Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This does look like sloppy reporting. At our school, we pay the HSA for every field trip. So if 100 students pay $10 each to the HSA to go to the Natural History Museum, it would appear that the HSA "raised" $1000. Then if you figure there are 7 grades and each grade goes on roughly 10 trips a year, it now looks like the HSA raised $70,000. But that is not fundraising, that's me paying for my kid to go on a field trip.

If you didn't pay for the field trip, the field trip would not happen. That's fundraising. The fact that the amount of money raised is equal to the cost of the activity is irrelevant.

It is not fundraising to pay for the cost of a field trip. It is not fundraising for parents to PAY for aftercare for their child just because the HSA/PTA is a conduit for those funds to go to the private provider of aftercare services. The aftercare provider could just as easily accept the funds directly from parents who are paying for care and the HSA would never be involved, it would just be a parent paying for a service.

The HSA is used as a pass-through for the fund to then go directly to pay for the bus or Metro to take the kids to the museum. Would you call it fundraising if instead we paid the school directly for the field trip like when I was a kid?

The CAP study is all about supplemental money in public education—in other words, money on top of what is allocated to schools from the school district. The reason is that traditionally most districts only compare resource equity by comparing school budgets. But if—within a single school district—there is one school that consistently receives hundreds of thousands of dollars in supplemental money from an outside organization, and another school consistently receives zero, and the primary difference between those two schools is race, then there is inequity. The question is, what responsibility, if any, does the school district have to address the inequity?

Your example assumes that every parent has the financial wherewithal to pay for the field trip, so it does not matter whether the money is paid to the PTA or directly to the school, because regardless of which entity receives the money, the trip will happen. Not every parent can afford the field trip, and when those parents are concentrated in a single school, the field trip will not happen. Therefore, the school with parents that can universally afford the field trip are receiving a benefit that another school may not receive.

Fine. Forget field trips.

Aftercare. Aftercare is not provided by DCPS at most (any?) upper NW schools. So a private entity provides it. At Janney, it happens to be that the parents on the PTA procured that private vendor so that aftercare would be available. They negotiated the contract and pay over the cost of the aftercare that simply passes through them. This is not additional money in public education. Having aftercare available is not an additional resource that other schools in the system do not receive. In fact, having no DCPS provided aftercare actually costs the parents in those schools more because private aftercare is more expensive. No one is looking at the $80 a month or whatever aftercare costs at DCPSs with DCPS provided aftercare and saying "OMG! They raised $80x10x400 kids, wow, that's $320,000 in resources that Title 1 school raised."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do think this is sloppy reporting, and I really don't care how much a PTA raises in different schools... I get that as a parent you are willing to donate more to a school if it directly impacts your child.

That being said, I would think with a budget as high as some of these schools have, perhaps they could make a small effort to help schools with much smaller PTO budgets. The success of the district as a whole should matter to these schools, even if the number one priority is their own population.

For one, many of these "poorer" schools are extremely inexperienced with fundraising, what works, what doesn't, etc. Reaching out to "mentor" a developing PTO would be so appreciated by schools. Offering advice, maybe a connection or two, sharing information, etc. Maybe developing a "Sister PTO" relationship. Its not just about the money. These schools are struggling just to figure out how to run a PTO, let alone how to raise money.

And if we want to get into the money, perhaps the wealthier PTO's could fund a small grant for other PTO's in the district. Offering a couple $500-$1000 grants a year to other district PTO's for a worthy cause. It would make such a difference to those school's budgets and would make a small impact on the wealthier school budgets.

I just think there are ways that wealthier schools could use a small portion of their resources for the greater good without negatively impacting their own budgets.

These PTAs absolutely do this. Many schools collect books at book fairs to help fill shelves in poorer parts of the city and coat drives to fill sister-school requests. There are organizations who's sole purpose is to make the connection between rich and poor PTOs and many of these school participate in this.

Lafayette, for example, has an entire program called Lafayette Gives back, sponsored by the HSA, whose sole purpose is to give, and to teach kids to give, to others. This includes packing backpacks for foster kids, making care packages for first-responders and collecting baby carriers for refugees.

This is wonderful... however, I am not sure it is well advertised. Being on a PTO at an EOTP elementary with limited resources, I have never once heard from a PTO at a more advantaged school. We have reached out directly to schools and been told specifically that, at this time, they do not offer any assistance. Etc. Perhaps we have spoken to the wrong schools...perhaps we have contacted the wrong people... But if it is something these schools are doing- they should make sure people know about it.

Anonymous wrote:Hmm, there's a way to solve this! It's something called a "tax." It's where you collect money from everyone in a jurisdiction, and distribute it according to need. Perhaps, since there are DC parents who have a demonstrated willingness to pay additional money to fund public schools, Dc could look into an increased property tax for additional schol funding.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I dont begrudge those schools. Title 1 schools may raise significantly less but they also get more govt dollars. Either way, the real heart of this is the commitment from parents. You could throw 1 mil at the worst performin elem in DC and I am not sure the test scores are going to jump all that much. It all comes down to what the parents are giving to the kids OUTSIDE of school unfortunately. And 1 million dollars isn't going to help that much.

false. PTA funds at our school go to aides in each classroom, which makes a huge difference in quality.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do think this is sloppy reporting, and I really don't care how much a PTA raises in different schools... I get that as a parent you are willing to donate more to a school if it directly impacts your child.

That being said, I would think with a budget as high as some of these schools have, perhaps they could make a small effort to help schools with much smaller PTO budgets. The success of the district as a whole should matter to these schools, even if the number one priority is their own population.

For one, many of these "poorer" schools are extremely inexperienced with fundraising, what works, what doesn't, etc. Reaching out to "mentor" a developing PTO would be so appreciated by schools. Offering advice, maybe a connection or two, sharing information, etc. Maybe developing a "Sister PTO" relationship. Its not just about the money. These schools are struggling just to figure out how to run a PTO, let alone how to raise money.

And if we want to get into the money, perhaps the wealthier PTO's could fund a small grant for other PTO's in the district. Offering a couple $500-$1000 grants a year to other district PTO's for a worthy cause. It would make such a difference to those school's budgets and would make a small impact on the wealthier school budgets.

I just think there are ways that wealthier schools could use a small portion of their resources for the greater good without negatively impacting their own budgets.

These PTAs absolutely do this. Many schools collect books at book fairs to help fill shelves in poorer parts of the city and coat drives to fill sister-school requests. There are organizations who's sole purpose is to make the connection between rich and poor PTOs and many of these school participate in this.

Lafayette, for example, has an entire program called Lafayette Gives back, sponsored by the HSA, whose sole purpose is to give, and to teach kids to give, to others. This includes packing backpacks for foster kids, making care packages for first-responders and collecting baby carriers for refugees.

This is wonderful... however, I am not sure it is well advertised. Being on a PTO at an EOTP elementary with limited resources, I have never once heard from a PTO at a more advantaged school. We have reached out directly to schools and been told specifically that, at this time, they do not offer any assistance. Etc. Perhaps we have spoken to the wrong schools...perhaps we have contacted the wrong people... But if it is something these schools are doing- they should make sure people know about it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do think this is sloppy reporting, and I really don't care how much a PTA raises in different schools... I get that as a parent you are willing to donate more to a school if it directly impacts your child.

That being said, I would think with a budget as high as some of these schools have, perhaps they could make a small effort to help schools with much smaller PTO budgets. The success of the district as a whole should matter to these schools, even if the number one priority is their own population.

For one, many of these "poorer" schools are extremely inexperienced with fundraising, what works, what doesn't, etc. Reaching out to "mentor" a developing PTO would be so appreciated by schools. Offering advice, maybe a connection or two, sharing information, etc. Maybe developing a "Sister PTO" relationship. Its not just about the money. These schools are struggling just to figure out how to run a PTO, let alone how to raise money.

And if we want to get into the money, perhaps the wealthier PTO's could fund a small grant for other PTO's in the district. Offering a couple $500-$1000 grants a year to other district PTO's for a worthy cause. It would make such a difference to those school's budgets and would make a small impact on the wealthier school budgets.

I just think there are ways that wealthier schools could use a small portion of their resources for the greater good without negatively impacting their own budgets.

These PTAs absolutely do this. Many schools collect books at book fairs to help fill shelves in poorer parts of the city and coat drives to fill sister-school requests. There are organizations who's sole purpose is to make the connection between rich and poor PTOs and many of these school participate in this.

Lafayette, for example, has an entire program called Lafayette Gives back, sponsored by the HSA, whose sole purpose is to give, and to teach kids to give, to others. This includes packing backpacks for foster kids, making care packages for first-responders and collecting baby carriers for refugees.

Anonymous wrote:I dont begrudge those schools. Title 1 schools may raise significantly less but they also get more govt dollars. Either way, the real heart of this is the commitment from parents. You could throw 1 mil at the worst performin elem in DC and I am not sure the test scores are going to jump all that much. It all comes down to what the parents are giving to the kids OUTSIDE of school unfortunately. And 1 million dollars isn't going to help that much.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do think this is sloppy reporting, and I really don't care how much a PTA raises in different schools... I get that as a parent you are willing to donate more to a school if it directly impacts your child.

That being said, I would think with a budget as high as some of these schools have, perhaps they could make a small effort to help schools with much smaller PTO budgets. The success of the district as a whole should matter to these schools, even if the number one priority is their own population.

For one, many of these "poorer" schools are extremely inexperienced with fundraising, what works, what doesn't, etc. Reaching out to "mentor" a developing PTO would be so appreciated by schools. Offering advice, maybe a connection or two, sharing information, etc. Maybe developing a "Sister PTO" relationship. Its not just about the money. These schools are struggling just to figure out how to run a PTO, let alone how to raise money.

And if we want to get into the money, perhaps the wealthier PTO's could fund a small grant for other PTO's in the district. Offering a couple $500-$1000 grants a year to other district PTO's for a worthy cause. It would make such a difference to those school's budgets and would make a small impact on the wealthier school budgets.

I just think there are ways that wealthier schools could use a small portion of their resources for the greater good without negatively impacting their own budgets.

But isn't this what our tax dollars are supposed to do? If there's a problem with per pupil funding, then the city budget is where the attention should go.

Anonymous wrote:I do think this is sloppy reporting, and I really don't care how much a PTA raises in different schools... I get that as a parent you are willing to donate more to a school if it directly impacts your child.

That being said, I would think with a budget as high as some of these schools have, perhaps they could make a small effort to help schools with much smaller PTO budgets. The success of the district as a whole should matter to these schools, even if the number one priority is their own population.

For one, many of these "poorer" schools are extremely inexperienced with fundraising, what works, what doesn't, etc. Reaching out to "mentor" a developing PTO would be so appreciated by schools. Offering advice, maybe a connection or two, sharing information, etc. Maybe developing a "Sister PTO" relationship. Its not just about the money. These schools are struggling just to figure out how to run a PTO, let alone how to raise money.

And if we want to get into the money, perhaps the wealthier PTO's could fund a small grant for other PTO's in the district. Offering a couple $500-$1000 grants a year to other district PTO's for a worthy cause. It would make such a difference to those school's budgets and would make a small impact on the wealthier school budgets.

I just think there are ways that wealthier schools could use a small portion of their resources for the greater good without negatively impacting their own budgets.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A very misleading amount as I know for certain the PTA did not raise half, a third, a fourth that amount! This exorbitant amount includes the budget for enrichment and after school care operations. The actual money raised by PTA is way less tha $1.4million.

CAP's source for the Janney fundraising data is the Form 990 Return of Organization Exempt from Income Tax. So if it wasn't $1.39M, then Janney PTA lied on its tax return.

The number includes the gross collected for aftercare and other after school programs that parents pay for which are organized by the PTA.

They didnt lie, rather the way the number is presented was intentionally misleading.

Non Janney parent here, but that totally makes sense. PTAs are often a pass through for the aftercare programs.

The number probably also includes gross auction receipts from the auction. Net receipts after expenses are 25% or less of the gross. A careful reporter would have discovered this.

Anonymous wrote:I do think this is sloppy reporting, and I really don't care how much a PTA raises in different schools... I get that as a parent you are willing to donate more to a school if it directly impacts your child.

That being said, I would think with a budget as high as some of these schools have, perhaps they could make a small effort to help schools with much smaller PTO budgets. The success of the district as a whole should matter to these schools, even if the number one priority is their own population.

For one, many of these "poorer" schools are extremely inexperienced with fundraising, what works, what doesn't, etc. Reaching out to "mentor" a developing PTO would be so appreciated by schools. Offering advice, maybe a connection or two, sharing information, etc. Maybe developing a "Sister PTO" relationship. Its not just about the money. These schools are struggling just to figure out how to run a PTO, let alone how to raise money.

And if we want to get into the money, perhaps the wealthier PTO's could fund a small grant for other PTO's in the district. Offering a couple $500-$1000 grants a year to other district PTO's for a worthy cause. It would make such a difference to those school's budgets and would make a small impact on the wealthier school budgets.

I just think there are ways that wealthier schools could use a small portion of their resources for the greater good without negatively impacting their own budgets.