Call for independent review of Ontario’s $66M Classroom Supplies Fund
The Issue
This school year, the Ontario government gave roughly 80,000 elementary teachers $750 each for classroom materials. But teachers cannot choose where to spend it. The entire program runs through one supplier selected by the province: Staples.
When government directs this much public money through one company, Ontarians should be able to understand how that company was selected and have confidence that the process was fair. Instead, the unanswered questions surrounding this procurement risk undermining confidence in the people, systems and institutions entrusted with spending public money.
A four-year contract was reopened less than a year later
In June 2025, Ontario established a four-year Vendor of Record arrangement for office supplies with multiple suppliers, running until 2029. Less than a year into its term, the province opened the arrangement to a refresh and added a new Classroom Products category for the Classroom Supplies Fund. Based on the public record, this appears to be the first refresh in the history of the province's office-supplies arrangement.
Every other category in the contract allows multiple suppliers. The Classroom Products category was designed from the outset for just one.
When a single procurement decision directs $66 million in annual public spending to one supplier, how that decision was made deserves scrutiny.
The government says Staples was dramatically cheaper
The government says Staples won on price at about half the next bidder. The Minister of Education has pointed to a list of 221 products as evidence of the savings the program delivers. That list includes Staples-branded products and other products with unusually low prices.
Ontarians need to understand how the evaluated basket was normalized to ensure an apples-to-apples comparison between bidders, particularly when different brands, products and package sizes were being compared.
They also need to know what safeguards were in place to ensure unusually low or loss-leader pricing on a small number of products could not distort the evaluated total or influence the outcome.
This matters because the evaluated basket represents only a small share of the roughly 3,000 products teachers can order. When the government says one bidder was almost 50% cheaper, Ontarians should be able to understand how that comparison was made, particularly when teachers report paying more under this contract than they did through previous school suppliers and, in some cases, more than on Staples’ own public website.
The questions that need answers
- Why was a four-year contract opened to a refresh, apparently for the first time in the history of the office-supplies arrangement, less than a year after it was awarded, to create a $66 million category for a single supplier?
- Who decided the new category would have only one supplier when the other categories allow multiple suppliers, and what was the rationale?
- How was the evaluated basket normalized to account for Staples-branded products that competing bidders could not supply?
- What safeguards prevented unusually low prices on a small number of items from disproportionately influencing the outcome?
- How many compliant bids were received, how were they scored, and will the province make the evaluation method and results public?
- Why are teachers finding some products cheaper outside the program, including on Staples' own public website, and what protections are in place to ensure the program delivers the value taxpayers were promised?
What we are asking for
Public confidence depends on the people, systems, policies and procedures responsible for administering billions of dollars in public money. When a $66 million annual program raises this many unanswered questions, independent scrutiny is warranted.
We are asking Ontario MPPs to request a special review of the Classroom Supplies Fund procurement by the Auditor General of Ontario. We are also asking Supply Ontario to make public the evaluation method used to award the contract.
If the process was sound, an independent review will confirm it. If it was not, problems can be identified and corrected before more public money is committed.
Why your signature matters
A request to the Auditor General starts with MPPs deciding this issue deserves scrutiny. Every signature shows them that Ontarians expect answers.
Please sign, share this petition and send it to your local MPP.
Disclosure: eSupply Canada is an Ontario supplier of office and classroom products. It did not bid on the Classroom Supplies Fund procurement opportunity.
431
The Issue
This school year, the Ontario government gave roughly 80,000 elementary teachers $750 each for classroom materials. But teachers cannot choose where to spend it. The entire program runs through one supplier selected by the province: Staples.
When government directs this much public money through one company, Ontarians should be able to understand how that company was selected and have confidence that the process was fair. Instead, the unanswered questions surrounding this procurement risk undermining confidence in the people, systems and institutions entrusted with spending public money.
A four-year contract was reopened less than a year later
In June 2025, Ontario established a four-year Vendor of Record arrangement for office supplies with multiple suppliers, running until 2029. Less than a year into its term, the province opened the arrangement to a refresh and added a new Classroom Products category for the Classroom Supplies Fund. Based on the public record, this appears to be the first refresh in the history of the province's office-supplies arrangement.
Every other category in the contract allows multiple suppliers. The Classroom Products category was designed from the outset for just one.
When a single procurement decision directs $66 million in annual public spending to one supplier, how that decision was made deserves scrutiny.
The government says Staples was dramatically cheaper
The government says Staples won on price at about half the next bidder. The Minister of Education has pointed to a list of 221 products as evidence of the savings the program delivers. That list includes Staples-branded products and other products with unusually low prices.
Ontarians need to understand how the evaluated basket was normalized to ensure an apples-to-apples comparison between bidders, particularly when different brands, products and package sizes were being compared.
They also need to know what safeguards were in place to ensure unusually low or loss-leader pricing on a small number of products could not distort the evaluated total or influence the outcome.
This matters because the evaluated basket represents only a small share of the roughly 3,000 products teachers can order. When the government says one bidder was almost 50% cheaper, Ontarians should be able to understand how that comparison was made, particularly when teachers report paying more under this contract than they did through previous school suppliers and, in some cases, more than on Staples’ own public website.
The questions that need answers
- Why was a four-year contract opened to a refresh, apparently for the first time in the history of the office-supplies arrangement, less than a year after it was awarded, to create a $66 million category for a single supplier?
- Who decided the new category would have only one supplier when the other categories allow multiple suppliers, and what was the rationale?
- How was the evaluated basket normalized to account for Staples-branded products that competing bidders could not supply?
- What safeguards prevented unusually low prices on a small number of items from disproportionately influencing the outcome?
- How many compliant bids were received, how were they scored, and will the province make the evaluation method and results public?
- Why are teachers finding some products cheaper outside the program, including on Staples' own public website, and what protections are in place to ensure the program delivers the value taxpayers were promised?
What we are asking for
Public confidence depends on the people, systems, policies and procedures responsible for administering billions of dollars in public money. When a $66 million annual program raises this many unanswered questions, independent scrutiny is warranted.
We are asking Ontario MPPs to request a special review of the Classroom Supplies Fund procurement by the Auditor General of Ontario. We are also asking Supply Ontario to make public the evaluation method used to award the contract.
If the process was sound, an independent review will confirm it. If it was not, problems can be identified and corrected before more public money is committed.
Why your signature matters
A request to the Auditor General starts with MPPs deciding this issue deserves scrutiny. Every signature shows them that Ontarians expect answers.
Please sign, share this petition and send it to your local MPP.
Disclosure: eSupply Canada is an Ontario supplier of office and classroom products. It did not bid on the Classroom Supplies Fund procurement opportunity.
The Decision Makers
Supporter Voices
Petition Updates
Share this petition
Petition created on September 23, 2026