SSFS Closing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Catholic independent schools can’t be compared to parish schools. They’re not all thriving, either. Some have huge endowments left from the days when their religious orders were still there, but others are hanging on by a thread.

For every Visi or Gonzaga, there’s a Woods Academy that could easily be the next SSFS.

Or a Good Counsel or SJCHS which are thriving. No religious orders left them huge endowments.

To be clear, the endowments typically weren’t from the orders but reflect the relationship students and families had with them. They’re from wealthy people annd even small donors at a time when donating whatever money you had to your parish or school was very much expected. A lot of these big endowments grew from 1-2 rich families who felt a connection to the sisters, or situations like a single woman graduate never marrying and giving her entire net worth to her alma mater after her death. $10k here or there in 1920 or 1940 is a robust endowed fund today.

Ok nice history lessen but irrelevant to these schools. Are you even in the DMV?

It sounds like their spending was out of control and huge mismanagement. They owned the land, as it was donated to them.
Well it’s relevant in that in comparison, SSFS is relatively new to most schools in DC and its endowment and financial picture certainly reflected that. Most postwar independent schools are vulnerable in the same way. They just don’t have sufficient generations of family money or alumni money to keep up with the expectations of families.

You can’t make money off of land you can’t sell.

You can’t mortgage land.

Land is nice to have but financially useless.

You absolutely can mortgage land. In fact the SSFS land is currently heavily mortgaged

wait, like a land equity loan? That's crazy.

I wonder what the lender accepted as collateral for a property that couldn't be subdivided and has structures on it. It seems really, really risky for both the lender and the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Where is the SSFS Quaker Meeting in all of this?

Also - doesnt the Board have a requirement to disclose?

The FAQ explains it.

What do you think the Board has a requirement to disclose, to whom, and when?

[Anonymous]

Who made these decisions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is from August message from BOT:

It is important to share with you that SSFS is facing some financial challenges, and the board is working on several strategic questions related to:
the declining boarding program;
unfulfilled pledges to our last Capital Campaign (Light the Way, meant to support the Upper School Building); and,
significant repair and maintenance needed in our Performing Arts and Athletic Centers.

I’m not aware (outside of this board) of the acrimony with the former HoS, but I suspect that someone would be well within their rights to not fulfill a pledge if they felt like the mission/direction/leadership of the school deviated from when the pledge was made. It may be (and is) sh*tty, but it happens all the time with universities, schools and other not for profits.

Institutions are typically hot to trot for pledges because they can publicize it and the fundraisers often get credit at the time of the pledge. From my experience, it’s often presented as “the pledge is good for the institution but it doesn’t really bind you to anything, so we’d appreciate it if you would agree. And if something comes up, no obligation.”

I wouldn’t make a pledge that I didn’t intend to fulfill, but I’ve seen the “bindingness” to be grossly undersold to try to get the signature.

These pledges were lapsed under Tom Gibian whose campaign it was and was supposed to be done before change of heads. They were already behind when the HOS changed. The lapses were discovered under RG, not created under RG.

Okay (again to RG cheerleader) let’s say the lapse was discovered under RG- before construction begun - which did occur UNDER RG. What stopped RG who was the leadership to say “hey so it looks like we haven’t received these pledges, we should hit the pause button till we do”? You’re saying RG was forced to continue down a bad path set by TG cause he was powerless to do the right thing for the school as its new head?

The building was finished before RG even got there. It opened to students under RG when they returned from the pandemic. Not an RG cheerleader. I just like facts.

+1. It also true that some pledges undertaken with TG were to be paid in subsequent years while Rodney was head. Not sure if this affected people not fulfilling them but it’s not unreasonable to wonder.

The lapsed pledges had a lot to do with the disorganization and mismanagement of the director of advancement who ran the campaign. Poorly.

So the onus is on the school to collect pledges that people committed to? How absurd. People should really be ashamed of themselves for pledging and knowing they had no intention of paying. People get all fancy pants, drinking wine at school events, and then realize they are in no position to be committing to that money. Shame.

Every private school I can think of has built new buildings in the last 10 years. None have had to shut their doors due to pledge issues. This is financial mismanagement on behalf of the board. They made the decision to move forward based on the money in hand and the pledged amounts. They took the risk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is from August message from BOT:

It is important to share with you that SSFS is facing some financial challenges, and the board is working on several strategic questions related to:
the declining boarding program;
unfulfilled pledges to our last Capital Campaign (Light the Way, meant to support the Upper School Building); and,
significant repair and maintenance needed in our Performing Arts and Athletic Centers.

I’m not aware (outside of this board) of the acrimony with the former HoS, but I suspect that someone would be well within their rights to not fulfill a pledge if they felt like the mission/direction/leadership of the school deviated from when the pledge was made. It may be (and is) sh*tty, but it happens all the time with universities, schools and other not for profits.

Institutions are typically hot to trot for pledges because they can publicize it and the fundraisers often get credit at the time of the pledge. From my experience, it’s often presented as “the pledge is good for the institution but it doesn’t really bind you to anything, so we’d appreciate it if you would agree. And if something comes up, no obligation.”

I wouldn’t make a pledge that I didn’t intend to fulfill, but I’ve seen the “bindingness” to be grossly undersold to try to get the signature.

These pledges were lapsed under Tom Gibian whose campaign it was and was supposed to be done before change of heads. They were already behind when the HOS changed. The lapses were discovered under RG, not created under RG.

Okay (again to RG cheerleader) let’s say the lapse was discovered under RG- before construction begun - which did occur UNDER RG. What stopped RG who was the leadership to say “hey so it looks like we haven’t received these pledges, we should hit the pause button till we do”? You’re saying RG was forced to continue down a bad path set by TG cause he was powerless to do the right thing for the school as its new head?

The building was finished before RG even got there. It opened to students under RG when they returned from the pandemic. Not an RG cheerleader. I just like facts.

+1. It also true that some pledges undertaken with TG were to be paid in subsequent years while Rodney was head. Not sure if this affected people not fulfilling them but it’s not unreasonable to wonder.

The lapsed pledges had a lot to do with the disorganization and mismanagement of the director of advancement who ran the campaign. Poorly.

So the onus is on the school to collect pledges that people committed to? How absurd. People should really be ashamed of themselves for pledging and knowing they had no intention of paying. People get all fancy pants, drinking wine at school events, and then realize they are in no position to be committing to that money. Shame.

Every private school I can think of has built new buildings in the last 10 years. None have had to shut their doors due to pledge issues. This is financial mismanagement on behalf of the board. They made the decision to move forward based on the money in hand and the pledged amounts. They took the risk.

All but those with biggest endowments, richest families have been dancing at the edge of financial insolvency.

[Anonymous]

The families all want new shiny stuff, and usually someone else to pay for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a parent of a brokenhearted student who has thrived there for over a decade, I would like some explanation in addition to... we ran out of money and we are letting you know now when its way too late to do anything. Our family has been blindsided. The teachers are some of the most genuine educators I have ever met, people with vocation who should have some information about why their jobs have been terminated and why their lives have been turned upside-down. In so many ways, SSFS walks the walk when it comes to values and community. Not perfect. Not expecting perfection, but I have seen them do right by a lot of people or at least try their best in situations where other schools would have thrown up their hands. I assumed the Board upheld similar values. That's on me for trusting and not verifying, not demanding more transparency, asking for financial reports. But I will humbly say, I didn"t even know what to demand. I dont know about boards or how a private school is run. I leave that to those whose skills lie in this area. I thought the Board was an extention of the fine, fine people I have had the honor to know personally, the heads of school and teachers, people who have cared for my kids while teaching them to write, analyze poetry, balance equations all while making the feel like they mattered, like they had something valuable to contribute to the world just by being themselves. If that doesn't "deserve" an explanation then I don't know what does. Pie in the sky sure. Naive, probably. But cynicism doesn't thrive inside me or SSFS.
This is simply too much damage, far too many people impacted negatively to offer such little information.

Well said… but sadly I doubt you’ll get a full explanation from the school. It’s certainly not the fault of the wonderful and caring teachers, who are in the same boat as you, with the unexpected closure upending their employment and lives.

As someone else said — one of the Quaker values is stewardship — to me, this means recognizing the value of the school to the community and preserving it for future generations. This includes making sure the educational and social/emotional experience is strong for students, but also — being fiscally responsible and not taking out too much debt (to finance the new upper school?) or otherwise overextending the school financially. This is on the Board and the heads of school.

(Former Feynman parent, so I feel what you’re going through)

++1

[Anonymous]

I felt for the families trying to start a coalition or sign petitions. I know people say it’s a troll to laugh or be skeptical at such efforts. But really how would they work at this point?

First of all - who should be making plans with a school that has so completely let them down and exhibited a complete lack of transparency and ethics? Why would we believe they can be trusted now?

Second any fundraising effort takes time. You’ll end with with pledges and then what? Find out in August there isn’t enough money after all? And we’re supposed to wait to see how it pans out?

Everyone is scrambling now and wants to figure out the fall as soon as possible. We will sign contracts or decide on path forward. No one can afford to wait to see if doors open in September and no coalition will produce a solution in 2 weeks. At best efforts can bring the school back in a year but certainly not this September and no one can afford to risk that gamble.

And even if it came back for a year, everyone still is going to leave as soon as they find something else (specially teachers). So the chance of not finishing out the year with enough staff would be extremely high. And if you know you’re going to be out of a school in a year already you’re more likely going to want to start there as soon as possible. The only exception might be US juniors. One more year gets them done. For no one else does one more tear help (like the sophomores want to be in the lurch for senior year?).

So i emphasize with everyone’s pain which is my own but we need solutions that don’t require us to be made of a fool of all over again next year.

[Anonymous]

*empathize

[Anonymous]

I agree with you 6:59. Parent of current junior. Selfishly there isn't much I wouldn't do for a one-year reprieve so our child can finish at the school they've grown to love. But other than junior parents, I have a hard time seeing who will take that risk with us?

We'd need in very short order an ENTIRELY new Board of Trustees (since the current batch is a big part of why we're here!), a HOS and who knows how many teachers since it's entirely unclear who would stay.

Again as a parent of a junior I'd leap at the chance to give our kid that last year. If I were a parent of a 7th grader, or a 10th grader, I'm sorry but there's no chance I'd stay, just not enough faith!

[Anonymous]

As I call other schools and visit websites and interact with schools, I realize how hard a transition it will be for all of us. Even though there are some fabulous schools out there, SSFS was a beautiful little community with amazing teachers and it will be hard to replicate and find. And the learning support (for the kids who needed it) was built into the system. This saddens me even more as I continue the search for schools. Just so mad and heartbroken.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Responding as an independent school administrator. Many independent schools enter an “arms race” to ramp up facilities and renovate — to stay competitive and attractive in the market. Boards make decisions to borrow money for costly projects w/o much strategy to generate revenue beyond tuition. This can happen when a campaign won’t be able to meet its goal. Philanthropy is a critical piece of how independent schools achieve long term sustainability.

With 140 acres, was there talk of ever selling some land to right size?

Also an administrator and it’s scary to see what’s going on at SSFS…and at my former colleagues’ schools up and down the East coast. We see philanthropy concentrating itself at schools that are already stable, and families coming to our school are just not willing to donate at a level that covers the true cost of educating their student, so forget major gifts. But meanwhile they are demanding all the things- arts programs as broad as those in public schools, extensive sports facilities, multiple languages regardless of class size, etc.

There will be a few schools untouched by this climate- the Sidwells, NCSs, etc. The rest of us are going to blow ourselves up no matter what we do. It sounds fatalistic but that’s how I feel. I can’t reconcile what parents expect vs. what we have the funds to offer. Either we’ll fail because enrollment declines when everyone jumps ship for more bells and whistles, or we’ll fail because we spend money we don’t have on more bells and whistles.

There is a market for a leaner private school without all the bells and whistles, but it has to have lower tuition to match. This is like the new car manufacturers who are all chasing the most affluent purchasers, new cars languishing on lots, while ignoring the upper middle class.

I'm really curious what that market is. Who wants to send their kids to a school that doesn't have certain amenities. What if they don't offer extracurriculars? What if there are no AP classes? What would that look like? Who is out there saying I'll pay more than public to send my kid to a private school that has way fewer amenities than the public school?

Catholics are saying that.

I’m one of the independent school administrator PPs. You can’t compare the culture of Catholic schools or use it to demonstrate what independent schools should do. Catholic schools work because families use them as a community and an extension of their family, have cultural expectations that drive their school choice toward them, and most importantly: they are subsidized by parishes.

Even that isn’t a given. In areas with archdioceses that are making huge legal settlement payouts, Catholic schools are certainly collapsing as parish closures gut their pool of future students and eliminate neighborhood Catholic schools. My childhood archdiocese in the Midwest and my friend’s archdiocese on the west coast are both in the midst of closures and consolidations, and their schools had high enrollment and full grades.

It’s an ugly landscape and it all seems to keep circling back to debt.

Are you unaware of all the Catholic schools in the DMV that are not diocesan but independent?

This is not true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Responding as an independent school administrator. Many independent schools enter an “arms race” to ramp up facilities and renovate — to stay competitive and attractive in the market. Boards make decisions to borrow money for costly projects w/o much strategy to generate revenue beyond tuition. This can happen when a campaign won’t be able to meet its goal. Philanthropy is a critical piece of how independent schools achieve long term sustainability.

With 140 acres, was there talk of ever selling some land to right size?

Also an administrator and it’s scary to see what’s going on at SSFS…and at my former colleagues’ schools up and down the East coast. We see philanthropy concentrating itself at schools that are already stable, and families coming to our school are just not willing to donate at a level that covers the true cost of educating their student, so forget major gifts. But meanwhile they are demanding all the things- arts programs as broad as those in public schools, extensive sports facilities, multiple languages regardless of class size, etc.

There will be a few schools untouched by this climate- the Sidwells, NCSs, etc. The rest of us are going to blow ourselves up no matter what we do. It sounds fatalistic but that’s how I feel. I can’t reconcile what parents expect vs. what we have the funds to offer. Either we’ll fail because enrollment declines when everyone jumps ship for more bells and whistles, or we’ll fail because we spend money we don’t have on more bells and whistles.

There is a market for a leaner private school without all the bells and whistles, but it has to have lower tuition to match. This is like the new car manufacturers who are all chasing the most affluent purchasers, new cars languishing on lots, while ignoring the upper middle class.

I'm really curious what that market is. Who wants to send their kids to a school that doesn't have certain amenities. What if they don't offer extracurriculars? What if there are no AP classes? What would that look like? Who is out there saying I'll pay more than public to send my kid to a private school that has way fewer amenities than the public school?

Catholics are saying that.

I’m one of the independent school administrator PPs. You can’t compare the culture of Catholic schools or use it to demonstrate what independent schools should do. Catholic schools work because families use them as a community and an extension of their family, have cultural expectations that drive their school choice toward them, and most importantly: they are subsidized by parishes.

Even that isn’t a given. In areas with archdioceses that are making huge legal settlement payouts, Catholic schools are certainly collapsing as parish closures gut their pool of future students and eliminate neighborhood Catholic schools. My childhood archdiocese in the Midwest and my friend’s archdiocese on the west coast are both in the midst of closures and consolidations, and their schools had high enrollment and full grades.

It’s an ugly landscape and it all seems to keep circling back to debt.

Are you unaware of all the Catholic schools in the DMV that are not diocesan but independent?

This is not true.

What’s not true? There absolutely are non-diocesan Catholic schools in the DC area. Are you new here?

[Anonymous]

I just cannot understand why they didn’t do a Hail Mary solicitation for donations before taking this step so abruptly.

[Anonymous]

I'm thinking about Christ Episcopal School in Rockville. They were in a similar position a few years ago, with an eminent closure and last-minute fundraising push. They had buildings to sell, so perhaps it's not an apples to apples comparison. But they're still open.