3 ms·

>Parents in these 34 most-affluent LAUSD elementaries donate an average of $876 per student, our analysis shows. That's like 1/5 of the gap between APS and the

by treis 4y ago

>Parents in these 34 most-affluent LAUSD elementaries donate an average of $876 per student, our analysis shows. That's like 1/5 of the gap between APS and the next highest school district. It looks like the wealthiest in LA are able to make up for the difference. But I am suspect of this article. The parental contribution is only 0.4% of the LAUSD budget but somehow it's making up a 20% funding gap between low and high income schools. Very suspicious that they're cherry picking but I don't have the time to dig in. >Pick one of the "High Income / Low Expenditure" counties - Forsyth - as an example. It has an average household income of $112,834. In that county, there is an entire parallel non-profit organization that raises private donations to fund programs in the school district. Here is an article describing their work: Google says APS spends 17k per pupil while Forsyth spends 10k. For 20 schools with 200 kids they'd need 28 million in contributions to equalize. Raising $115k by selling ducks is a drop in the bucket in comparison. Also, APS does their own fund raising. Brief googling reveals that they've raised 7.4 million through this one site alone: https://www.donorschoose.org/aps?active=true https://www.donorschoose.org/aps?active=true

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
danans 4y ago
> The parental contribution is only 0.4% of the LAUSD budget > but somehow it's making up a 20% funding gap between low and high income schools. Where are you getting the 0.4% coming from? Parents don't generally donate directly to public school district budgets. They donate to school PTAs and school-affiliated non-profits. Perhaps you are referring to https://achieve.lausd.net/donorschoose https://achieve.lausd.net/donorschoose but that's totally unrelated to outside PTA fundraising via the parent community, and it's usually tiny amounts used to pay for things like classroom supplies. It's pretty straightforward. The article says $876 in private PTA donations are raised per year per pupil in the wealthier schools, and that is still $300 shy of what poorer schools spend overall per pupil. So the wealthier schools only make 3/4 of the spending gap. I know this from direct experience since I write a check annually to my kid's California public school PTA for roughly the same amount.
- treis 4y ago
  >Where are you getting the 0.4% coming from? Parents don't generally donate directly to public school district budgets. They donate to school PTAs and school-affiliated non-profits. It's in the article: >In 2018-19, PTAs and booster clubs at LAUSD schools brought in more than $36.9 million in revenues. Compared to LAUSD’s annual $9 billion operating budget, that’s not that much money 36.9 million divided by 9 billion is 0.4%. >The article says $876 in private PTA donations are raised per year per pupil in the wealthier schools, and that is still $300 shy of what poorer schools spend overall per pupil. So the wealthier schools only make 3/4 of the spending gap. >I know this from direct experience since I write a check annually to my kid's California public school PTA for roughly the same amount. Ok, but even if you and every other parent does that it still doesn't make up the difference between city spending per pupil and the surrounding suburbs.
  - danans 4y ago
    > >In 2018-19, PTAs and booster clubs at LAUSD schools brought in more than $36.9 million in revenues. Compared to LAUSD’s annual $9 billion operating budget, that’s not that much money > 36.9 million divided by 9 billion is 0.4%. Read the article again. That's $36.9M raises mostly over the 126 most affluent schools, which is a quarter of the elementary schools in LAUSD, or over $500k raised per school, which would bridge that gap. Furthermore a significant chunk of school district budgets go to pay for pension and health care obligations for retirees, building maintenance, law enforcement, etc. > Ok, but even if you and every other parent does that it still doesn't make up the difference between city spending per pupil and the surrounding suburbs. Not sure I understand what you are saying, but the affluent surrounding suburbs near me spend even more per student from privately raised donations. Some of their PTAs ask for $2k/student per year.

by treis 4y ago

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

danans 4y ago

> The parental contribution is only 0.4% of the LAUSD budget > but somehow it's making up a 20% funding gap between low and high income schools. Where are you getting the 0.4% coming from? Parents don't generally donate directly to public school district budgets. They donate to school PTAs and school-affiliated non-profits. Perhaps you are referring to https://achieve.lausd.net/donorschoose https://achieve.lausd.net/donorschoose but that's totally unrelated to outside PTA fundraising via the parent community, and it's usually tiny amounts used to pay for things like classroom supplies. It's pretty straightforward. The article says $876 in private PTA donations are raised per year per pupil in the wealthier schools, and that is still $300 shy of what poorer schools spend overall per pupil. So the wealthier schools only make 3/4 of the spending gap. I know this from direct experience since I write a check annually to my kid's California public school PTA for roughly the same amount.

treis 4y ago
>Where are you getting the 0.4% coming from? Parents don't generally donate directly to public school district budgets. They donate to school PTAs and school-affiliated non-profits. It's in the article: >In 2018-19, PTAs and booster clubs at LAUSD schools brought in more than $36.9 million in revenues. Compared to LAUSD’s annual $9 billion operating budget, that’s not that much money 36.9 million divided by 9 billion is 0.4%. >The article says $876 in private PTA donations are raised per year per pupil in the wealthier schools, and that is still $300 shy of what poorer schools spend overall per pupil. So the wealthier schools only make 3/4 of the spending gap. >I know this from direct experience since I write a check annually to my kid's California public school PTA for roughly the same amount. Ok, but even if you and every other parent does that it still doesn't make up the difference between city spending per pupil and the surrounding suburbs.
- danans 4y ago
  > >In 2018-19, PTAs and booster clubs at LAUSD schools brought in more than $36.9 million in revenues. Compared to LAUSD’s annual $9 billion operating budget, that’s not that much money > 36.9 million divided by 9 billion is 0.4%. Read the article again. That's $36.9M raises mostly over the 126 most affluent schools, which is a quarter of the elementary schools in LAUSD, or over $500k raised per school, which would bridge that gap. Furthermore a significant chunk of school district budgets go to pay for pension and health care obligations for retirees, building maintenance, law enforcement, etc. > Ok, but even if you and every other parent does that it still doesn't make up the difference between city spending per pupil and the surrounding suburbs. Not sure I understand what you are saying, but the affluent surrounding suburbs near me spend even more per student from privately raised donations. Some of their PTAs ask for $2k/student per year.