Friday, February 28, 2025

Improving Salaries!


How can we pay our teachers better and at the same time, make our schools more affordable to  our families? I believe this is the central dilemma facing our schools just about everywhere.


But rather than viewing these as opposing tensions, I believe we can use one to help the other— if we structure our advancement program correctly. 


Here’s how I tried to do that when I was principal of St. Michael in Fairhope, AL:


Whatever our actual total financial aid gifts were each year—after all the dust settled— we listed it as a line item under expense. On the revenue side, we coded tuition as if everyone was paying full freight.


At St. Michael, that aid number was about $600,000, given to 30% of our 350 students.


I also had a line item under income for our annual fund appeal at $250,000. I considered this our "ordinary” philanthropic income and tasked our advancement director to raise this each year.  If we were successful with our annual fund, together with tuition, fees and subsidies, I could offer our teachers modest raises each year. That was our “baseline.” 


But if I wanted to make real headway on salaries—which I believe is THE challenge for our schools—I needed to spend my limited time as school principal on "extraordinary”  philanthropy.  What is the most powerful way to do that? 


I believe it's by asking wealthy Catholic families to give students "the gift of a Catholic education." I have found they're receptive to appeal that if they are convinced the money is going directly to families for this purpose.  


In other words, my aim was to begin to offset the 600K number listed as an expense for financial aid with gifts and scholarships. 


We did that in three ways:


First, we asked older Catholic parishioners to consider becoming  “Guardian Angels” for younger Catholic families, inviting them to “pay the gift of their Catholic education forward.” Every August we would take kids (in uniform) and talk at the end of masses to ask for pledges or a donation to help families. 


The money would go into a “Guardian Angel” fund available for the next year. If parents applied for financial aid, I would give them what I could through the school’s budget. But if they needed more, they went to their pastor, who could then ask me to withdraw GA funds and apply it to their student account. I didn’t spend that money—only the pastors did. 


The pastors appreciated it, because they were able to help their families directly, without tapping into parish money. They were the "good guys," and I was happy with that. It also opened them to us making that appeal each year in their churches. Pastors are rightfully hesitant to see donation dollars leave their parish for other causes! 


Older Catholics responded generously. I didn’t transfer money into a student’s account until I received a thank you from the student  to their anonymous guardian angel, and then I would send that letter to the donor. The donors thus knew their money wasn’t going to an administrative “black hole.” Each year we would receive about 150K in GA donations. When we withdrew money from this account, we would list that "income" in our operations. I never used all of it in a single year, figuring the appeal might become less successful down the line, perhaps with even a long term goal of morphing it into an endowment fund.  When I left the school in 2022, the number had grown to about 300K.  


The second way we offset the financial aid number was through recurring scholarships. For a minimum gift of 25K and a commitment to re-supply the gift to that level each year, we would offer a deserving student a half tuition scholarship named after a loved one (see here: https://stmichaelchs.org/scholarships-to-st-michael). These were roughly 5k each. I would ask the family to restore the fund that by 5K each year, minimum. Or, a family could “endow” a scholarship that paid a 5K scholarship if they made a gift for100K. I placed these gifts in a Catholic foundation account and anticipated a 5% yearly return.


In early May we would host a “scholarship breakfast,” inviting both the donor families, the student and the students’ parents to meet each other. I would say a few words about each scholarship and the person for whom it was named. Hearing those words about a loved one, and meeting the child they were helping in that loved one's name meant a lot to our donors. It also gave the recipient a chance to say thank you face to face!


Finally, we sought legacy gifts aimed at assisting students with financial aid. The largest came from a donor whom I met originally as a Guardian Angel donor. (I wasn't smart enough to understand this when we first started the GA program, but it turned out to give me fantastic “leads” on people who were supportive of our schools,  open to the idea of creating family scholarships and possibly open to a legacy gift.) His gift to us upon his death endowed ten half tuition scholarships each year


Sum total, after six years as a school, we were offsetting the 600k of financial aid with almost 250K of scholarship or GA income each year, which really allowed us to do more for our teachers. Alas, not all of that went to them, as other needs arose. But it helped a great deal!


I don’t presume this “template” works for every school. As the expression goes, “Once you know ONE Catholic school, you know…one Catholic school.” I do think the Guardian Angel appeal could  have traction elsewhere, as the piety of “guardian angels” appeals to an older generation of Catholics, and I believe connects to an altruistic instinct to pass on the gift they have received from their Catholic schooling. 


The fella who endowed the ten scholarships was an older man, in his 80’s, and had difficulty standing. When he called me to his home and told me of his intent to give St. Michael everything he possessed upon his death, I got choked up, and asked him why he was doing that.


I will never forget his response. He rose to his feet, a little wobbly, but with fire in his eyes, and said, “When I went to St. Joseph elementary school, my parents paid the sisters five dollars a month for tuition. When I went to the McGill Institute (high school), they paid the brothers one hundred dollars a year. Those schools changed my life! It’s PAYBACK time!”


In summary: Aim your efforts to raise extraordinary gifts at financial aid. It will give you the best means to pay your teachers more substantially.  


It works! 


Thursday, February 20, 2025

Five Contrarian Views Regarding Catholic Schools


We have operated our schools with certain assumptions that I believe no longer help us—indeed, holding onto them may even be hurting us. 

Here are a five, with my brief comments:


“Our tuitions should be low, consistent with the gospel mandate to protect the least among us.”


A noble sentiment, but we have a competing obligation to pay our teachers a just wage, and if we don’t, we won’t be able to sustain their long term commitment, to the detriment of our mission and our competitiveness. Better to aim our tuitions at mid-market rates and then assist our most vulnerable families with financial aid. 


“Diocesan schools should be very similar, with the same calendar, roughly similar times, the same curriculum, teacher requirements, etc.”


Insisting so only makes our under-resourced schools less competitive—why wouldn’t parents drive a few extra minutes to the school offering the same program with better resources? Instead, we should give these schools a fighting chance by encouraging them to offer unique programs: Why not dual-language? Year round? Classical? Extended day? Diocesan central offices should view themselves as laboratories for innovation, not as regulatory agencies to protect diocesan liability. 


“We should pay our teachers according to a strict pay scale based on degrees and years of experience.”


This virtually guarantees we are under-paying our best teachers and overpaying others. I haven’t used a strict salary scale in twenty years. I use benchmark numbers—for example, I might say 45K for a first year teacher with a B.A., but consider a range of plus or minus five thousand off that benchmark depending on how difficult it is to fill that position and how competitive the candidate or important to the life of the school. 


“Principals should protect and defend our least gifted teachers from our most demanding parents.”


Principals should defend teachers when they are right, not when they’re wrong or because they’re mediocre and need us as advocates. Of course, even our best teachers can be off their game for a while due to difficult circumstances, like a death in the family, an issue in their marriage, or health issues. Those are temporary circumstances and the community will have to trust the principal. But our first obligation as principals is to our kids and families. Often, our parents are rightfully upset about a mediocre teacher. That doesn’t mean we take a public position against that teacher, but behind  the scenes we should give these teachers a specific improvement plan. If they can’t hit those marks, we must let them go, sooner than later. 


“Principals must do what they think best, independent of what parents think or want.”


While it is true that the mission of the school takes precedence over any one’s preferences, a principal who discounts parent preferences leads foolishly. Yes, I understand that parental love can skew objectivity. But I’m not talking here about specific situations involving someone’s child as much as what the parents hope and dream about the school more generally. Do they want us to invest more in our athletic programs? In a fence to protect their kids? Is there a general consensus on a coach or teacher? We must listen to our parents and deliver where we can. “Parents are the primary educators” isn’t just nice talk. It means they are partners with us. 


Tuesday, February 11, 2025

The Future of Our Schools

 

Imagine the following:

You’re a Corporate Turn-around Specialist, hired by a national company to save it from insolvency. Here’s what your looking at:


• In 1960, the company had approximately 13,000 franchises around the country and a customer base of 5.2 million.


• By 2000, those numbers had fallen off precipitously: 8600 franchises, with only 2.6 million customers.


• Today there are just less than 6,000 franchises and 1.7 million customers.


What’s driving the decline? You track four fundamental causes:


-In 1960, this company was one of the few privately held companies in its field. Over the last decades, many new privately supported ventures and new public initiatives have increased competition.


-Prior to 1960, the company was able to pull its best employees from a training center that didn’t charge the company for its training. Now the company must employ independent contractors who demand higher wages and who must be trained at company expense.


-Each franchise must invest heavily in buildings and infrastructure to deliver its product. Unfortunately, changing demographics now leave many stores in neighborhoods with those unable to afford their product.


-Most troubling of all, a cultural shift has pulled potential customers away from the company’s core product. 


So, Mr. or Mrs. Turnaround Specialist, what do you recommend?


——-

Ouch! Of course I am talking about Catholic schools. But I find it helpful to step back and pretend, for a moment, this was just any other business, facing these trends. What on earth would a turn around expert recommend?


One thing he or she would NOT recommend: tinkering! Marginal improvements (newer tech, better P.D., improved fundraising, etc.) won’t get to root causes.


The reality is our schools are run separately by dioceses, so there is no "CEO" at the top of the hierarchy than can issue directives for all our schools. But I believe a turn-around specialist would make these fundamental recommendations, applicable to all dioceses:


  1. Schools serving our most disadvantaged students will continue to close. Rather than allow this kind of Darwinian evolution to continue without any planning, dioceses must make hard choices and decide which few of these schools it can truly support and then go “all in” with these few. The parish model will not work—they must be supported by the whole church as a measure of its historical commitment to the poor. 

  2. The K-8, 9-12 model is not competitive vs. K-12 schools, except for the wealthiest parish schools. K12 privates leverage the strength of their athletic programs, facilities, lab facilities, advancement and admission offices, etc. to offer more value than our stand alone K8’s can provide. We will need to compete more often as K12’s.

  3. Our schools will need to adopt a “college model” for funding, increasing  tuitions and financial aid considerably. We will not be able to sustain excellent teachers unless they can afford to support themselves and their families. They cannot do so at 40, 50 or 60K a year.

  4. Principal and leadership salaries must increase dramatically. We will not have strong schools without smart, creative and confident leaders. Programs like Notre Dame’s Alliance for Catholic Education bring young teachers into our schools who fit this profile, but most leave within five years because they can’t afford to raise families. That kind of “talent bleed” will kill us! At minimum, if X = the  avg salary of teachers, principals should make 2X or even 2.5X. Heads of NAIS schools make an average of 4.5X!

  5. Schools must be focused on their fundamental mission to create disciples, fully aligned with their Church, staffed by joyful, practicing people of faith, with aspirational goals for all of their students to become saints and scholars! Any “mission-drift” to be all things to all people or compromises in staffing or goal-setting due to expediency are cancerous to this vision.


Will these five recommendation reverse things? They'll help! In some situations, maybe not. But the old paradigms must change for us to have a chance. May God give us the creativity and courage to embrace the challenges ahead!