Should Public Schools Have to Raise Money?

Should Public Schools Have to Raise Money?

About a year ago I was explaining to an educator how my firm helps schools attract more resources. We were both attending a President Obama private event at a charter school in Madison, Wisconsin. She responded, "Schools shouldn't have to do that!" I've thought about her response many times since then.

Today I would have to say that it doesn't really matter if she or anyone else thinks schools should not have to raise money. The fact is that school budgets are shrinking all over the country, and at the same time people are less satisfied with our education system. Add to that a struggling economy and overall distrust of how government at the federal and state level uses tax dollars, and the writing is clearly on the wall.

The sooner public schools realize that they need to diversify their revenue sources, and that in order to secure new sources of revenue they will need to strategically cultivate relationships with community members, companies and organizations, the sooner they will have more control over their future sustainability.

You see there is no shortage of money or resources for good schools. It's just going to come from places other than government. And I think that's actually a good thing.

Is There a Downside to a Purely Government Funded Education System?

I think there have been two consequences of public schools being solely funded by government.

First, I think many schools have developed a mindset of scarcity and survival versus vision for the future. Every year they find out how much money they will get and then they budget accordingly, laying off valuable teachers and assistants if they have to. Instead, what they should be doing is thinking about what kind of school they want to be for children, figuring out how much that costs and then going out and finding the money to pay for it.

Second, many schools have developed a kind of entitlement mindset. They don't really have to be accountable in the truest sense, because they will continue to receive some amount of money to run the school. It could be a school that performs well, but there is no incentive to be cutting edge or really innovative.

So being dependent on one source of revenue results in schools being vulnerable when it comes to ensuring the quality of their programs, and it also causes schools to be insular and closed to real community engagement.

I believe if individul schools had to go to the residents and businesses in their neighborhoods and inspire people to support them, we'd see a lot more innovation and excellence.

So whether or not you believe public schools should have to raise money is sort of irrelevant at this point. If they don't, they might not be around for long.

Send me your thoughts.