WES Head of School resigns

[Anonymous]

I think PP is right that a mix of constituencies is important on a board. But aren't most independent school boards composed primarily (80%) of current parents? WES' board is chaired by an alum who is also a current parent -- which seems a great choice. He must have a longtime perspective on the school.

The WES board should be leading the school in giving, but those donor lists make it obvious that most of them are content to "participate" and let just a few shoulder that burden. They shouldn't approve a new campaign unless they're willing to lead by example. My family's gift will not exceed the smallest board gift.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think PP is right that a mix of constituencies is important on a board. But aren't most independent school boards composed primarily (80%) of current parents? WES' board is chaired by an alum who is also a current parent -- which seems a great choice. He must have a longtime perspective on the school.

The WES board should be leading the school in giving, but those donor lists make it obvious that most of them are content to "participate" and let just a few shoulder that burden. They shouldn't approve a new campaign unless they're willing to lead by example. My family's gift will not exceed the smallest board gift.

No. According to NAIS, the national average is 48.7% current parents. Past parents tend to be more desirable than alums.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My family's gift will not exceed the smallest board gift.

I don't know the situation at WES, but at many schools, this would be a ridiculous position to take. Most boards have several members who have particular skills the board needs or who just work extraordinarily hard for the school. They are not necessarily wealthy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My family's gift will not exceed the smallest board gift.

I don't know the situation at WES, but at many schools, this would be a ridiculous position to take. Most boards have several members who have particular skills the board needs or who just work extraordinarily hard for the school. They are not necessarily wealthy.

+1 Just because someone gives a lot of money doesn't mean they have the brains or the temperament to be a board member. The bets people should be on the board regardless of their ability to give. Too many boards follow the money without actually considering that some of these people are just not that birght.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

joromo703 wrote:I think your view of the school is a bit distorted. WES is not in "serious trouble" at all -- enrollment is growing and parents are happy. I am very pleased with the direction of the school.

I'm not on the Board but I like that parents of current students are, as they have a finger on the pulse of the school. You clearly have a different opinion, but not one that is especially convincing.

I have no specific knowledge or connection with WES, so I am speaking in general terms here. It is fine to have some current parents on the board, but you need a balance of alumni, past parents, retired administrators from other schools, people with business experience, etc. The problem with having too many current parents is that they often have personal agendas and are thinking more in the short-term, rather than than making decisions that will be best for the school in the future but may not currently benefit their kids. Research shows that head of school turnover, and thus instability, occurs most often in schools with 80% or more current parents making up the board. Current parents often do not understand that the role of the board is to set policies and long-term strategies, rather than manage the day to day operation of the school. I am sure that nearly all current parents serving on the boards of independent schools are well-meaning and dedicated to the school. However, it is only natural for them to be guided by self-interest at times, rather than making decisions that are best for the long-term health of the school.

Very well put. Parents on the board create conflicts of interest and problems when their children need to be disciplined but no one has the guts to do it (especially if the child is a minority and his parent was put on the board because, they make the board look diverse). The parent members, unfortunately, view it also as a feather in their cap, which peculiarly leads them to talk a lot about "Well, I'm on the board and we think X" which is not what being on a board is about. It's not good for either parent or child (who gets an obnoxious big head and thinks they are indestructible and can bully all the other kids).

WES needs a professional board that can set the school on a long-term stable course. Parents bouncing in and out annually just because they are minorities, past auction chairs, gave a lot of money, hosted big parties at their house, ran a 100% cap. campaign, are popular with the headmaster, or are head of the PTA does not make sense. These people do not have the long-term professional mindset that is needed to guide a school in trouble. I just went and looked at the WES Board - small - 13 names, not including Kirk Duncan's - 8 women - could be moms, 5 men - could be dads. Not names you know so I am guessing parents. All in all, too small, too young. I recognize only one old time name. Go look at St. Albans list - 27 members - almost all men, honorables, amabassadors, names you know. And, no, I'm not being sexist, I'm just looking for wise leaders of industry when I look at a board, which happens to be predominantly male.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think PP is right that a mix of constituencies is important on a board. But aren't most independent school boards composed primarily (80%) of current parents? WES' board is chaired by an alum who is also a current parent -- which seems a great choice. He must have a longtime perspective on the school.

The WES board should be leading the school in giving, but those donor lists make it obvious that most of them are content to "participate" and let just a few shoulder that burden. They shouldn't approve a new campaign unless they're willing to lead by example. My family's gift will not exceed the smallest board gift.

Not quite sure what you are saying. (I don't have the fancy pamphlet anymore). The board members are not big givers? My SLAC university - which asked me to serve on the Board - said at the time @ 10 years ago - $20,000 was considered the minimum amount for a board seat. So you are saying that some of the WES board members are not big givers and that your future gift will not exceed the smallest board gift, right? Makes sense.

i think it's just understood that board members are big contributors to the school. Too often WES has used a board seat to dangle like a carrot in front of a mommy to run an auction, cap. campaign, or do something else. Then the mom runs around talking about being "on the board" as if she were on the board of Chevron.

[Anonymous]

The WES Board is full of current parents who mean well, but do not understand governance. The school would be well served to recruit outside the school for professionals who are forward thinking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The WES Board is full of current parents who mean well, but do not understand governance. The school would be well served to recruit outside the school for professionals who are forward thinking.

+++1,000

[Anonymous]

With a new Head of School coming, this might allow for the changes being discussed. So far this board has done a great job getting the finances back in order and putting a strategic plan that makes sense for the school. With where the school is now, the foundation is set for real growth. Whoever takes the reigns will have a great foundation.

[Anonymous]

The finances have been in order for years. That's not the problem.

[Anonymous]

The finances have been in order for years. That's not the problem.

What do you mean by this statement? What is the evidence base? Do you know the endowment of WES?

[Anonymous]

I have actually been very impressed with how the board is handling the Head of School transition. They have been very transparent with the community. The chair, an alum from the first graduating class of WES I might add, has been nothing but accommodating in meeting with faculty, staff and parents and is very thoughtful about the direction of the school. If you doubt the leadership of the WES board, you should have a conversation with the chair and see for yourself rather than posting negative comments on a blog. Time is better spent giving your kid a hug rather than posting here, I promise...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The finances have been in order for years. That's not the problem.

What do you mean by this statement? What is the evidence base? Do you know the endowment of WES?

WES files IRS Form 990, which is required by law. These forms become public domain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My family's gift will not exceed the smallest board gift.

I don't know the situation at WES, but at many schools, this would be a ridiculous position to take. Most boards have several members who have particular skills the board needs or who just work extraordinarily hard for the school. They are not necessarily wealthy.

In a community like WES, there should be enough people to choose from who have both strategic thinking and the capacity to be a lead donor. Small schools like WES get in trouble when their boards approve big goals and assume that their contribution was their "extraordinarily hard work" -- and that someone else can raise/donate the money.

[Anonymous]

It is possible that a WES board member makes a conscious decision to give less after joining the board. But, there should be financial requirements agreed to by all board members.