Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Schools asking for parental contributions

238 replies

ButamIwhoyouthinkIam · 27/01/2026 19:40

I’m sure this one will be divisive and is partly down to personal politics but I’m interested in the consensus.

state funded primary, good catchment, in deficit, like many others.

email last week to suggest a voluntary contribution from parents to cover essential materials, lays out case etc. but already have quite a few requests annually for enrichment and also trips. Has active PTA and most families donate to this through usual calendar of events.

email sets out rising costs of utilities etc and asks parents to plug the gap. I’m not sure this is the right solution for something that is inherently gov funded and it feels like a slippery slope.

IABU: it’s reasonable for schools to ask this and for parents to be happy to pay

YABU: a different option eg lobbying gov or showing the deficit would be more reasonable. Contributing financially allows the funding problem to be hidden

OP posts:
BernardButlersBra · 28/01/2026 13:57

HisNotHes · 28/01/2026 13:32

It is. I’m not the one who went off on a tangent about siblings passing things down.

Because buying 1 thing and then passing it onto younger sibling is cheaper than buying 2 🙄

Primrose86 · 28/01/2026 14:10

In my son's future school ( faith school), 25% of the budget is funded by parental contributions. Suggested contribution is £175 per month. Ostensibly it is to fund religious education but the main religious education is 'integrated' into the regular curriculum so it mainly goes to fund other stuff.

It does very well academically

Primrose86 · 28/01/2026 14:12

ACynicalDad · 28/01/2026 11:27

A primary school budget is about £1.5m if you have 30 children in each year. What parents give will barely change the dial. The vast majority of costs are wages, keeping salaried headcount manageable and classes full is the only way to really make it work. But they are not being unreasonable for asking for a voluntary contribution, but few will raise enough to cover one TA.

My husband's alma mater (secondary) raised 1 million in 36 hours! They put out an appeal and I guess the story was compelling enough

Gahr · 28/01/2026 14:17

Utter nonsense. If I wanted to pay extras, I would be sending my child to a private school. I'm not here to subsidise the village.

OhDear111 · 28/01/2026 14:18

We’ve had grammars here raising £100,000 a year decades ago! State schools. The big boy well established private schools easily raise money. Girls schools, not so easy!

Primary schools have to plan carefully when they know their staffing budget is 85% ish of the budget. As for a faith school demanding money! Appalling - what if you don’t have it? Turned away? Made to feel inferior? Not Godly enough? The mind boggles! I don’t see how they can justify it either. I think parents don’t mind fund raising but regular big payments are not on.

Primrose86 · 28/01/2026 14:22

OhDear111 · 28/01/2026 14:18

We’ve had grammars here raising £100,000 a year decades ago! State schools. The big boy well established private schools easily raise money. Girls schools, not so easy!

Primary schools have to plan carefully when they know their staffing budget is 85% ish of the budget. As for a faith school demanding money! Appalling - what if you don’t have it? Turned away? Made to feel inferior? Not Godly enough? The mind boggles! I don’t see how they can justify it either. I think parents don’t mind fund raising but regular big payments are not on.

My husband's mum never paid it as she was a single earner with 4 kids but I think most do. Even she was saying it was disgraceful that she knew some people went on cruises but didnt make the voluntary contribution. So she was judging even though she didn't pay as she felt she couldn't afford it but people who go on cruises, she feels they can

Itsmetheflamingo · 28/01/2026 14:27

noblegiraffe · 28/01/2026 13:56

The current employer contributions are not paying for future teacher pensions but current teacher pensions.

How are you suggesting that current teacher pensions are paid for if current employer contributions are reduced?

I know what current contributors pay for - as I said in my first post is something you would start now that would take decades to realise, tapering down as the last pensioners are supported.

its very obvious that it’s not a quick fix and I haven’t presented it as such

there are many laws and t&cs that stop a employer pulling out of a scheme overnight. It’s obviously not possible so doesn’t need to be considered

Itsmetheflamingo · 28/01/2026 14:32

Needlenardlenoo · 28/01/2026 13:53

So when you said "successful", whom or what did you have in mind? It wasn't the students, pupils, teachers or lecturers presumably?

I think it’s very clear from my post. I don’t think it actually matters either, in terms of this conversation. Not sure what angle you’re trying to take

Newbutoldfather · 28/01/2026 14:57

When I was a governor we often had the discussion about how to ask for parental contributions. Obviously, you don’t want to embarrass those who can’t afford it but, on the other hand, if you don’t ask you don’t get.

I always think that a clear explanation of why you need funds and a polite request to ask people to give as much as they can and only if you can afford it is absolutely fine.

Most schools are getting more and more savvy about fund raising. It is a massive business. In private schools I have worked for, marketing is a whole department. Even in the state school I was a governor for, we got voluntary help with marketing and did a drive which raised close to 100k. Whilst that sounds great, you can’t do that every year, the most is three yearly.

At my (very affluent) first private school I taught at, they had one dinner and raised over £1million for a new 6th form centre (even though the existing one was just fine!).

This will probably have private school parents up in arms but, as they are already paying the school £30k in fees (around me, after VAT), If they are philanthropic and have a ‘spare’ £10-50k, surely giving to a local struggling state school would be more useful than yet another architecturally inspiring building replacement?!

Meadowfinch · 28/01/2026 15:06

Gahr · 28/01/2026 14:17

Utter nonsense. If I wanted to pay extras, I would be sending my child to a private school. I'm not here to subsidise the village.

Just as well you haven't sent your child to a private school @Gahr , we have fundraising and additional parental contributions too, on top of normal fees.

They pay for things like replacing the broken heating pump in the pool house. Either that or reduce swimming to the legal minimum, and let down the three state primaries who also use our pool.

OhDear111 · 28/01/2026 16:54

@Primrose86 Well these days cruises are cheap! However it’s always been the case that some will pay and others won’t or can’t. There should not really be judgement.

Yes, most independent schools fund raise and have marketing people. Boarding schools at £65,000 a year do. Oxford university does and in the USA raising funds from alumni is big business. Many parents don’t mind a bit of fundraising but it’s difficult in poorer areas.

Jesuismartin · 28/01/2026 17:25

Primrose86 · 28/01/2026 14:10

In my son's future school ( faith school), 25% of the budget is funded by parental contributions. Suggested contribution is £175 per month. Ostensibly it is to fund religious education but the main religious education is 'integrated' into the regular curriculum so it mainly goes to fund other stuff.

It does very well academically

Edited

Wow that’s a lot. Is that in London? I think we would struggle with £175 x 2 per month. Is it voluntary?

Primrose86 · 28/01/2026 18:46

Jesuismartin · 28/01/2026 17:25

Wow that’s a lot. Is that in London? I think we would struggle with £175 x 2 per month. Is it voluntary?

Yes. It is voluntary. The stats say that 50% of parents in my religion's London schools pay the contributions (only one third in Manchester). My son's future school is a more liberal one with fewer siblings so the proportion of paying parents is probably higher.

Duckishness · 28/01/2026 19:29

ACynicalDad · 28/01/2026 11:27

A primary school budget is about £1.5m if you have 30 children in each year. What parents give will barely change the dial. The vast majority of costs are wages, keeping salaried headcount manageable and classes full is the only way to really make it work. But they are not being unreasonable for asking for a voluntary contribution, but few will raise enough to cover one TA.

This is 100% correct.

OhDear111 · 28/01/2026 21:03

@Duckishness In mn land people expect 24 in a class, a teacher and TAs. It astounds me how many schools can have few dc but don’t alter class configuration. Staffing 6 classes instead of 5 across 2 years groups is very expensive and yet everyone expects the status quo with falling rolls. It’s not possible.

Duckishness · 28/01/2026 21:44

OhDear111 · 28/01/2026 21:03

@Duckishness In mn land people expect 24 in a class, a teacher and TAs. It astounds me how many schools can have few dc but don’t alter class configuration. Staffing 6 classes instead of 5 across 2 years groups is very expensive and yet everyone expects the status quo with falling rolls. It’s not possible.

We were forced to have mixed year groups (single form entry primary) due to falling roll plus other factors. LA accounts team were all over us questioning class size, number of teachers, amount of non-contact time etc.

We covered it with surplus once (transient area, hoping for a boost in numbers the next and wanted room for growth), fought them off another year, but then were out of options and deficit couldn’t get any higher. It was hideous for the teachers, huge curriculum re-write burden etc. Very complex cohort so it was tough for everyone but that’s the reality for many schools.

WorkCleanRepeat · 28/01/2026 21:47

TeenToTwenties · 27/01/2026 19:54

What will happen to the schools in disadvantaged areas where getting parents to cover the funding gap isn't possible?

I understand why schools would like it, but it won't resolve systemic issues.

These tend to be the better off schools due to the higher levels of pupil premium funding.

noblegiraffe · 28/01/2026 22:04

WorkCleanRepeat · 28/01/2026 21:47

These tend to be the better off schools due to the higher levels of pupil premium funding.

Who have massively more challenges to deal with due to their cohort than schools in more affluent areas? I wouldn't call them 'better off'.

OhDear111 · 28/01/2026 22:24

They do have significantly more money. There’s also the issue of village schools attracting higher numbers of SEN dc but no pp because they don’t get fsm. Their parents are just looking for smaller family feel schools but they bring no money in. That’s been a problem for a long time too.

@Duckishness I’ve no personal experience in what era you are talking about. Certainly my LA hasn’t done that in living memory. Governors are responsible and have been for decades. No school here gets that level of interference from LA accountants unless totally out of control financially. Schools must draw up budgets that balance. So maybe your school refused to do that? It’s mismanagement if they didn’t and the LA might have refused to delegate the budget as the school was incompetent. But yes, cut your cost according to your cloth.

noblegiraffe · 28/01/2026 22:34

They do have significantly more money.

Because they need more money.

Jasnah · 29/01/2026 05:00

I haven't rtft so am not sure whether this has been mentioned, but do people realise that a vast contributer to lack of funds is academisation?

When, like in the Arthur Terry trust, Head Office (CEOs and other back office staff with no real impact) are creaming off up to 20% of government funds, it is no wonder that schools are strugglig for funds.

The first things that should happen is a move back to LA funded schools. When LAs were in charge, not only was there no need for that money to be spent, but schools were also much more able to use an LA pool of resources, such as supply teachers from a common pool of LA employed staff - much cheaper than agency staff these days, where 50% of the money for a supply teacher goes to fund the agency.

Needlenardlenoo · 29/01/2026 07:15

While I agree the academy system has much to answer for, I think that would be an incredibly bad idea at the moment with the LAs being so strapped for cash. The money would just disappear to a different place!

Itsmetheflamingo · 29/01/2026 08:21

Jasnah · 29/01/2026 05:00

I haven't rtft so am not sure whether this has been mentioned, but do people realise that a vast contributer to lack of funds is academisation?

When, like in the Arthur Terry trust, Head Office (CEOs and other back office staff with no real impact) are creaming off up to 20% of government funds, it is no wonder that schools are strugglig for funds.

The first things that should happen is a move back to LA funded schools. When LAs were in charge, not only was there no need for that money to be spent, but schools were also much more able to use an LA pool of resources, such as supply teachers from a common pool of LA employed staff - much cheaper than agency staff these days, where 50% of the money for a supply teacher goes to fund the agency.

Why do you think this re temp staff? Agency staff are generally* cheaper as there is no pension or other benefit (sick pay employers NI etc) contribution. This is the case across employers with v expensive pension schemes

*I’m sure there are exceptions but it certainly wouldn’t be the norm.

OhDear111 · 29/01/2026 08:22

@Jasnah These back office functions just replace the LA though. We had a huge education dept. From memory this included finance, HR, Advisers, buildings, procurement, special projects, plus payroll, legal and pension depts which serviced all the LA staff. Many services were optional like governor clerking and we had a menu of these. However I agree with you. Academies cost too much.

Itsmetheflamingo · 29/01/2026 08:29

Jasnah · 29/01/2026 05:00

I haven't rtft so am not sure whether this has been mentioned, but do people realise that a vast contributer to lack of funds is academisation?

When, like in the Arthur Terry trust, Head Office (CEOs and other back office staff with no real impact) are creaming off up to 20% of government funds, it is no wonder that schools are strugglig for funds.

The first things that should happen is a move back to LA funded schools. When LAs were in charge, not only was there no need for that money to be spent, but schools were also much more able to use an LA pool of resources, such as supply teachers from a common pool of LA employed staff - much cheaper than agency staff these days, where 50% of the money for a supply teacher goes to fund the agency.

Double post