to the least expensive option. In 20 minutes.
A Possible Confusion
In reviewing the emails and statements, an area of confusion emerged: at different points, the people involved appeared to be interpreting "two years" in different ways.
Alderman Healy and Kathy Bailey both understood the contract to be for one year. The price increase in Bridges' January quote — from $4.50 to $4.75 — was set to take effect January 1, 2027, midway through that single school year, not in a hypothetical second year. Neither was discussing a multi-year contract, because that is not what the RFP described.
In her initial recommendation memo, Bailey listed Bridges' price as $4.50 without noting the in-year increase to $4.75 that the company's January quote had specified. In the recommendation section, she wrote that Main Event was offering a "guaranteed price lock of two years" — language that, in context, appears to describe Main Event's commitment to hold $4.50 across the full contract year, including the calendar-year change from 2026 to 2027 that had triggered Bridges' increase.
Gripp's May statement offers a different explanation. He wrote that after discussions with Winter, "we determined that Kathy understood '2026-2027' to be two years, but it actually represented one school year," and that this prompted the additional questions to all three bidders.
The RFP Bailey co-drafted defines "2026-2027" explicitly as one school year: "Starting August 2026 through May 2027." The memo Bailey wrote uses "2026-2027 school year" in the bid tabulation and "two years" in the recommendation section as separate phrases referring to different commitments.
The follow-up questions also produced different interpretations among the bidders. Main Event appears to have read the second-year question as exploratory — an inquiry about what pricing might look like beyond the contract, not a request to commit to a second year. Their response reflected that: they would hold $4.50 for the contract year, and any future-year increase would fall in a 5-to-20 percent range with ample notice. Bridges appears to have read the same question as an offer to lock in a two-year commitment, and answered yes to a guarantee that extended beyond the contract itself. Neither company had been offered a two-year contract. The RFP was for one school year. But the supplemental questions asked about a second year the RFP had not solicited, and the divergence in how that question was read produced answers that staff then used to compare the bidders against one another.
The Award
With the supplemental questions answered, Bridges had a matching price for year one and the lowest price for a second year the RFP had not solicited. Under the City's purchasing policy, staff are required to select the lowest-priced bidder.
Bailey Objects to the Process
Reached for this story, Preschool Director Kathy Bailey said she did not agree with how the process unfolded and asked that her name be removed from the recommendation to city council. Her understanding was that Main Event had come in with the lowest bid after the initial sealed bids were reviewed.
Healy Defends the Process
In email correspondence with Rock Island Line, Alderman Bill Healy denied any inappropriate conversations regarding the bid process. Healy wrote:
“We were reached out to a second time after completing a first RFP that stated it was a competitive process and asked what we would do on a second year. Bridges said it would remain without a price change for year 2. The original quote was based on a year to year contract. The decision was made to not raise the price if there was a 2 yr commitment."
RIFAC's Response
In a written statement provided to Rock Island Line, Gripp defended the process and stated:
“All submitted bids were highly competitive and closely aligned in pricing. To ensure fairness and consistency, all vendors were provided the same follow-up questions and equal opportunity to respond.”
Gripp also stated:
“Bridges Catering distinguished itself by guaranteeing its pricing for a two-year period, which provided additional long-term value and cost certainty to the City.”
He concluded:
“At no time was there any inappropriate communication with staff or vendors, and the process followed was consistent with and fully in line with the City’s purchasing policy.”
Bid and Bid and Bid Again
An informal bidding process led to a formal bidding process led to a second round of questions that was never itself a formal re-bid. In the end, Bridges Catering received the staff recommendation on April 27, 2026.
At that City Council meeting, Alderman Healy withdrew the bid on behalf of his family's business. "This issue has been mischaracterized publicly and on Facebook and has created a distraction for the city's work," he told the council. "I am not going to continue to engage in that. This decision is not based on any legal conflicts or wrongdoings but simply because it is not worth pursuing under these circumstances."
With Bridges out of the running, staff recommended Main Event. At the following council meeting, the motion to award the contract passed. Alderman Healy recused himself. Alderwoman Jenni Swanson voted against.
Main Event ultimately received the contract — the same vendor Bailey had recommended on February 27, before any of this began. The same outcome the documents suggest was available, and arguably required, eight weeks earlier.