Sandy Springs Going After $25M in Grants As the Solution?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn't about "good people" versus those wishing the school unwell. I really don't think anyone wants the school to fail, except maybe developers who have more lucrative ideas for the land.

Most of the comments seem to be a good faith discussion (or criticism) of what seems to be yet another poor decision by an incompetent board that is seemingly trying to prove that it's previous total failures were an anomaly.

The board had literally nothing to do with this choice.

Well, if the new HoS or other administrators have the authority to enter into absurd agreements and then to send out a press release to amplify the idiocy, then the board has ceded its role as the stewards of the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn't about "good people" versus those wishing the school unwell. I really don't think anyone wants the school to fail, except maybe developers who have more lucrative ideas for the land.

Most of the comments seem to be a good faith discussion (or criticism) of what seems to be yet another poor decision by an incompetent board that is seemingly trying to prove that it's previous total failures were an anomaly.

The board had literally nothing to do with this choice.

Well, if the new HoS or other administrators have the authority to enter into absurd agreements and then to send out a press release to amplify the idiocy, then the board has ceded its role as the stewards of the school.

This is a misunderstanding of the role of a school board. Good governance says that trustees don't involve themselves in the day-to-day administrative decisions. That's for the Head of School and his/her senior staff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn't about "good people" versus those wishing the school unwell. I really don't think anyone wants the school to fail, except maybe developers who have more lucrative ideas for the land.

Most of the comments seem to be a good faith discussion (or criticism) of what seems to be yet another poor decision by an incompetent board that is seemingly trying to prove that it's previous total failures were an anomaly.

The board had literally nothing to do with this choice.

Well, if the new HoS or other administrators have the authority to enter into absurd agreements and then to send out a press release to amplify the idiocy, then the board has ceded its role as the stewards of the school.

This is a misunderstanding of the role of a school board. Good governance says that trustees don't involve themselves in the day-to-day administrative decisions. That's for the Head of School and his/her senior staff.

I’m the PP who works in independent school advancement. This isn’t a day-to-day administrative decision. Hiring a consultant to pursue $25 million in grants is a strategic fundraising/financial decision that requires board approval and ongoing oversight by the Development and/or Finance committees.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope that Sandy Springs will survive and thrive. It can.

But it's just true that this decision was a big red flag for a school that didn't need any more red flags. It signifies that the people responsible for fundraising don't have the necessary experience and understanding of the philanthropic landscape. So, ok. There's expertise and advice that you can tap into through your association memberships. Do that. Fast. And dissolve that partnership pronto.

+1 If the school eventually turns around, it won’t happen anytime soon.

She says, with glee, hoping it fails.

What a nasty thread.

The same parents follow SSFS "news" from thread to thread completely annoyed that SSFS just won't "die". Every time a new "story" comes out about SSFS they hope this will be the nail in the coffin. And it never is. Even a literal temporary shut down wasn't the end. SSFS has made some really bad decisions that caught up with them and they are going through a dark period but with light shining as always. The light always shines which is why SSFS won't fail. They will learn from their bad decisions and move forward into better days. Sure, this won't happen overnight and may even take years but the school won't die. These parents that follow from thread to thread have been second-guessing themselves since whatever moment they decided to leave. And they shouldn't. Be content with your choice for your own sanity. There's plenty of schools in the DMV that are great - SSFS is one of them and so too is whatever school you ended up at after SSFS. But for some reason they can't let go. And at this point it says far more about their own personal lives then it does SSFS. Ignore them or respond - it doesn't matter. They won't be satisfied until either SSFS fails or whatever truly ails them in their personal life is resolved.

Isn't this what the PP said? You sugarcoat these very serious issues while saying that any critique of the school is a sign of the PP's mental issues. Many supporters of the school are saddened and shocked that SSFS is a shadow of its former self (and no, it is no longer a "great" school). The same handful of posters follow the SSFS threads and accuse others of wanting the school to fail when most reasonable folks can see what a dire situation SSFS is in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn't about "good people" versus those wishing the school unwell. I really don't think anyone wants the school to fail, except maybe developers who have more lucrative ideas for the land.

Most of the comments seem to be a good faith discussion (or criticism) of what seems to be yet another poor decision by an incompetent board that is seemingly trying to prove that it's previous total failures were an anomaly.

The board had literally nothing to do with this choice.

Well, if the new HoS or other administrators have the authority to enter into absurd agreements and then to send out a press release to amplify the idiocy, then the board has ceded its role as the stewards of the school.

This is a misunderstanding of the role of a school board. Good governance says that trustees don't involve themselves in the day-to-day administrative decisions. That's for the Head of School and his/her senior staff.

I’m the PP who works in independent school advancement. This isn’t a day-to-day administrative decision. Hiring a consultant to pursue $25 million in grants is a strategic fundraising/financial decision that requires board approval and ongoing oversight by the Development and/or Finance committees.

Or at least it should be. If the school is wagering its future existence on a grant strategy, surely the selection of the expert to procure the funds falls under the purview of the board.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope that Sandy Springs will survive and thrive. It can.

But it's just true that this decision was a big red flag for a school that didn't need any more red flags. It signifies that the people responsible for fundraising don't have the necessary experience and understanding of the philanthropic landscape. So, ok. There's expertise and advice that you can tap into through your association memberships. Do that. Fast. And dissolve that partnership pronto.

+1 If the school eventually turns around, it won’t happen anytime soon.

She says, with glee, hoping it fails.

What a nasty thread.

The same parents follow SSFS "news" from thread to thread completely annoyed that SSFS just won't "die". Every time a new "story" comes out about SSFS they hope this will be the nail in the coffin. And it never is. Even a literal temporary shut down wasn't the end. SSFS has made some really bad decisions that caught up with them and they are going through a dark period but with light shining as always. The light always shines which is why SSFS won't fail. They will learn from their bad decisions and move forward into better days. Sure, this won't happen overnight and may even take years but the school won't die. These parents that follow from thread to thread have been second-guessing themselves since whatever moment they decided to leave. And they shouldn't. Be content with your choice for your own sanity. There's plenty of schools in the DMV that are great - SSFS is one of them and so too is whatever school you ended up at after SSFS. But for some reason they can't let go. And at this point it says far more about their own personal lives then it does SSFS. Ignore them or respond - it doesn't matter. They won't be satisfied until either SSFS fails or whatever truly ails them in their personal life is resolved.

Isn't this what the PP said? You sugarcoat these very serious issues while saying that any[i] critique of the school is a sign of the PP's mental issues. Many supporters of the school are saddened and shocked that SSFS is a shadow of its former self (and no, it is no longer a "great" school). The same handful of posters follow the SSFS threads and accuse others of wanting the school to fail when [b]most reasonable folks can see what a dire situation SSFS is in.

Having the opinion that SSFS won't die is hardly sugarcoating. Nevertheless, you give yourself away with your belief that only those who feel the situation is dire are the reasonable ones. Finally, calling out those parents who have been jumping from one SSFS thread to the next with the obvious intent of piling on the situation with hope of failure does not neglect the fact that of course there are many supporters who are saddened nor does it suggest that "any" critique of the school is a sign of someone's personal issues. Check yourself - you obviously brought some defensiveness to your interpretation of the post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn't about "good people" versus those wishing the school unwell. I really don't think anyone wants the school to fail, except maybe developers who have more lucrative ideas for the land.

Most of the comments seem to be a good faith discussion (or criticism) of what seems to be yet another poor decision by an incompetent board that is seemingly trying to prove that it's previous total failures were an anomaly.

The board had literally nothing to do with this choice.

How do you know the board had nothing to do with this choice? Evidence please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn't about "good people" versus those wishing the school unwell. I really don't think anyone wants the school to fail, except maybe developers who have more lucrative ideas for the land.

Most of the comments seem to be a good faith discussion (or criticism) of what seems to be yet another poor decision by an incompetent board that is seemingly trying to prove that it's previous total failures were an anomaly.

The board had literally nothing to do with this choice.

Well, if the new HoS or other administrators have the authority to enter into absurd agreements and then to send out a press release to amplify the idiocy, then the board has ceded its role as the stewards of the school.

This is a misunderstanding of the role of a school board. Good governance says that trustees don't involve themselves in the day-to-day administrative decisions. That's for the Head of School and his/her senior staff.

I’m the PP who works in independent school advancement. This isn’t a day-to-day administrative decision. Hiring a consultant to pursue $25 million in grants is a strategic fundraising/financial decision that requires board approval and ongoing oversight by the Development and/or Finance committees.

I also work in school advancement. Our board's development committee would be informed of the development office's decision to pursue grants, but it would never ask for permission.

[Anonymous]

It’s a brand new head of school taking his first steps and issuing public statements that address a piece of their very public financial crisis. Of course his bosses, the Board, should have been involved. It’s not business as usual. And yes it was a singularly dumb tone deaf move to contract with anyone with such limited experience, much less advertise it as any kind of possible rescue which it is not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope that Sandy Springs will survive and thrive. It can.

But it's just true that this decision was a big red flag for a school that didn't need any more red flags. It signifies that the people responsible for fundraising don't have the necessary experience and understanding of the philanthropic landscape. So, ok. There's expertise and advice that you can tap into through your association memberships. Do that. Fast. And dissolve that partnership pronto.

+1 If the school eventually turns around, it won’t happen anytime soon.

She says, with glee, hoping it fails.

What a nasty thread.

The same parents follow SSFS "news" from thread to thread completely annoyed that SSFS just won't "die". Every time a new "story" comes out about SSFS they hope this will be the nail in the coffin. And it never is. Even a literal temporary shut down wasn't the end. SSFS has made some really bad decisions that caught up with them and they are going through a dark period but with light shining as always. The light always shines which is why SSFS won't fail. They will learn from their bad decisions and move forward into better days. Sure, this won't happen overnight and may even take years but the school won't die. These parents that follow from thread to thread have been second-guessing themselves since whatever moment they decided to leave. And they shouldn't. Be content with your choice for your own sanity. There's plenty of schools in the DMV that are great - SSFS is one of them and so too is whatever school you ended up at after SSFS. But for some reason they can't let go. And at this point it says far more about their own personal lives then it does SSFS. Ignore them or respond - it doesn't matter. They won't be satisfied until either SSFS fails or whatever truly ails them in their personal life is resolved.

Isn't this what the PP said? You sugarcoat these very serious issues while saying that any[i] critique of the school is a sign of the PP's mental issues. Many supporters of the school are saddened and shocked that SSFS is a shadow of its former self (and no, it is no longer a "great" school). The same handful of posters follow the SSFS threads and accuse others of wanting the school to fail when [b]most reasonable folks can see what a dire situation SSFS is in.

Having the opinion that SSFS won't die is hardly sugarcoating. Nevertheless, you give yourself away with your belief that only those who feel the situation is dire are the reasonable ones. Finally, calling out those parents who have been jumping from one SSFS thread to the next with the obvious intent of piling on the situation with hope of failure does not neglect the fact that of course there are many supporters who are saddened nor does it suggest that "any" critique of the school is a sign of someone's personal issues. Check yourself - you obviously brought some defensiveness to your interpretation of the post.

Good luck trying to gaslight reasonable people. You can try to defend SSFS's actions all you want in your little echo chamber.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope that Sandy Springs will survive and thrive. It can.

But it's just true that this decision was a big red flag for a school that didn't need any more red flags. It signifies that the people responsible for fundraising don't have the necessary experience and understanding of the philanthropic landscape. So, ok. There's expertise and advice that you can tap into through your association memberships. Do that. Fast. And dissolve that partnership pronto.

+1 If the school eventually turns around, it won’t happen anytime soon.

She says, with glee, hoping it fails.

What a nasty thread.

The same parents follow SSFS "news" from thread to thread completely annoyed that SSFS just won't "die". Every time a new "story" comes out about SSFS they hope this will be the nail in the coffin. And it never is. Even a literal temporary shut down wasn't the end. SSFS has made some really bad decisions that caught up with them and they are going through a dark period but with light shining as always. The light always shines which is why SSFS won't fail. They will learn from their bad decisions and move forward into better days. Sure, this won't happen overnight and may even take years but the school won't die. These parents that follow from thread to thread have been second-guessing themselves since whatever moment they decided to leave. And they shouldn't. Be content with your choice for your own sanity. There's plenty of schools in the DMV that are great - SSFS is one of them and so too is whatever school you ended up at after SSFS. But for some reason they can't let go. And at this point it says far more about their own personal lives then it does SSFS. Ignore them or respond - it doesn't matter. They won't be satisfied until either SSFS fails or whatever truly ails them in their personal life is resolved.

Isn't this what the PP said? You sugarcoat these very serious issues while saying that any[i] critique of the school is a sign of the PP's mental issues. Many supporters of the school are saddened and shocked that SSFS is a shadow of its former self (and no, it is no longer a "great" school). The same handful of posters follow the SSFS threads and accuse others of wanting the school to fail when [b]most reasonable folks can see what a dire situation SSFS is in.

Having the opinion that SSFS won't die is hardly sugarcoating. Nevertheless, you give yourself away with your belief that only those who feel the situation is dire are the reasonable ones. Finally, calling out those parents who have been jumping from one SSFS thread to the next with the obvious intent of piling on the situation with hope of failure does not neglect the fact that of course there are many supporters who are saddened nor does it suggest that "any" critique of the school is a sign of someone's personal issues. Check yourself - you obviously brought some defensiveness to your interpretation of the post.

Good luck trying to gaslight reasonable people. You can try to defend SSFS's actions all you want in your little echo chamber.

Hmmm. I don't think the PP needs "luck". Judging from your reply, they clearly succeeded.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope that Sandy Springs will survive and thrive. It can.

But it's just true that this decision was a big red flag for a school that didn't need any more red flags. It signifies that the people responsible for fundraising don't have the necessary experience and understanding of the philanthropic landscape. So, ok. There's expertise and advice that you can tap into through your association memberships. Do that. Fast. And dissolve that partnership pronto.

+1 If the school eventually turns around, it won’t happen anytime soon.

She says, with glee, hoping it fails.

What a nasty thread.

The same parents follow SSFS "news" from thread to thread completely annoyed that SSFS just won't "die". Every time a new "story" comes out about SSFS they hope this will be the nail in the coffin. And it never is. Even a literal temporary shut down wasn't the end. SSFS has made some really bad decisions that caught up with them and they are going through a dark period but with light shining as always. The light always shines which is why SSFS won't fail. They will learn from their bad decisions and move forward into better days. Sure, this won't happen overnight and may even take years but the school won't die. These parents that follow from thread to thread have been second-guessing themselves since whatever moment they decided to leave. And they shouldn't. Be content with your choice for your own sanity. There's plenty of schools in the DMV that are great - SSFS is one of them and so too is whatever school you ended up at after SSFS. But for some reason they can't let go. And at this point it says far more about their own personal lives then it does SSFS. Ignore them or respond - it doesn't matter. They won't be satisfied until either SSFS fails or whatever truly ails them in their personal life is resolved.

Isn't this what the PP said? You sugarcoat these very serious issues while saying that any[i] critique of the school is a sign of the PP's mental issues. Many supporters of the school are saddened and shocked that SSFS is a shadow of its former self (and no, it is no longer a "great" school). The same handful of posters follow the SSFS threads and accuse others of wanting the school to fail when [b]most reasonable folks can see what a dire situation SSFS is in.

Having the opinion that SSFS won't die is hardly sugarcoating. Nevertheless, you give yourself away with your belief that only those who feel the situation is dire are the reasonable ones. Finally, calling out those parents who have been jumping from one SSFS thread to the next with the obvious intent of piling on the situation with hope of failure does not neglect the fact that of course there are many supporters who are saddened nor does it suggest that "any" critique of the school is a sign of someone's personal issues. Check yourself - you obviously brought some defensiveness to your interpretation of the post.

Good luck trying to gaslight reasonable people. You can try to defend SSFS's actions all you want in your little echo chamber.

Either you are lacking in reading comprehension or you have some baggage that influences your interpretation of what you read. Reasonable people are usually also self-aware.

[Anonymous]

We are excited for the school year, and most importantly, so is our high schooler.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We are excited for the school year, and most importantly, so is our high schooler.

Same!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We are excited for the school year, and most importantly, so is our high schooler.

+1 So is our middle schooler!