I read with interest Jeffery I. Goodman's article, "Same goal, different 'Vision' for SMMEF drive" (April 23, 2015). In it, School Board President Laurie Lieberman makes the astute observation "that it's been difficult to rally middle and high school parents, at least in part because there's a perception that elementary school students benefit more." This correctly points out the downside of switching to a centralized fundraising system from the grassroots, school-by-school, parent-run fundraising that had successfully worked until Ms. Lieberman and the rest of the School Board decided to disallow that type of fundraising four years ago.
Of course it is difficult to convince middle and high school parents that they should give money that won't go to their own kid's schools, but instead to younger kids at other schools. It's a simple truth built into human nature: we give more willingly if we can see where our donations go and what good they do. In the past, donating to your own child's school led to changes at that school parents could see every day. Now, donating means giving money to the Ed Foundation, which gets spread among all schools at the whim of the School Board or some preordained formula. It's not only difficult to see what good the donations do, it's difficult to see how they might help your own child. Furthermore, it makes it difficult to rally volunteers at the individual school level to assist with fundraising efforts. It's easy to get a parent to feel school spirit for their own child's school and therefore volunteer to help. Like it or not, nobody feels school spirit for a school board or a school district.
What puzzles me is how Board President Lieberman and the rest of the board seem surprised at this turn of events. I, and dozens of other families involved in the previous fundraising efforts, predicted this situation in 2011 and warned the Board at public hearings prior to their vote banning fundraising by and for individual schools.
At that time, the Daily Press quoted SMMEF Executive Director Linda Greenberg (then Linda Gross) saying "I think we could raise $6 to $8 million altogether…" When the Board voted to entrust the fundraising to SMMEF, that goal was cut to $4 million.
Two years later, we've seen the centralized method entrusted to SMMEF come up short of that reduced goal both times they've tried.
Campaign 1: Having raised only $3.2 million as the fundraising period ended, the School Board gave $800,000 to SMMEF so that they could "make" their $4 million goal, meaning a full 20 percent of the "fundraising" total was really just a transfer from somewhere else that would have directly benefited the schools, too. This $3.2 million included all corporate donations, event profits, and bequests that would have gone to SMMEF regardless of the policy change. Only a minority share of that $3.2 million came from family donations. Let's be generous and say it was half that total, or $1.6 million. As a comparison, six years earlier, among the middle and elementary schools only, parent-led fundraising from family donations totaled $3.3 million. Clearly, this first try was a big step backward.
Campaign 2: SMMEF has raised $2 million to date, $2 million short of their goal, with 2 months to go. Daily Press reports say that 45 percent of this money came from families, or $900,000. Again, compared to the $3.3 million raised six years ago by families in just the middle and elementary schools, this is not progress. SMMEF's Linda Greenberg says she is "optimistic that we will make our goal." But knowing they have only 10 percent of the fundraising period left to raise 50 percent of the money, I do not share her optimism.
Excuses like Superintendent Lyon saying "People don't see it (the name of the program) as connected to the ed foundation," or from Ms. Greenberg adding "…now we're funding them through a different mechanism. I don't think they realized that, in order to keep them, they need to donate to SMMEF," are just that, excuses, neither of which will help hire a teachers aide or add art instruction.
I'd like the School Board to answer two questions:
How can you still think this change in fundraising policy a good idea when the results have been so dismal?
How can you justify continuing it in the face of these results?
Then I'd like them to get back to letting parents run effective fundraising programs that benefit their schools. By all means, let SMMEF add to that total with the kind of district wide events, sales, and corporate donations that are appropriate for a district wide organization. It's time to acknowledge a failed attempt and return to the system that worked.
Patrick Adams is a Santa Monica resident.
