Voluntary donations from parents/ carers

[smogsville]

Hi Everyone

I’m trying to find out if any comprehensive community schools actively seek voluntary donations from parents/ carers.

Our DCs’ primary does (monthly standing order) but it’s a voluntary aided church school so is obliged to find a portion of its funding from the church/ families.

Locally a couple of state secondaries do ask - and in a fairly insistent way. One is a grammar, the other a religious school. Anecdotally I hear that the majority of parents get on board with these requests which tend to suggest/ stipulate a particular amount, sometimes totalling more that £2.5k per year (again, paid by monthly standing order). As result both schools have serious extra money to invest in smaller classes, staff and equipment - making a material difference to the quality of the educational experience. Compared to private fees it’s a drop in the ocean.

My question is - do any community comps do this, or is it a blanket no because of sensitivities around asking parents do contribute? I want to raise it with our head and would love to be able to share some examples of schools in exactly the same
category that are doing this. We are doing all usual PTA fundraising and having fun at events but the money raised is negligible compared to what regular donations could achieve.

Thanks in advance.

Yes totally agree at the macro level. Would happily pay more tax and see it dedicated to really excellent schools for everyone. They seem to be doing some fantastic things in Estonia for example.

Remember that schools with high numbers of disadvantaged students do receive more funding than other schools via the Pupil Premium.

Also, primary schools tend to have a more active PTA because they have higher numbers of parents who are SAHP or working part time.

When children go to secondary school parents are more likely to work longer hours, but have lower childcare costs, so some who are used to supporting their local school are willing & able to contribute financially.

Yes @conditionality this is my thinking. Less time to help/ attend and less of a general events/ fundraising culture but may be happy to donate. But need the function to be in place and to be able to appreciate the point of donating because others are too.

The problem with that is that pupil premium isn’t actually that much and it seems that schools aren’t always using it for what it is intended for.

I know voluntarily contributions are well intended but this sometimes, in my opinion, take away from the fact that schools need to be funded better by taxpayers rather than middle class, well off, parents topping up the school with voluntary funding.

@privatenonamegiven saying schools need to be better funded is a truism. Hopefully all past wrongs will be righted, the economy will boom, teachers (and nurses, and doctors, and social workers, and carers) will get the pay they deserve, and the sun will always shine. In the meantime we can all lobby our MPs. I expect they would agree with all the above, and just be less clear on how to get there. 🙂

@conditionality I think many of us need to vote differently and more strategically. Not sure whether your post was sarcastic difficult to tell, but the sun will always shine in there kind of suggests it is. I don’t believe lobbying your MP is sufficient, this is just the middle class way of easing your conscience and patting yourself on the back that you’ve done something, when it makes very little difference. In the meantime I get people are going to give voluntary donations to their schools when asked if they can afford it, doesn’t make it fair or right. Also I don’t think all politicians would agree that schools are underfunded. Especially when so many of them have been complicit in under funding them over the past couple of decades.

Would my child stand out if I offered the school a really generous amount monthly, and get nicer roles for the yearly production? Would my child be disadvantaged if we are unable to contribute at all? What if I don't seem like it but my financial circumstances don't allow me to contribute at all.. would it seem intentional to the school and the school sees xxx's parents that way? Would the teachers know how much each household is donating? Would the top figures be recognised and their children shown more appreciation knowingly or unknowingly? I know a primary school where a parent donates in hundreds for school fairs and they recognise her name and put up a thank you banner in the school. Everyone knows who her child is. I don't know if the school or the teachers try to show further appreciation in other forms.
I don't like the idea.

No teachers should know this. The school should make that clear in their letter. Donations will usually be handled by school business managers or finance staff, and there would be no justifiable reason under GDPR for them to share transaction details with teaching staff.

Our school provides the option of using Just Giving, which facilitates anonymous donations if preferred.

I want to donate to my children's primary school as this is the last year a child of mine will be there, and they've been absolutely instrumental in supporting me and my children in various ways. But I have no idea how to, they don't ask, and I feel very weird asking!

My child’s (secondary) school has recently introduced this after years of campaigning to do so by parents. It’s another potential revenue stream not a replacement for PTA activities, PP funding or any other of the sources of income that they already have.

Our local comp suggested that parents could make donations but it was done with as little pressure as possible. I and other parents still felt pressured though, and I don’t really like it. Everything about some schools having more money than others feels very distasteful to me though. It doesn’t seem fair that some children get free trips and enrichment from their schools and others don’t. It doesn’t make much difference whether the money comes from an active PTA, affluent parent donations or pupil premium.

@CopperWhiteat my DC school the money goes to buy things like pritt stick, mend holes in the roof and buy those in need, food. I wouldn’t say any of that is conferring advantage. It’s sad that it is necessary.

@WhereAreTheWildThingsNow mending holes in the roof!! That should be paid for by the taxpayers ridiculous that schools are having to raise money to fix things that are fundamental in the operation of a school!

Also the government ought to do what the Major of London has done and all primary school children get lunch free at the point of access - in my mind there’s a good argument for this being continued into secondary schools too!

“There does seem to be a certain squeamishness at some schools about asking parents for fear of putting people under pressure when they're not in a position to contribute which is emphatically not a sensible way forward.”

You could call it ‘squeamishness’ or you could say it’s an ethical stance founded on (a) not putting pressure on parents who can’t afford it, and / or (b) a belief in comprehensive education without skewing more advantage towards schools attended by the children of affluent parents who can afford it.

I’m not saying that’s my standpoint but I think the use of the word ‘squeamish’ is judgy.

Pragmatically, I would support it as long as it’s very very clear there is no implied pressure.

Pupil premium is different from an active PTA or parent donations though - PP is linked to the number of disadvantaged pupils and schools need to show how it benefits them.

@privatenonamegivennot lunch. Breakfast, snacks,food after school to encourage staying in school to revise. That’s not covered by FSM but is pivotal in supporting many of the most disadvantaged.

Wages are (rightly) rising. Revenues not.

@WhereAreTheWildThingsNow totally agree and think that should be funded centrally and there is very good argument that it should be universal. As there are saving to be made when buying in bulk etc. that schools could benefit from. As previously said parents shouldn’t be funding this kind of stuff. Very sad really.

Another issue is that where state schools receive these voluntary donations from parents, the donations can be gift aided which means between the school and the parent, the full amount of tax paid is reimbursed. This means that the more parental donations a school gets, the more taxpayer funding it gets. With the sums being discussed of £100-200 per month (ie £1200-2400 per year), this is not a trivial addition to schools funding from the taxpayer. Given that the schools receiving the highest donations are likely to have the most affluent pupils, this is a distortion of the funding model.

"It doesn’t seem fair that some children get free trips and enrichment from their schools and others don’t."

Within a school, the donations from the more affluent parents supplement activities for children whose parents don't donate. It makes school better for everyone. There's nothing wrong with a bit of philanthropy.

If other schools don't have enough parents able to contribute to make that viable then that is sad for their children, but it is not "unfair". They are still getting the education that they are entitled to.

They are still getting the education that they are entitled to.

You could say that about the children of parents who are wealthy, who are in state schools. How is it fair that children from wealthy backgrounds are getting a better state education than children from less wealthy backgrounds (as we all know that certain state schools have a much higher proportion of wealthy parents than others - it kind of goes against the whole ethos of a state education in my opinion.

As I said if all state schools were funded properly by the taxpayers then we wouldn't have this problem..

But the cost of suggesting that could be an evaporation of goodwill and parents only able to donate significantly less than that deciding they're seen as not good enough if they can't meet the 'We donate £200 a month per child, it's all about the Children, really' that does emerge in some schools - along with the most disadvantaged completely turned away from the odd fiver here and there if they can stretch to it.

After all, you'd be asking for people to hand over the equivalent of working 16 hours a week if they're on NMW - so many women's (in particular) entire salary for a week a month. Would you hand over 25% of your salary a year to the school? More to the point, would you be indifferent or horrified at the sheer privilege being expressed by somebody who can't imagine what a significant amount it is to some, whilst it is but a trifle to those asking?

They are not getting a "better state education". They are getting the same state education, with some added extras paid for by generous parents. Not everything has to be paid for by general taxation. I'm a school governor so fully aware that schools need more money, but the things that are funded by parents are a drop in the ocean.

When schools were relatively better funded (the "Education, Education, Education" years) it was on the back of a briefly booming economy. We are not there now so we have to make the best of it.

Education isn’t everything though that’s a cop out…. taxpayers benefit from an educated society and taxpayers should pay more everyone would benefit. They are getting a better education/ experience and to suggest otherwise is you being in denial.

Not in denial, no, just not naive about the national economy, and I'm pragmatic about how long it will take to turn things around. Feeling optimistic though.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/article/2024/sep/02/pay-as-you-go-schooling-parents-under-pressure-to-fund-essentials

This makes for interesting reading and illustrates the inequalities as a consequence of this approach. And while I understand people who want to be generous in donating, I worry this just enables our government to get away with underfunding schools for longer. Don’t think I’m native either but I understand what needs prioritising.