SSFS HOS leaving

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Inflation rates for the prior year resulted in many schools having a 6-7% increase for that year.

So I guess this is the "everyone is doing it" rationale. But do those same many schools have millions in debt, a quarter of the faculty departing, ~100 students withdrawing and an hos who resigned overnight also? Surely ssfs' problems are not what "everyone" is facing so there is good reason for families not to not trust those tuition increases?

If SSFS has millions in debt it sounds like this issue pre-dates RG. I think recalibrating tuition to come in line with similar schools is a valid reason. To me, it sounds like the prior BOT, HOS and finance committee delayed the needed tuition increase for too long; and SSFS was in a shaky financial situation but they never disclosed it.

[Anonymous]

Then again, SSFS has a boarding school component so maybe that enabled them to limit tuition increase. I imagine that Covid decimated that revenue line and exposed the precariousness of such a revenue model.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Inflation rates for the prior year resulted in many schools having a 6-7% increase for that year.

So I guess this is the "everyone is doing it" rationale. But do those same many schools have millions in debt, a quarter of the faculty departing, ~100 students withdrawing and an hos who resigned overnight also? Surely ssfs' problems are not what "everyone" is facing so there is good reason for families not to not trust those tuition increases?

If SSFS has millions in debt it sounds like this issue pre-dates RG. I think recalibrating tuition to come in line with similar schools is a valid reason. To me, it sounds like the prior BOT, HOS and finance committee delayed the needed tuition increase for too long; and SSFS was in a shaky financial situation but they never disclosed it.

Thanks for weighing in on a situation you are entirely unfamiliar with!

[Anonymous]

That’s not why all this information is posted in a public forum?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Inflation rates for the prior year resulted in many schools having a 6-7% increase for that year.

So I guess this is the "everyone is doing it" rationale. But do those same many schools have millions in debt, a quarter of the faculty departing, ~100 students withdrawing and an hos who resigned overnight also? Surely ssfs' problems are not what "everyone" is facing so there is good reason for families not to not trust those tuition increases?

If SSFS has millions in debt it sounds like this issue pre-dates RG. I think recalibrating tuition to come in line with similar schools is a valid reason. To me, it sounds like the prior BOT, HOS and finance committee delayed the needed tuition increase for too long; and SSFS was in a shaky financial situation but they never disclosed it.

Thanks for weighing in on a situation you are entirely unfamiliar with!

This is exactly what happened. The debt was incurred pre Covid and pre RG. While many people seemed to love the old advancement director she was terrible at fundraising. So many pledges she didn’t follow up on. She was allowed by the BOT to talk a good game for way too long. Many of us who were long term givers were completely ignored. This was a problem before this last head but it continued to get worse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Inflation rates for the prior year resulted in many schools having a 6-7% increase for that year.

So I guess this is the "everyone is doing it" rationale. But do those same many schools have millions in debt, a quarter of the faculty departing, ~100 students withdrawing and an hos who resigned overnight also? Surely ssfs' problems are not what "everyone" is facing so there is good reason for families not to not trust those tuition increases?

If SSFS has millions in debt it sounds like this issue pre-dates RG. I think recalibrating tuition to come in line with similar schools is a valid reason. To me, it sounds like the prior BOT, HOS and finance committee delayed the needed tuition increase for too long; and SSFS was in a shaky financial situation but they never disclosed it.

Thanks for weighing in on a situation you are entirely unfamiliar with!

This is exactly what happened. The debt was incurred pre Covid and pre RG. While many people seemed to love the old advancement director she was terrible at fundraising. So many pledges she didn’t follow up on. She was allowed by the BOT to talk a good game for way too long. Many of us who were long term givers were completely ignored. This was a problem before this last head but it continued to get worse.

I’m not disputing that there aren’t issues that RG inherited but to pretend as if this was all the fault of people pre-ratings rg’s tenure that’s ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Inflation rates for the prior year resulted in many schools having a 6-7% increase for that year.

So I guess this is the "everyone is doing it" rationale. But do those same many schools have millions in debt, a quarter of the faculty departing, ~100 students withdrawing and an hos who resigned overnight also? Surely ssfs' problems are not what "everyone" is facing so there is good reason for families not to not trust those tuition increases?

If SSFS has millions in debt it sounds like this issue pre-dates RG. I think recalibrating tuition to come in line with similar schools is a valid reason. To me, it sounds like the prior BOT, HOS and finance committee delayed the needed tuition increase for too long; and SSFS was in a shaky financial situation but they never disclosed it.

Thanks for weighing in on a situation you are entirely unfamiliar with!

This is exactly what happened. The debt was incurred pre Covid and pre RG. While many people seemed to love the old advancement director she was terrible at fundraising. So many pledges she didn’t follow up on. She was allowed by the BOT to talk a good game for way too long. Many of us who were long term givers were completely ignored. This was a problem before this last head but it continued to get worse.

I’m not disputing that there aren’t issues that RG inherited but to pretend as if this was all the fault of people pre-ratings rg’s tenure that’s ridiculous.

I think you are being disingenuous. I am an SSFS outsider but prior to that throwaway line about millions in debt, it sounded like RG was being faulted for all of the schools financial woes. From my reading of what has been posted here, it just didn’t seem logical for that amount of debt to be incurred solely under his tenure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Using archive.org, I compiled the US tuition from ssfs.org over time to see how it changed.

17-18 $32,300.00
18-19 $33,250.00 2.94%
19-20 $34,250.00 3.01% *
20-21 $35,250.00 2.92%
21-22 $36,500.00 3.55%
22-23 $38,300.00 4.93%
23-24 $40,980.00 7.00%
24-25 $43,200.00 5.42%
*19-20 tuition is estimated from the average of 18-19 and 20-21 as data was not available from archive.org.

Before RG headed the school, the tuition increases were consistently 3%. During RG's time, the tuition increases are random and reactionary. To me, this proves that TG knew how to manage the schools finances.

Doesn’t the board decide on tuition increase? Didn’t most independent schools in the DMV have ~4-5% increase post pandemic? The jump to 7% seems like an outlier, seems like they wanted to move to the $40k bracket like other schools in the area; there must have been an explanation as to why that increase by the board.

Well if we know one thing, the oversight of the BOT has not been present. So what the BOT agreed or didnt agree to is hard to tell. But then, the BOT is only going to make decisions based on the data they are given, if the data is flawed their concurrence will be flawed as well. The BOT doesnt run the day to day finances, staffing or other operational decisions - at best they only hey/nay's the HOS decisions that are presented to them. But if he's presenting data showing they need to increase to make ends meet, what's the board going to do? I don't believe the BOT knew how bad the finances were.

Second "other schools in the area" are not 40K, there are several in the Moco, Hoco, Baltimore area that are in the 30s still. But prices shouldnt be increased to compete with other schools tuition - it should increase because it needs to and there is a value added service being provided. You have to go towards DC to find schools in the 40K range and frankly SSFS is not those schools. So to increase tuition just because there are schools in the DMV that are pricier is a poor reason (and yes, that is the reason he used - "other schools are more expensive anyway!").

Which non-catholic independent schools (not K-8), in the DMV are below 40k? Who would you say are SSFS peers?

It's not hard to find a few. US tuition 2024-25:
SSFS: $43,200

McDonogh: $41,050
Bryn Mawr: $40,430
Park School: $38,900
Baltimore Friends: $38,000
Gilman: $37,690
Barrie: $37,135
Glenelg Country: $ 35,830
Key School: $35,220

To say none of those can offer an alternative to SSFS is a stretch. You have to move towards DC (Sidwell, Holton Arms) when you start getting the schools that cost more. But you can't say SSFS competes with those schools in what they're offering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Using archive.org, I compiled the US tuition from ssfs.org over time to see how it changed.

17-18 $32,300.00
18-19 $33,250.00 2.94%
19-20 $34,250.00 3.01% *
20-21 $35,250.00 2.92%
21-22 $36,500.00 3.55%
22-23 $38,300.00 4.93%
23-24 $40,980.00 7.00%
24-25 $43,200.00 5.42%
*19-20 tuition is estimated from the average of 18-19 and 20-21 as data was not available from archive.org.

Before RG headed the school, the tuition increases were consistently 3%. During RG's time, the tuition increases are random and reactionary. To me, this proves that TG knew how to manage the schools finances.

Doesn’t the board decide on tuition increase? Didn’t most independent schools in the DMV have ~4-5% increase post pandemic? The jump to 7% seems like an outlier, seems like they wanted to move to the $40k bracket like other schools in the area; there must have been an explanation as to why that increase by the board.

Well if we know one thing, the oversight of the BOT has not been present. So what the BOT agreed or didnt agree to is hard to tell. But then, the BOT is only going to make decisions based on the data they are given, if the data is flawed their concurrence will be flawed as well. The BOT doesnt run the day to day finances, staffing or other operational decisions - at best they only hey/nay's the HOS decisions that are presented to them. But if he's presenting data showing they need to increase to make ends meet, what's the board going to do? I don't believe the BOT knew how bad the finances were.

Second "other schools in the area" are not 40K, there are several in the Moco, Hoco, Baltimore area that are in the 30s still. But prices shouldnt be increased to compete with other schools tuition - it should increase because it needs to and there is a value added service being provided. You have to go towards DC to find schools in the 40K range and frankly SSFS is not those schools. So to increase tuition just because there are schools in the DMV that are pricier is a poor reason (and yes, that is the reason he used - "other schools are more expensive anyway!").

Which non-catholic independent schools (not K-8), in the DMV are below 40k? Who would you say are SSFS peers?

It's not hard to find a few. US tuition 2024-25:
SSFS: $43,200

McDonogh: $41,050
Bryn Mawr: $40,430
Park School: $38,900
Baltimore Friends: $38,000
Gilman: $37,690
Barrie: $37,135
Glenelg Country: $ 35,830
Key School: $35,220

To say none of those can offer an alternative to SSFS is a stretch. You have to move towards DC (Sidwell, Holton Arms) when you start getting the schools that cost more. But you can't say SSFS competes with those schools in what they're offering.

I said DMV (meaning metro DC). Parents that are looking at SSFS also look at Baltimore private schools? The only school listed here I consider DMV is Barrie. Is Barrie the peer to SSFS? Someone earlier suggested Barrie for SSFS parents who wanted to move and the reaction to the suggestion seemed negative.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Inflation rates for the prior year resulted in many schools having a 6-7% increase for that year.

So I guess this is the "everyone is doing it" rationale. But do those same many schools have millions in debt, a quarter of the faculty departing, ~100 students withdrawing and an hos who resigned overnight also? Surely ssfs' problems are not what "everyone" is facing so there is good reason for families not to not trust those tuition increases?

If SSFS has millions in debt it sounds like this issue pre-dates RG. I think recalibrating tuition to come in line with similar schools is a valid reason. To me, it sounds like the prior BOT, HOS and finance committee delayed the needed tuition increase for too long; and SSFS was in a shaky financial situation but they never disclosed it.

Thanks for weighing in on a situation you are entirely unfamiliar with!

This is exactly what happened. The debt was incurred pre Covid and pre RG. While many people seemed to love the old advancement director she was terrible at fundraising. So many pledges she didn’t follow up on. She was allowed by the BOT to talk a good game for way too long. Many of us who were long term givers were completely ignored. This was a problem before this last head but it continued to get worse.

I’m not disputing that there aren’t issues that RG inherited but to pretend as if this was all the fault of people pre-ratings rg’s tenure that’s ridiculous.

I think you are being disingenuous. I am an SSFS outsider but prior to that throwaway line about millions in debt, it sounded like RG was being faulted for all of the schools financial woes. From my reading of what has been posted here, it just didn’t seem logical for that amount of debt to be incurred solely under his tenure.

It seems like what most people are faulting RG for is promoting a toxic culture for teaches, staff, students, and families.

[Anonymous]

I have no issue with RG being faulted for creating/enabling a toxic environment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Using archive.org, I compiled the US tuition from ssfs.org over time to see how it changed.

17-18 $32,300.00
18-19 $33,250.00 2.94%
19-20 $34,250.00 3.01% *
20-21 $35,250.00 2.92%
21-22 $36,500.00 3.55%
22-23 $38,300.00 4.93%
23-24 $40,980.00 7.00%
24-25 $43,200.00 5.42%
*19-20 tuition is estimated from the average of 18-19 and 20-21 as data was not available from archive.org.

Before RG headed the school, the tuition increases were consistently 3%. During RG's time, the tuition increases are random and reactionary. To me, this proves that TG knew how to manage the schools finances.

Doesn’t the board decide on tuition increase? Didn’t most independent schools in the DMV have ~4-5% increase post pandemic? The jump to 7% seems like an outlier, seems like they wanted to move to the $40k bracket like other schools in the area; there must have been an explanation as to why that increase by the board.

Well if we know one thing, the oversight of the BOT has not been present. So what the BOT agreed or didnt agree to is hard to tell. But then, the BOT is only going to make decisions based on the data they are given, if the data is flawed their concurrence will be flawed as well. The BOT doesnt run the day to day finances, staffing or other operational decisions - at best they only hey/nay's the HOS decisions that are presented to them. But if he's presenting data showing they need to increase to make ends meet, what's the board going to do? I don't believe the BOT knew how bad the finances were.

Second "other schools in the area" are not 40K, there are several in the Moco, Hoco, Baltimore area that are in the 30s still. But prices shouldnt be increased to compete with other schools tuition - it should increase because it needs to and there is a value added service being provided. You have to go towards DC to find schools in the 40K range and frankly SSFS is not those schools. So to increase tuition just because there are schools in the DMV that are pricier is a poor reason (and yes, that is the reason he used - "other schools are more expensive anyway!").

Which non-catholic independent schools (not K-8), in the DMV are below 40k? Who would you say are SSFS peers?

It's not hard to find a few. US tuition 2024-25:
SSFS: $43,200

McDonogh: $41,050
Bryn Mawr: $40,430
Park School: $38,900
Baltimore Friends: $38,000
Gilman: $37,690
Barrie: $37,135
Glenelg Country: $ 35,830
Key School: $35,220

To say none of those can offer an alternative to SSFS is a stretch. You have to move towards DC (Sidwell, Holton Arms) when you start getting the schools that cost more. But you can't say SSFS competes with those schools in what they're offering.

I said DMV (meaning metro DC). Parents that are looking at SSFS also look at Baltimore private schools? The only school listed here I consider DMV is Barrie. Is Barrie the peer to SSFS? Someone earlier suggested Barrie for SSFS parents who wanted to move and the reaction to the suggestion seemed negative.

I think if a family can just as easily commute to any of those schools as ssfs there is no reason why those schools aren’t in the running. There are kids that come from all over moco, hoco, pg, Baltimore to ssfs. So why would these schools be off limits? But the point was that Ssfs is only cheaper than some very different DC schools that offer programs ssfs can’t compete with. After the latest tuition increase which school would you say ssfs has a better program but costs ~same? The 80+ kids who left obviously went somewhere and not all back to public school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Using archive.org, I compiled the US tuition from ssfs.org over time to see how it changed.

17-18 $32,300.00
18-19 $33,250.00 2.94%
19-20 $34,250.00 3.01% *
20-21 $35,250.00 2.92%
21-22 $36,500.00 3.55%
22-23 $38,300.00 4.93%
23-24 $40,980.00 7.00%
24-25 $43,200.00 5.42%
*19-20 tuition is estimated from the average of 18-19 and 20-21 as data was not available from archive.org.

Before RG headed the school, the tuition increases were consistently 3%. During RG's time, the tuition increases are random and reactionary. To me, this proves that TG knew how to manage the schools finances.

Doesn’t the board decide on tuition increase? Didn’t most independent schools in the DMV have ~4-5% increase post pandemic? The jump to 7% seems like an outlier, seems like they wanted to move to the $40k bracket like other schools in the area; there must have been an explanation as to why that increase by the board.

Well if we know one thing, the oversight of the BOT has not been present. So what the BOT agreed or didnt agree to is hard to tell. But then, the BOT is only going to make decisions based on the data they are given, if the data is flawed their concurrence will be flawed as well. The BOT doesnt run the day to day finances, staffing or other operational decisions - at best they only hey/nay's the HOS decisions that are presented to them. But if he's presenting data showing they need to increase to make ends meet, what's the board going to do? I don't believe the BOT knew how bad the finances were.

Second "other schools in the area" are not 40K, there are several in the Moco, Hoco, Baltimore area that are in the 30s still. But prices shouldnt be increased to compete with other schools tuition - it should increase because it needs to and there is a value added service being provided. You have to go towards DC to find schools in the 40K range and frankly SSFS is not those schools. So to increase tuition just because there are schools in the DMV that are pricier is a poor reason (and yes, that is the reason he used - "other schools are more expensive anyway!").

Which non-catholic independent schools (not K-8), in the DMV are below 40k? Who would you say are SSFS peers?

It's not hard to find a few. US tuition 2024-25:
SSFS: $43,200

McDonogh: $41,050
Bryn Mawr: $40,430
Park School: $38,900
Baltimore Friends: $38,000
Gilman: $37,690
Barrie: $37,135
Glenelg Country: $ 35,830
Key School: $35,220

To say none of those can offer an alternative to SSFS is a stretch. You have to move towards DC (Sidwell, Holton Arms) when you start getting the schools that cost more. But you can't say SSFS competes with those schools in what they're offering.

I said DMV (meaning metro DC). Parents that are looking at SSFS also look at Baltimore private schools? The only school listed here I consider DMV is Barrie. Is Barrie the peer to SSFS? Someone earlier suggested Barrie for SSFS parents who wanted to move and the reaction to the suggestion seemed negative.

I think if a family can just as easily commute to any of those schools as ssfs there is no reason why those schools aren’t in the running. There are kids that come from all over moco, hoco, pg, Baltimore to ssfs. So why would these schools be off limits? But the point was that Ssfs is only cheaper than some very different DC schools that offer programs ssfs can’t compete with. After the latest tuition increase which school would you say ssfs has a better program but costs ~same? The 80+ kids who left obviously went somewhere and not all back to public school.

Ok. That’s helpful to know SSFS have students from all parts of Maryland. My kids are at 2 different independent schools and parents generally looked at the dc metro area or boarding school for their kids. I think the board wants to upscale SSFS to be comparable to independent schools in Moco (right now I think Barrie may be considered its peer), to get there, tuition would have to increase. However, parents want SSFS to remain the way it is. It seems there is a disconnect about the vision for the school. The board and the parent/faculty needs to get on the same page before a HOS is hired.

[Anonymous]

Did 80+ kids really withdraw in the last year? Is that confirmed or just dcum hyperbole?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did 80+ kids really withdraw in the last year? Is that confirmed or just dcum hyperbole?

Yes, confirmed.