Where is the fat in private schools?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One the one hand the cost of tuition is exorbitant and the cost of building maintenance and teachers salaries is much lower.

Who is responsible for the excess costs?

My guess is that with more reasonable administrative salaries and more conservative financial aid policies the Tuition could be lowered by 20 percent.

Any other ideas about where the fat is coming from?

In most, there is no fat. Cost of maintenance is much higher than public. Most privates are break even with little or no fat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many pages of comments in this thread, but very very little fat has been identified.

If people cannot be specific, perhaps there is not much fat after all.

1. An increase in non-teaching faculty
2. An increase in non-teaching faculty salaries
3. financial aid budgets (I personally support a robust financial aid budget, but depending on your definition this could fall under "fat")

1 and 2 is just not true at most privates.

[Anonymous]

Sports and administration are both incredibly expensive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sports and administration are both incredibly expensive.

Sports are expensive and not always benefit all kids. Mostly the ones in High school at the expense of the rest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Large facilities are expensive to maintain. Health insurance for faculty and staff also very expensive and has been going up at a rate higher than general inflation for years.

It’s this— teacher’s salaries and benefits ( particularly health insurance—most teachers have kids and many have pregnancies). There isn’t fat. Spouse served two terms on board of directors of a local private.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:HOS makes a lot, but would cutting 100K off the top of his/her salary really make much of a difference for many private schools? There's also facilities and maintenance, marketing, travel to conferences, athletes/teams transportation and weekend transport (buses and shuttles), and many families receive aid. So do faculty children. Operating costs don't remain flat. Even teacher salaries go up year to year. And they need to maintain a healthy endowment.

Why? What is this money ever used for?

Ask SSFS.

Boom!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. sports
2. administration
3. financial aid/scholarships
3. marketing. Think of all the money that goes into promoting a private school, plus all the extras, like catering open houses and accepted student nights, sending swag boxes to accepted students, etc. Teachers in publics are paying out of pocket for school supplies and decorating their classroom. That's probably not happening at the Sidwells of the world.

But are the teachers showing up before and leaving after all of these administrators?

1000%

[Anonymous]

Have a look at local charter and public school expenditure per student. The numbers range from $13k to $24k. These are marginal costs per student and do not include capital expenditures or central office overhead. Privates have lower student-teacher ratios, so a higher staff expense. They don’t benefit from economies of scale for administrative functions and purchasing. Maintaining their larger landholdings and greater number of buildings is a huge expense as well. They are also smaller organizations with less bargaining power when it comes to purchasing health insurance. Insurance costs have been skyrocketing for all organizations, but private schools have seen particularly high premium hikes.

[Anonymous]

This notion that private schools are spending more money than they should, and therefore have fat to trim is completely misguided. What some people are calling fat is truly a desired feature. Fundraising team: feature. Communications team: feature. Athletics department: feature. Arts programs: feature. Small class sizes: feature. Class trips to international destinations: feature. Financial aid to create diversity: feature.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many pages of comments in this thread, but very very little fat has been identified.

If people cannot be specific, perhaps there is not much fat after all.

1. An increase in non-teaching faculty
2. An increase in non-teaching faculty salaries
3. financial aid budgets (I personally support a robust financial aid budget, but depending on your definition this could fall under "fat")

1 and 2 is just not true at most privates.

It demonstrably is. You are clearly not speaking from an informed place as NAIS Trendbook or even doing some research into the past 10-15 years of 990s will prove.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This notion that private schools are spending more money than they should, and therefore have fat to trim is completely misguided. What some people are calling fat is truly a desired feature. Fundraising team: feature. Communications team: feature. Athletics department: feature. Arts programs: feature. Small class sizes: feature. Class trips to international destinations: feature. Financial aid to create diversity: feature.

+1 I personally believe this whole thread and most of the comments perpetuating the "fat" available to cut are the troll... but also because it has been one of their daily opening 3 they like to pull up to the top in a rapid fire since it first started...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many pages of comments in this thread, but very very little fat has been identified.

If people cannot be specific, perhaps there is not much fat after all.

1. An increase in non-teaching faculty
2. An increase in non-teaching faculty salaries
3. financial aid budgets (I personally support a robust financial aid budget, but depending on your definition this could fall under "fat")

1 and 2 is just not true at most privates.

It demonstrably is. You are clearly not speaking from an informed place as NAIS Trendbook or even doing some research into the past 10-15 years of 990s will prove.

Very few administrators at our private and the few that are there usually also teach and/or coach. One hundred percent of coaches have another job— either teaching, or serving as an administrator. Most teachers coach or serve as advisors for extracurricular clubs. Very few, with the exception of some of the lower school teachers, only teach.

[Anonymous]

There is a big chunk of fat in all financial aid given to upper middle class families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the same fashion as healthcare, the US education system is characterized for being bloated, overpriced, with poor academic outcomes. So yes, there is plenty of fat to trim in both private and public schools.

Yes and no. In the US the same syringe costs 10x more than in Europe. Similarly in the US healthcare, insurance, attorney retention fees, etc all cost more than in Europe. They add significantly to the bottom line.

However the cost of the basketball coach, tennis court, swimming pool, science lab, second campus (Sheridan), European trips (WES) is a difference in choice. The programming is similar to top boarding schools in Europe. The price is also similar—take the boarding school tuition and discount it to a day rate. It’s similar to a DC private.

They are similar to the extent that they have a very poor value per dollar spent.

It’s usually up to the buyer to determine if they’re happy with the value of their dollar and want a repeat purchase.

Yes, usually, unfortunately when the average quality of the service is so low the options are limited. It’s hard to have a surgery in Canada or send your kids to a schooo in Europe.

What a negative Nancy. Many of these private school graduates have the option to create a life in Europe if they want. They won’t.

As for you, I would lobby for better public schools. The system is made for lobbying.

Never thought that discussing an issue turns you in a “negative Nancy”. I still think that is better than burying your head under the sand and pretend that we have the best education in the world.

Why do you think the best universities in the US have an increasing fraction of foreign students and faculty (before trump)?

No one says our education system was the best. Just that many parents with kids in private were satisfied. The position that it’s all gone to the dogs is what makes you a negative Nancy. There’s a lot wrong with the world. There are better battles to pick with a lot more support than whether or not private school kids could save $2K by not doing the Europe trip.

Sure. Next time I post my opinion I will ask for your permission. And next time something goes wrong with your hotel booking or medical bill please don’t complain that there are better battles to pick.

A hotel is a perfect example. Do I have to pay $500 a night for a hotel? No. Is it a problem? Also no.

Do people need $2m houses? No Could they raise children just as well in a $500K apartment? Yes. Could the child raised in the $500K apartment do better in life than the one from the $2m house? Of course.

But nothing’s wrong with the $2m house.

Nothing’s gone wrong with my child’s tuition. I knew what it was in advance. It was never a secret. The school did not make a billing mistake. Yes it could be lower if healthcare were universal and not tied to employment. But that’s a separate, far more universal issue than private schools.

You are assuming two things: first, that schools cannot make mistakes; and second, that parents should stay quiet when they disagree with those mistakes.

Suppose you book a hotel room with a lake view for $600, but when you arrive, you get a room with no view, which normally costs less. Would you complain, or would you just accept it quietly? Maybe you would let it go, and that is fine. But if other people are not fine with it, I would not criticize them for complaining about a mistake or a subpar service.

A school is no different. If you are paying for a service, and a large share of that money is not translating into value, it is perfectly reasonable to raise the issue and discuss it.

I do not think that is very hard to understand.

You can certainly complain about the service. Or even the price.

But if you are trying to tell the hotel how to manage their back office operations I’m sure they’d rightly just laugh in your face.

Sure. I can tell them I booked a room with value of 600 and you gave me one for 300. I can also tell the same thing to the school. I paid for high quality education and you are not delivering x, y, and z. Perfectly normal in a free market economy. Tell me what’s so unusual about that?

Totally normal to complain about prices and services rendered.

Totally NOT normal to try to dig into hotel’s back office to try to customersplain how they should run their hotel.

“You should charge less by switching to lower-thread-count sheets and not giving housekeeping any benefits.”

Sure. Improvements tend to occur when you receive feedback. It’s enough to say that you are not delivering x,y, and z.

Normally companies deliver more by cutting fat and improving efficiency. If no one complains and everyone is content with a mediocre product, of course there is going to be a buildup in fat. Nothing surprising there.

Which "mediocre" schools do your kids attend? I don't think most parents here would call their kids' private school mediocre.

It's on the business (or school) to determine how to best provide their service. They don't need clueless randos offering up suggestions.