| The purpose of the annual fund is almost always to fund FA in the school budget. Schools want 100% participation because it shows that everyone's committed to the goals of the school and creates a culture of philanthropy (an expectation to give and keep giving). It's not really about the grants because only donor-advised funds give money to wealthy $40,000+ private schools and the participation rate doesn't really matter to them. In most fundraising campaigns, 20% of the donors give 80% of the money. So it is no big deal that you can't give much. Besides, today you might receive FA but at some point you or your child may become a big donor. |
I was on the Board of my DCs school and the expectation was that if you served on the Board that the school would be a priority for giving. That's pretty typical because the Board needs to demonstrate its commitment not only in time and talent, but in giving. Our school didn't have a PTA. Hard to believe PTA leadership would be a patronage type job - doesn't seem like much of a reward! |
OP here. Thank you all for your helpful feedback. To the above poster's point, my DC has already said that he plans to really support the school when he is financially able. To all of you that support the annual fund and FA at your school, thank you! |
| My kids were at a private school where one parent had donated over $150,000 cumulatively over about 1-2 years. It bought her a very strange relationship with the head of school and she ended up pulling her kid out for a different school anyway. It clearly benefitted the school, but not the parent or the kid. |
Ok, makes sense. |
| At my DD's school the parents who gave the most ($250,000+) all had kids who got into the best colleges and had the highest GPA. I'm not making a connection one way or the other, just an observation. |
| I think it totally depends on the school. |
| None really. |