Janney PTA raised $1.4 million in one year

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do think this is sloppy reporting, and I really don't care how much a PTA raises in different schools... I get that as a parent you are willing to donate more to a school if it directly impacts your child.

That being said, I would think with a budget as high as some of these schools have, perhaps they could make a small effort to help schools with much smaller PTO budgets. The success of the district as a whole should matter to these schools, even if the number one priority is their own population.

For one, many of these "poorer" schools are extremely inexperienced with fundraising, what works, what doesn't, etc. Reaching out to "mentor" a developing PTO would be so appreciated by schools. Offering advice, maybe a connection or two, sharing information, etc. Maybe developing a "Sister PTO" relationship. Its not just about the money. These schools are struggling just to figure out how to run a PTO, let alone how to raise money.

And if we want to get into the money, perhaps the wealthier PTO's could fund a small grant for other PTO's in the district. Offering a couple $500-$1000 grants a year to other district PTO's for a worthy cause. It would make such a difference to those school's budgets and would make a small impact on the wealthier school budgets.

I just think there are ways that wealthier schools could use a small portion of their resources for the greater good without negatively impacting their own budgets.

But isn't this what our tax dollars are supposed to do? If there's a problem with per pupil funding, then the city budget is where the attention should go.

By this theory, PTO/PTAs should not exist at all. Per-pupil funding should cover everything.

I was simply pointing out that PTO's with considerable advantages could (and maybe should) make small efforts to help those with considerable hurdles.

Offering a 1-2 hour mentoring session for a developing PTO owould require no money- just some time. It would be such a HUGE help to the developing school and a small burden for an advantaged school. Offering a small grant- maybe a matching one to help the school develop their own fundraising efforts-... would also be a HUGE help with a small cost.

Thank, but no thanks. I'm the fundraising chair of an EOTP Title I school PTA. Our FARMs percentage is in excess of 60%. We can't raise money the way you do, i.e. from parents at the school auctioning their vacation homes to each other. We can't ask for big donations from parents. We can't charge each other $20 to attend house parties. Our higher income parents are also disproportionately ECE/K parents. They often have an under 2 at home. They are exhausted and wont come to fundraisers.

We have to be much more creative about pulling in dollars from the wider community, getting grsnts, haggling for discounts etc.

Im at an EoTP title 1 school too and there ws reluctance to ask for money . But then a match was offered and the school was able to ask for parent donations and got 1k in under two weeks. Which may be more than than they have ever raised in several years combined. there is more money than you realize at your title 1 school, even if its just a handful of families. I am happy to donate hundreds of dollars but dont have the time to do a bunch of random fundaisers. You just need to ask.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This does look like sloppy reporting. At our school, we pay the HSA for every field trip. So if 100 students pay $10 each to the HSA to go to the Natural History Museum, it would appear that the HSA "raised" $1000. Then if you figure there are 7 grades and each grade goes on roughly 10 trips a year, it now looks like the HSA raised $70,000. But that is not fundraising, that's me paying for my kid to go on a field trip.

If you didn't pay for the field trip, the field trip would not happen. That's fundraising. The fact that the amount of money raised is equal to the cost of the activity is irrelevant.

It is not fundraising to pay for the cost of a field trip. It is not fundraising for parents to PAY for aftercare for their child just because the HSA/PTA is a conduit for those funds to go to the private provider of aftercare services. The aftercare provider could just as easily accept the funds directly from parents who are paying for care and the HSA would never be involved, it would just be a parent paying for a service.

The HSA is used as a pass-through for the fund to then go directly to pay for the bus or Metro to take the kids to the museum. Would you call it fundraising if instead we paid the school directly for the field trip like when I was a kid?

The CAP study is all about supplemental money in public education—in other words, money on top of what is allocated to schools from the school district. The reason is that traditionally most districts only compare resource equity by comparing school budgets. But if—within a single school district—there is one school that consistently receives hundreds of thousands of dollars in supplemental money from an outside organization, and another school consistently receives zero, and the primary difference between those two schools is race, then there is inequity. The question is, what responsibility, if any, does the school district have to address the inequity?

Your example assumes that every parent has the financial wherewithal to pay for the field trip, so it does not matter whether the money is paid to the PTA or directly to the school, because regardless of which entity receives the money, the trip will happen. Not every parent can afford the field trip, and when those parents are concentrated in a single school, the field trip will not happen. Therefore, the school with parents that can universally afford the field trip are receiving a benefit that another school may not receive.

It simply isn't true that the other schools receive zero on top of the DCPS budget. They get more from DCPS, and they get a ton of outside grands, partnerships, etc. that are not available to the 5 schools in the article. Where is the article on all the money and resources allocated to those schools? look at the DCPS profiles and the lists of activities and resources even the poorest schools are getting. Who is paying for all of that? So the five schools in the article make up the difference by making the parents pay out of pocket for their free public education.

Funding inequity favors at risk youth and Title I schools, particularly the 40 lowest performing schools. If DC changed its law to mirror Massachusetts in this regard, it would favor the wealthier schools. As it is, wealthy parents will not push for funding equity, which would take funds away from at risk youth. Also, lobbying for something district wide will never inure to the benefit of wealthy kids because DCPS is expressly focused on the neediest kids and schools, and will be for the foreseeable future. Instead, they fill in the gaps in their giant schools through fundraising. And by and large they are not providing things that are not available to kids at other schools. Look at the items cited in the article:

art teacher: most other DCPS schools have arts partnerships for low income schools and additional funding for arts through at risk allocations, see also https://dcps.dc.gov/page/art-dance-drama-music-and-visual-arts

classroom aides: most other DCPS schools are significantly smaller with small teacher:student ratios, plus they have additional support staff through at risk funding and title I funding. Quite frankly, DCPS should provide additional staff when there are 120 kids in a single grade, but they don't.

school trips: again, at risk funding, partnerships, grants, Proving What's Possible grants, and the like pay for this at other schools

additional instructional coaches: I actually don't think PTAs pay for this

after-school programs: this is a pass through -- parents are paying for this service out of pocket if they choose to use it -- it is not a PTA subsidy; no different than sending your kids to private karate class after school at your own expense; but in other DCPS schools, after care is provided by DCPS, plus 54 schools have OSTP, and there are partnerships with law firms, DC Scores, Food Corps, etc, available for enrichment to low income schools.

I'd like to see an article on all the outside support DCPS is getting to make the education experience better for kids at schools other than these five. There is a lot of going going on.

No, I don't believe for a second what you are saying. EOTP schools in DC are not as well funded as Janney, in terms of their needs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do think this is sloppy reporting, and I really don't care how much a PTA raises in different schools... I get that as a parent you are willing to donate more to a school if it directly impacts your child.

That being said, I would think with a budget as high as some of these schools have, perhaps they could make a small effort to help schools with much smaller PTO budgets. The success of the district as a whole should matter to these schools, even if the number one priority is their own population.

For one, many of these "poorer" schools are extremely inexperienced with fundraising, what works, what doesn't, etc. Reaching out to "mentor" a developing PTO would be so appreciated by schools. Offering advice, maybe a connection or two, sharing information, etc. Maybe developing a "Sister PTO" relationship. Its not just about the money. These schools are struggling just to figure out how to run a PTO, let alone how to raise money.

And if we want to get into the money, perhaps the wealthier PTO's could fund a small grant for other PTO's in the district. Offering a couple $500-$1000 grants a year to other district PTO's for a worthy cause. It would make such a difference to those school's budgets and would make a small impact on the wealthier school budgets.

I just think there are ways that wealthier schools could use a small portion of their resources for the greater good without negatively impacting their own budgets.

But isn't this what our tax dollars are supposed to do? If there's a problem with per pupil funding, then the city budget is where the attention should go.

By this theory, PTO/PTAs should not exist at all. Per-pupil funding should cover everything.

I was simply pointing out that PTO's with considerable advantages could (and maybe should) make small efforts to help those with considerable hurdles.

Offering a 1-2 hour mentoring session for a developing PTO owould require no money- just some time. It would be such a HUGE help to the developing school and a small burden for an advantaged school. Offering a small grant- maybe a matching one to help the school develop their own fundraising efforts-... would also be a HUGE help with a small cost.

Thank, but no thanks. I'm the fundraising chair of an EOTP Title I school PTA. Our FARMs percentage is in excess of 60%. We can't raise money the way you do, i.e. from parents at the school auctioning their vacation homes to each other. We can't ask for big donations from parents. We can't charge each other $20 to attend house parties. Our higher income parents are also disproportionately ECE/K parents. They often have an under 2 at home. They are exhausted and wont come to fundraisers.

We have to be much more creative about pulling in dollars from the wider community, getting grsnts, haggling for discounts etc.

WOTP mom here and I would have assumed something similar. How is 1-2 hours telling title 1 PTOs about how we decided to up the dues this year a helpful bit of info? Getting parents engaged is not the problem for WOTP schools, nor is asking them to shell out for an event.

Now, maybe a grant writing expert could be of use. But the event planning and quickbooks skills of a WOTP PTO just isn't going to be useful.

I'm not sure you understand how new some of these PTO's are in the process of developing. They are winging everything. Meetings are disorganized, records are not properly kept, structure is lacking. Learning about the overall structure of your PTO, learning about different job functions, allocation of resources, budgeting, how to advertise, how to reach out to investors, etc. Things that probably seem basic to you are non-existent in these PTO's. Sure, a lot of what you are working with is not applicable.... but understanding how a well-oiled-machine runs can help you figure out how to create your own well-oiled-machine... even if it is a smaller version.

[Anonymous]

Here's just one example of unfair funding disparities in DCPS:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/unequal-shelves-in-dc-school-libraries-benefit-wealthier-students/2015/03/09/f548db96-bd1f-11e4-8668-4e7ba8439ca6_story.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain why Van Ness is getting the most funding per pupil for all DCPS elementary schools?

Or why Leckie is getting the least?

http://dcpsbudget.ourdcschools.org/

Van Ness has high per pupil funding because it's a small school and the fixed cost of the principal, for example, is spread among a smaller number of students. The school is growing a grade level each year and will like fall in per pupil funding. Similarly, Leckie is large. If you look at total budget as opposed to general education funds, you'll find the larger/wealthier schools are all at the bottom in per pupil funding. This is partly due to size and partly due to a lack of the extra funds devoted to schools based on student needs (special education, at risk, English language learner, Federal funds).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I'm not sure you understand how new some of these PTO's are in the process of developing. They are winging everything. Meetings are disorganized, records are not properly kept, structure is lacking. Learning about the overall structure of your PTO, learning about different job functions, allocation of resources, budgeting, how to advertise, how to reach out to investors, etc. Things that probably seem basic to you are non-existent in these PTO's. Sure, a lot of what you are working with is not applicable.... but understanding how a well-oiled-machine runs can help you figure out how to create your own well-oiled-machine... even if it is a smaller version.

Ok- I like the idea. But, given the conversations just on this thread, show me how this is done without be offensive. Just on this thread alone every is losing their minds over perceived slights to schools, students etc. when rich schools approach poor schools.

[Anonymous]

BTW, many title 1 schools do raise funds.

Ludlow Taylor gave $26K (after expenses) to school activities and programs.

[Anonymous]

You and I both know that the extra money earmarked for Title 1 schools is not nearly enough to cause a real difference.

Title 1 schools have some money- but often it is earmarked for certain things and restricted in numerous ways. You might have money earmarked for new textbooks in 5th grade Math but you just got textbooks 2 years ago. What you really need are new computers. But you can't get those because the grant or partnership you have is only for one particular thing.

And sure, the number of students in your classroom is less than a WOTP elementary classroom, but 1/4 of those kids are ESL students, 1/4 of the kids start Kindergarten woefully behind, and a 1/4 of them come from homes with systemic poverty. You probably have a couple or more students with some diagnosed learning disability. Plus, you have several bright students who need differentiated instruction to keep them motivated. Teachers are pulled in a million different directions in a classroom to meet the extremely different needs in the classroom. You might have fewer students, but I would bet a lot of money that you have much extremer and more varied needs.

And yes, they have DCPS aftercare for a much lower cost... but that aftercare is barebones. Many of the "free" programming that exists is geared towards 2-5 grade. So ECE, K, and 1st graders are left with minimal aftercare activities. During winter months and rainy days, they are restricted to indoor spaces with limited activities. Bringing in outside activities costs money. Money that a large portion of the population does not have. So schools are hesitant to bring these programs in, because the children who cannot afford these programs are naturally upset and don't understand when Larlo gets to run off to basketweaving and they are stuck doing the same old thing. Teachers that are hired for this aftercare are paid minimal dollars, and are tired from a long day of work. So PTO's are left trying to figure out how they can help aftercare run more smoothly and offer the kids some basic activities. That being said, these PTO's have small budgets and have to consider how spending on Aftercare only benefits 1/3 or so of the school population.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You and I both know that the extra money earmarked for Title 1 schools is not nearly enough to cause a real difference.

Title 1 schools have some money- but often it is earmarked for certain things and restricted in numerous ways. You might have money earmarked for new textbooks in 5th grade Math but you just got textbooks 2 years ago. What you really need are new computers. But you can't get those because the grant or partnership you have is only for one particular thing.

And sure, the number of students in your classroom is less than a WOTP elementary classroom, but 1/4 of those kids are ESL students, 1/4 of the kids start Kindergarten woefully behind, and a 1/4 of them come from homes with systemic poverty. You probably have a couple or more students with some diagnosed learning disability. Plus, you have several bright students who need differentiated instruction to keep them motivated. Teachers are pulled in a million different directions in a classroom to meet the extremely different needs in the classroom. You might have fewer students, but I would bet a lot of money that you have much extremer and more varied needs.

And yes, they have DCPS aftercare for a much lower cost... but that aftercare is barebones. Many of the "free" programming that exists is geared towards 2-5 grade. So ECE, K, and 1st graders are left with minimal aftercare activities. During winter months and rainy days, they are restricted to indoor spaces with limited activities. Bringing in outside activities costs money. Money that a large portion of the population does not have. So schools are hesitant to bring these programs in, because the children who cannot afford these programs are naturally upset and don't understand when Larlo gets to run off to basketweaving and they are stuck doing the same old thing. Teachers that are hired for this aftercare are paid minimal dollars, and are tired from a long day of work. So PTO's are left trying to figure out how they can help aftercare run more smoothly and offer the kids some basic activities. That being said, these PTO's have small budgets and have to consider how spending on Aftercare only benefits 1/3 or so of the school population.

But a PTA with a budget of, around, $300/kid lets say also isn't going to help these problems either. PTAs aren't funding new computers in all the classrooms, they are adding bits and pieces around the edges. They help pay for art supplies, give teachers some money to decorate their rooms. They fund popsicle parties and parts of salaries of specials teachers. It looks like a lot of money, but it really isn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You and I both know that the extra money earmarked for Title 1 schools is not nearly enough to cause a real difference.

Title 1 schools have some money- but often it is earmarked for certain things and restricted in numerous ways. You might have money earmarked for new textbooks in 5th grade Math but you just got textbooks 2 years ago. What you really need are new computers. But you can't get those because the grant or partnership you have is only for one particular thing.

And sure, the number of students in your classroom is less than a WOTP elementary classroom, but 1/4 of those kids are ESL students, 1/4 of the kids start Kindergarten woefully behind, and a 1/4 of them come from homes with systemic poverty. You probably have a couple or more students with some diagnosed learning disability. Plus, you have several bright students who need differentiated instruction to keep them motivated. Teachers are pulled in a million different directions in a classroom to meet the extremely different needs in the classroom. You might have fewer students, but I would bet a lot of money that you have much extremer and more varied needs.

And yes, they have DCPS aftercare for a much lower cost... but that aftercare is barebones. Many of the "free" programming that exists is geared towards 2-5 grade. So ECE, K, and 1st graders are left with minimal aftercare activities. During winter months and rainy days, they are restricted to indoor spaces with limited activities. Bringing in outside activities costs money. Money that a large portion of the population does not have. So schools are hesitant to bring these programs in, because the children who cannot afford these programs are naturally upset and don't understand when Larlo gets to run off to basketweaving and they are stuck doing the same old thing. Teachers that are hired for this aftercare are paid minimal dollars, and are tired from a long day of work. So PTO's are left trying to figure out how they can help aftercare run more smoothly and offer the kids some basic activities. That being said, these PTO's have small budgets and have to consider how spending on Aftercare only benefits 1/3 or so of the school population.

But a PTA with a budget of, around, $300/kid lets say also isn't going to help these problems either. PTAs aren't funding new computers in all the classrooms, they are adding bits and pieces around the edges. They help pay for art supplies, give teachers some money to decorate their rooms. They fund popsicle parties and parts of salaries of specials teachers. It looks like a lot of money, but it really isn't.

Ok, why don't you ask a Title I school if they'd like an extra $500k as a slush fund to dedicate to whatever they think is most important? I think they'd think it was indeed a LOT of money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You and I both know that the extra money earmarked for Title 1 schools is not nearly enough to cause a real difference.

Title 1 schools have some money- but often it is earmarked for certain things and restricted in numerous ways. You might have money earmarked for new textbooks in 5th grade Math but you just got textbooks 2 years ago. What you really need are new computers. But you can't get those because the grant or partnership you have is only for one particular thing.

And sure, the number of students in your classroom is less than a WOTP elementary classroom, but 1/4 of those kids are ESL students, 1/4 of the kids start Kindergarten woefully behind, and a 1/4 of them come from homes with systemic poverty. You probably have a couple or more students with some diagnosed learning disability. Plus, you have several bright students who need differentiated instruction to keep them motivated. Teachers are pulled in a million different directions in a classroom to meet the extremely different needs in the classroom. You might have fewer students, but I would bet a lot of money that you have much extremer and more varied needs.

And yes, they have DCPS aftercare for a much lower cost... but that aftercare is barebones. Many of the "free" programming that exists is geared towards 2-5 grade. So ECE, K, and 1st graders are left with minimal aftercare activities. During winter months and rainy days, they are restricted to indoor spaces with limited activities. Bringing in outside activities costs money. Money that a large portion of the population does not have. So schools are hesitant to bring these programs in, because the children who cannot afford these programs are naturally upset and don't understand when Larlo gets to run off to basketweaving and they are stuck doing the same old thing. Teachers that are hired for this aftercare are paid minimal dollars, and are tired from a long day of work. So PTO's are left trying to figure out how they can help aftercare run more smoothly and offer the kids some basic activities. That being said, these PTO's have small budgets and have to consider how spending on Aftercare only benefits 1/3 or so of the school population.

Huh? Look at these aftercare set ups. Looks pretty enriched to me:
http://www.ludlowtaylor.org/program-information.html
http://politepiggys.com/before-after-school/maury/
http://politepiggys.com/wp-content/uploads/PP_Specials_Cycle_1_2016_2017_Tyler.pdf
http://www.thomsondcps.org/after-school.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You and I both know that the extra money earmarked for Title 1 schools is not nearly enough to cause a real difference.

Title 1 schools have some money- but often it is earmarked for certain things and restricted in numerous ways. You might have money earmarked for new textbooks in 5th grade Math but you just got textbooks 2 years ago. What you really need are new computers. But you can't get those because the grant or partnership you have is only for one particular thing.

And sure, the number of students in your classroom is less than a WOTP elementary classroom, but 1/4 of those kids are ESL students, 1/4 of the kids start Kindergarten woefully behind, and a 1/4 of them come from homes with systemic poverty. You probably have a couple or more students with some diagnosed learning disability. Plus, you have several bright students who need differentiated instruction to keep them motivated. Teachers are pulled in a million different directions in a classroom to meet the extremely different needs in the classroom. You might have fewer students, but I would bet a lot of money that you have much extremer and more varied needs.

And yes, they have DCPS aftercare for a much lower cost... but that aftercare is barebones. Many of the "free" programming that exists is geared towards 2-5 grade. So ECE, K, and 1st graders are left with minimal aftercare activities. During winter months and rainy days, they are restricted to indoor spaces with limited activities. Bringing in outside activities costs money. Money that a large portion of the population does not have. So schools are hesitant to bring these programs in, because the children who cannot afford these programs are naturally upset and don't understand when Larlo gets to run off to basketweaving and they are stuck doing the same old thing. Teachers that are hired for this aftercare are paid minimal dollars, and are tired from a long day of work. So PTO's are left trying to figure out how they can help aftercare run more smoothly and offer the kids some basic activities. That being said, these PTO's have small budgets and have to consider how spending on Aftercare only benefits 1/3 or so of the school population.

But a PTA with a budget of, around, $300/kid lets say also isn't going to help these problems either. PTAs aren't funding new computers in all the classrooms, they are adding bits and pieces around the edges. They help pay for art supplies, give teachers some money to decorate their rooms. They fund popsicle parties and parts of salaries of specials teachers. It looks like a lot of money, but it really isn't.

Ok, why don't you ask a Title I school if they'd like an extra $500k as a slush fund to dedicate to whatever they think is most important? I think they'd think it was indeed a LOT of money.

But that's the thing- the SCHOOL doesn't decide what to spend the money on. The parents do. So if parents want aides in every classroom then that's what is given to the school. Ask the Janney principal and she'll tell you that she'd rather not have the aides the parents pay for. She's trying to find ways to cut them back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm not sure you understand how new some of these PTO's are in the process of developing. They are winging everything. Meetings are disorganized, records are not properly kept, structure is lacking. Learning about the overall structure of your PTO, learning about different job functions, allocation of resources, budgeting, how to advertise, how to reach out to investors, etc. Things that probably seem basic to you are non-existent in these PTO's. Sure, a lot of what you are working with is not applicable.... but understanding how a well-oiled-machine runs can help you figure out how to create your own well-oiled-machine... even if it is a smaller version.

Ok- I like the idea. But, given the conversations just on this thread, show me how this is done without be offensive. Just on this thread alone every is losing their minds over perceived slights to schools, students etc. when rich schools approach poor schools.

If it were up to me, I would suggest first figuring out if anyone on your PTO would be willing to volunteer for this. Then I would reach out to several PTO's in the district at schools that have new or developing PTO's. It would probably make sense to match an elementary school with another elementary school, etc. I would let the PTO know that your PTO is ready and willing to meet informally over coffee or drinks with members of their PTO- share who volunteered... a grant writer, advertising committee chair, secretary, etc. Once a relationship is established, you might find them interested in having someone attend a committee meeting or general meeting to offer suggestions. It might be nice to have someone review the Bylaws- if that is your area of expertise... or a website.

The hard part will be not sounding patronizing... but I think if you come at it from a genuine place of willingness to help.. it could be a great thing.

"Our PTO is working on a new initiative to partner with other DCPS PTO's to share our experience and expertise, and to gain insight and ideas from your organization. We think this partnership would benefit both organizations and are excited to see what develops from the relationship. If you are interested, the following members of our team (titles only) have some limited availability in the coming months and would be interested in meeting with people from your team in similar positions. Please let me know if this is something you would like to do and I can connect you directly with these team members."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You and I both know that the extra money earmarked for Title 1 schools is not nearly enough to cause a real difference.

Title 1 schools have some money- but often it is earmarked for certain things and restricted in numerous ways. You might have money earmarked for new textbooks in 5th grade Math but you just got textbooks 2 years ago. What you really need are new computers. But you can't get those because the grant or partnership you have is only for one particular thing.

And sure, the number of students in your classroom is less than a WOTP elementary classroom, but 1/4 of those kids are ESL students, 1/4 of the kids start Kindergarten woefully behind, and a 1/4 of them come from homes with systemic poverty. You probably have a couple or more students with some diagnosed learning disability. Plus, you have several bright students who need differentiated instruction to keep them motivated. Teachers are pulled in a million different directions in a classroom to meet the extremely different needs in the classroom. You might have fewer students, but I would bet a lot of money that you have much extremer and more varied needs.

And yes, they have DCPS aftercare for a much lower cost... but that aftercare is barebones. Many of the "free" programming that exists is geared towards 2-5 grade. So ECE, K, and 1st graders are left with minimal aftercare activities. During winter months and rainy days, they are restricted to indoor spaces with limited activities. Bringing in outside activities costs money. Money that a large portion of the population does not have. So schools are hesitant to bring these programs in, because the children who cannot afford these programs are naturally upset and don't understand when Larlo gets to run off to basketweaving and they are stuck doing the same old thing. Teachers that are hired for this aftercare are paid minimal dollars, and are tired from a long day of work. So PTO's are left trying to figure out how they can help aftercare run more smoothly and offer the kids some basic activities. That being said, these PTO's have small budgets and have to consider how spending on Aftercare only benefits 1/3 or so of the school population.

But a PTA with a budget of, around, $300/kid lets say also isn't going to help these problems either. PTAs aren't funding new computers in all the classrooms, they are adding bits and pieces around the edges. They help pay for art supplies, give teachers some money to decorate their rooms. They fund popsicle parties and parts of salaries of specials teachers. It looks like a lot of money, but it really isn't.

Ok, why don't you ask a Title I school if they'd like an extra $500k as a slush fund to dedicate to whatever they think is most important? I think they'd think it was indeed a LOT of money.

But that's the thing- the SCHOOL doesn't decide what to spend the money on. The parents do. So if parents want aides in every classroom then that's what is given to the school. Ask the Janney principal and she'll tell you that she'd rather not have the aides the parents pay for. She's trying to find ways to cut them back.

Oh ok, then ask the Title 1 parents if they want $500k to spend on their school. Surely they'll just say "Nah, that's nothing."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You and I both know that the extra money earmarked for Title 1 schools is not nearly enough to cause a real difference.

Title 1 schools have some money- but often it is earmarked for certain things and restricted in numerous ways. You might have money earmarked for new textbooks in 5th grade Math but you just got textbooks 2 years ago. What you really need are new computers. But you can't get those because the grant or partnership you have is only for one particular thing.

And sure, the number of students in your classroom is less than a WOTP elementary classroom, but 1/4 of those kids are ESL students, 1/4 of the kids start Kindergarten woefully behind, and a 1/4 of them come from homes with systemic poverty. You probably have a couple or more students with some diagnosed learning disability. Plus, you have several bright students who need differentiated instruction to keep them motivated. Teachers are pulled in a million different directions in a classroom to meet the extremely different needs in the classroom. You might have fewer students, but I would bet a lot of money that you have much extremer and more varied needs.

And yes, they have DCPS aftercare for a much lower cost... but that aftercare is barebones. Many of the "free" programming that exists is geared towards 2-5 grade. So ECE, K, and 1st graders are left with minimal aftercare activities. During winter months and rainy days, they are restricted to indoor spaces with limited activities. Bringing in outside activities costs money. Money that a large portion of the population does not have. So schools are hesitant to bring these programs in, because the children who cannot afford these programs are naturally upset and don't understand when Larlo gets to run off to basketweaving and they are stuck doing the same old thing. Teachers that are hired for this aftercare are paid minimal dollars, and are tired from a long day of work. So PTO's are left trying to figure out how they can help aftercare run more smoothly and offer the kids some basic activities. That being said, these PTO's have small budgets and have to consider how spending on Aftercare only benefits 1/3 or so of the school population.

Huh? Look at these aftercare set ups. Looks pretty enriched to me:
http://www.ludlowtaylor.org/program-information.html
http://politepiggys.com/before-after-school/maury/
http://politepiggys.com/wp-content/uploads/PP_Specials_Cycle_1_2016_2017_Tyler.pdf
http://www.thomsondcps.org/after-school.html

These seem nice- and are possibly exceptions- but I know at our EOTP Title 1, if a Yoga instructor donates 1 hour of time once during the whole school year it would go on the list of aftercare activities. They also might include activities offered last year- because we will potentially use them again this year. And if 5th graders get to work on homework in the library rather than the classroom, they might name it something special and add it to the list. Etc. They can work the system to make it look good, but at the end of the day, it is not nearly as extensive as it seems. They still mainly rotate between cafeteria, playground, and classroom.. with the same boardgames, coloring pages, and card games (most of which were donated by parents and are missing half the pieces within a few weeks of school starting).