Ready to lose free after school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see why it's not realistic that the city council provide additional funding to make up for whatever the lost amount of funding that occurs due to this from the federal gov't or the bill that passed today or whatever is the issue here. And I know $ isn't infinite but they can and should take from something else since our children having a safe place after school is more important than MOST other things.

Council could do this, but should only do it with income limits. All UMC families should have to pay. The current situation where some UMC families pay and others don’t doesn’t seem feasible to me with DC’s finances.

+1

You can’t just give free aftercare to all students at Title 1 schools.

-1

I would rather money go for this rather than making ICE the third biggest army in the world.

This thread is not about how we’d rather they fund this program federally. It’s about how DC government, that is already in a financial crisis, can still offer free aftercare for low income students. Charging families who can afford it is the best way to do this.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see why it's not realistic that the city council provide additional funding to make up for whatever the lost amount of funding that occurs due to this from the federal gov't or the bill that passed today or whatever is the issue here. And I know $ isn't infinite but they can and should take from something else since our children having a safe place after school is more important than MOST other things.

Council could do this, but should only do it with income limits. All UMC families should have to pay. The current situation where some UMC families pay and others don’t doesn’t seem feasible to me with DC’s finances.

How would this work. Our school currently has funds for a mediocre non-enriching program for all. Now the funds would only be for title 1 kids, maybe a sliding scale, and some parents can buy our way in? Can’t imagine the principal having to take on yet another task. And realistically those parents with money won’t pay for these non-enriching programs. UMC like me will prefer to pay more for private programs. The current program will be more segregated.

If we need more taxes from the UMC then raise rates or expand services that must apply existing sales taxes (private school tuition comes to mind).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:School is not free daycare.

+1000 Why don't parents have to pay for their own kids after school care why is it the responsibility of the government to?

You’re…mad about free aftercare so people can work? Yeesh

Why is it called aftercare at all-school should just go to 5.

[Anonymous]

Yes I’m ready to stop funding a daycare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see why it's not realistic that the city council provide additional funding to make up for whatever the lost amount of funding that occurs due to this from the federal gov't or the bill that passed today or whatever is the issue here. And I know $ isn't infinite but they can and should take from something else since our children having a safe place after school is more important than MOST other things.

Council could do this, but should only do it with income limits. All UMC families should have to pay. The current situation where some UMC families pay and others don’t doesn’t seem feasible to me with DC’s finances.

How would this work. Our school currently has funds for a mediocre non-enriching program for all. Now the funds would only be for title 1 kids, maybe a sliding scale, and some parents can buy our way in? Can’t imagine the principal having to take on yet another task. And realistically those parents with money won’t pay for these non-enriching programs. UMC like me will prefer to pay more for private programs. The current program will be more segregated.

If we need more taxes from the UMC then raise rates or expand services that must apply existing sales taxes (private school tuition comes to mind).

I don’t know. Maybe they could do it the way other schools in DC manage to have a sliding scale based on income/need?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes I’m ready to stop funding a daycare.

Prepare for the societal fall out then. (I’m appealing to your selfishness since you don’t seem to think this is worthy of government funding.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see why it's not realistic that the city council provide additional funding to make up for whatever the lost amount of funding that occurs due to this from the federal gov't or the bill that passed today or whatever is the issue here. And I know $ isn't infinite but they can and should take from something else since our children having a safe place after school is more important than MOST other things.

Council could do this, but should only do it with income limits. All UMC families should have to pay. The current situation where some UMC families pay and others don’t doesn’t seem feasible to me with DC’s finances.

+1

You can’t just give free aftercare to all students at Title 1 schools.

Does anyone know what currently determines if a school gets free aftercare? We're at a Title I school with free breakfast/lunch but aftercare is not free.

Are you sure you’re actually at a T1? Free lunch is more generous after a shift in USDA rules. L-T, Peabody/Watkins and Bancroft are examples of schools that get free lunch but are not T1.

I'm sure it's Title I.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see why it's not realistic that the city council provide additional funding to make up for whatever the lost amount of funding that occurs due to this from the federal gov't or the bill that passed today or whatever is the issue here. And I know $ isn't infinite but they can and should take from something else since our children having a safe place after school is more important than MOST other things.

Council could do this, but should only do it with income limits. All UMC families should have to pay. The current situation where some UMC families pay and others don’t doesn’t seem feasible to me with DC’s finances.

+1

You can’t just give free aftercare to all students at Title 1 schools.

Does anyone know what currently determines if a school gets free aftercare? We're at a Title I school with free breakfast/lunch but aftercare is not free.

Are you sure you’re actually at a T1? Free lunch is more generous after a shift in USDA rules. L-T, Peabody/Watkins and Bancroft are examples of schools that get free lunch but are not T1.

I'm sure it's Title I.

Then it gets aftercare money from OSTP. Not all schools use it to make aftercare free for kids up to an arbitrary limit (usually those schools have two providers). Some use it to subsidize all slots and others do free aftercare only for a certain subset grade-wise. You’d have to talk to your LSAT to find out how your $$ is allocated, but if you’re at a T1, they get a bunch of OSTP funding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see why it's not realistic that the city council provide additional funding to make up for whatever the lost amount of funding that occurs due to this from the federal gov't or the bill that passed today or whatever is the issue here. And I know $ isn't infinite but they can and should take from something else since our children having a safe place after school is more important than MOST other things.

Council could do this, but should only do it with income limits. All UMC families should have to pay. The current situation where some UMC families pay and others don’t doesn’t seem feasible to me with DC’s finances.

+1

You can’t just give free aftercare to all students at Title 1 schools.

Does anyone know what currently determines if a school gets free aftercare? We're at a Title I school with free breakfast/lunch but aftercare is not free.

Are you sure you’re actually at a T1? Free lunch is more generous after a shift in USDA rules. L-T, Peabody/Watkins and Bancroft are examples of schools that get free lunch but are not T1.

I'm sure it's Title I.

Then it gets aftercare money from OSTP. Not all schools use it to make aftercare free for kids up to an arbitrary limit (usually those schools have two providers). Some use it to subsidize all slots and others do free aftercare only for a certain subset grade-wise. You’d have to talk to your LSAT to find out how your $$ is allocated, but if you’re at a T1, they get a bunch of OSTP funding.

That makes sense. They do offer "scholarships" for the fee-based program. There's also a DPR site nearby so some students get free aftercare that way. Does DPR have its own OSTP funds or could that be coming from the school too?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:School is not free daycare.

+1000 Why don't parents have to pay for their own kids after school care why is it the responsibility of the government to?

You’re…mad about free aftercare so people can work? Yeesh

Why is it called aftercare at all-school should just go to 5.

School could go to 5 but you'd need additional workers or some way to cover the time. What are teacher hours? 7:30-3:30 or so?

[Anonymous]

Get rid of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:School is not free daycare.

+1000 Why don't parents have to pay for their own kids after school care why is it the responsibility of the government to?

You’re…mad about free aftercare so people can work? Yeesh

Why is it called aftercare at all-school should just go to 5.

School could go to 5 but you'd need additional workers or some way to cover the time. What are teacher hours? 7:30-3:30 or so?

Nope, my kids don’t need to go to eight hours of school each day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see why it's not realistic that the city council provide additional funding to make up for whatever the lost amount of funding that occurs due to this from the federal gov't or the bill that passed today or whatever is the issue here. And I know $ isn't infinite but they can and should take from something else since our children having a safe place after school is more important than MOST other things.

Council could do this, but should only do it with income limits. All UMC families should have to pay. The current situation where some UMC families pay and others don’t doesn’t seem feasible to me with DC’s finances.

How would this work. Our school currently has funds for a mediocre non-enriching program for all. Now the funds would only be for title 1 kids, maybe a sliding scale, and some parents can buy our way in? Can’t imagine the principal having to take on yet another task. And realistically those parents with money won’t pay for these non-enriching programs. UMC like me will prefer to pay more for private programs. The current program will be more segregated.

If we need more taxes from the UMC then raise rates or expand services that must apply existing sales taxes (private school tuition comes to mind).

I don’t know. Maybe they could do it the way other schools in DC manage to have a sliding scale based on income/need?

A sliding scale is how our school manages, plus optional enrichment classes for an additional cost (i.e. chess, dance).

[Anonymous]

It's not Title 1 that pays for OSTP it's a grant called twenty first century. (Or something like that). Mr. Orange is keeping Title 1 but eliminating the twenty first century grant which is what pays for after school programming that funds OSTP here in DC and all over the country. And since the bill passed--then that means there won't be programming next school year. I don' tknow why there isn't more attention to the matter .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's not Title 1 that pays for OSTP it's a grant called twenty first century. (Or something like that). Mr. Orange is keeping Title 1 but eliminating the twenty first century grant which is what pays for after school programming that funds OSTP here in DC and all over the country. And since the bill passed--then that means there won't be programming next school year. I don' tknow why there isn't more attention to the matter .

If this is the case then yes, DC government needs to message about this now. If parents will have to pay, if numbers will be reduced at schools, if they will do it for few hours (maybe until 4:30 instead 6:00 or whatever), or if programs are cut. Or if DC will keep it funded at its current level but cut something else. Parents need to know as soon as possible. And I would hope DC already had these scenarios worked out before this bill passed because they knew it would.