Day Pupils

[Jo]

It saddens me somewhat that the people who don't like the changes aren't offering any alternative suggestions to make up the shortfall in funds. I'm sure the school would welcome constructive suggestions.

However, in anticipation of suggestions that pupils shouldn't have it so easy these days because "it wasn't like that in our day", please don't forget that there are statutory requirements now that didn't exist before, plus today's expectations are different. We can't go back to the old days of long dormitories and inedible food.

So, what ideas does anyone have that might help the school to save money, or generate alternative income, whilst preserving its ethos?

[tween blue]

Perhaps if the school was more honest with the pupils and parents a like about impending changes and followed the lead of other mixed day/boarding schools now giving the boarding pupils the right to choose to go home at weekends etc when they want to the divide between the day pupils and the full boarders wouldnt be so stark.

[SAS]

In the last edition of Housey! which came with the end of term report just before Christmas

I didn't get "Housey". Who do I contact about this?

[J.R.]

In the last edition of Housey! which came with the end of term report just before Christmas

I didn't get "Housey". Who do I contact about this?

The School Office, I believe.

[YadaYada]

Or I could send you mine if you like

[ailurophile]

Jo wrote:

It saddens me somewhat that the people who don't like the changes aren't offering any alternative suggestions to make up the shortfall in funds. I'm sure the school would welcome constructive suggestions.
So, what ideas does anyone have that might help the school to save money, or generate alternative income, whilst preserving its ethos?

Jo, can I offer up again a suggestion which I made on another Forum thread last June (and I'm sure I'd suggested something similar even further back, but I can't find it!):

I wonder whether a more radical alternative has been considered ? I have long wondered why CH does not educate more 'looked after' children - the type of disadvantaged and vulnerable young people for whom the school was founded, and for whom it could offer much-needed stability and a genuinely life-changing educational opportunity. Only a few days ago I read an item on the BBC online news suggesting that Kent County Council are hoping to place more 'at risk' children in boarding schools http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-13881133. As this article observes, boarding school fees compare very favourably with the cost of residential care, and CH could well find that public sector authorities would happily pay full fees for such children without the need for the 'carrot' of scholarship subsidy. More importantly, this move would be faithful to the mission of the school.

Maybe I'm being naive here, but this strikes me as having the potential to be a win-win situation for CH.

While searching back for this post, I also found a response from another current parent which I think is pertinent to copy here (Antinous1, I hope you don't mind!):

Surely by failing to involve parents more, at a time when the school itself admits to a crisis in funding requiring drastic measures to remedy, CH is ignoring a really valuable and positive source of ideas and energy. Opening a dialogue between school and parents about how best to maintain the school's tradition of helping the neediest, without disadvantaging too badly those families who bring with them the money that helps to support those neediest, could go a long way towards easing some of the frustration that people have been expressing here. The school would quite likely make the same decisions it would have anyway, after discussions with parents, but those decisions might be better understood by us and seem less high-handed or more reasonable. Many of us may not have the professional expertise of the Council of Almoners but we are a diverse and quirky bunch and who knows, someone might throw up a 'radical' suggestion, like ailurophile's, that turns out to be the first step to a more secure future for the school.

The general consensus among current parents on this Forum is that we would welcome the opportunity to contribute our ideas to CH, but sadly the lines of communication are very much one-way!

[cupcakemom]

I've been following this thread with great interest - as a new parent I realise my experience is limited. However, I grew up just round the corner from CH and was roped in to play various female roles in plays - some house plays, some more bigger DNP productions so I feel I am reasonably familiar with what the school was like some 30 years ago (ah!). Someone earlier posted a hypothetical conversation between two pupils about how they spent their summer holidays - (can't work out whilst typing this how to find the post - so sorry for the "translation") about one spending it in the Maldives (for example) and another spending it in very different circumstances. Surely this is real life? My daughter has already had very similar conversations with regards Christmas presents. I didn't need to point out to her that some people have more disposable income than others - she had already worked that out for herself. It is for this reason that CH was a viable option for my dd - I didn't want to apply to local independent schools for a bursary as I felt she was likely to be in a school FULL of children who spend their summer holidays in the Maldives, live in huge houses, have holiday homes and all the latest gadgets, so there would be no balance.

I wish I could come up with a solution or a suggestion for increasing funding significantly - the only thing that crosses my mind is corporate sponsorship - but that's one heck of a can of worms! On a much smaller scale - I am amazed how much information has been posted from the school rather than sent via e-mail. My mother used to say "watch the pennies and the pounds look after themselves."

Also - when my daughter started at her primary school - from day one all parents were expected to fund raise in some shape, way or form (some did, some didn't). It was a significant part of school life for me - and I have to say made a positive impact on my social life. I was surprised at the absence of this kind of revenue generation when we joined CH. I'd welcome the opportunity to help out - it would enable me to begin to put something back into the school in return for educating my daughter.

Rambled on long enough now - sorry!

[SAS]

Or I could send you mine if you like

Yes, please, Yada yada!! If you are done with it and don't mind. Maybe they should stick it online?

[Mid A 15]

It saddens me somewhat that the people who don't like the changes aren't offering any alternative suggestions to make up the shortfall in funds. I'm sure the school would welcome constructive suggestions.

However, in anticipation of suggestions that pupils shouldn't have it so easy these days because "it wasn't like that in our day", please don't forget that there are statutory requirements now that didn't exist before, plus today's expectations are different. We can't go back to the old days of long dormitories and inedible food.

So, what ideas does anyone have that might help the school to save money, or generate alternative income, whilst preserving its ethos?

The communications issues referred to make this task difficult as ideas may well be founded on outdated information.

However here goes for better or worse:

It is my understanding that the School / Foundation owns a substantial portfolio property in Central London and the City of London. Social Housing is at a premium in those areas because of the high commercial rental values to the best of my knowledge.

Could it be feasible to link up with one or more Housing Associations and offer "our" property as social housing the "rent" payable by the Housing Association being (say) the revenue equivalent to 90 full fee paying pupils?

If the Housing Association wished to pay more they could participate in the selection process, rather as donation governors do I believe, although the ultimate admission criteria would rest with the school.

To my simple mind this scheme would ensure that Foundation/School property directly helps those in "need" as traditionally defined and monies raised fromthat "help" in turn enable the school to continue educating academically able pupils in "need" as traditionally defined by CH.

[J.R.]

It saddens me somewhat that the people who don't like the changes aren't offering any alternative suggestions to make up the shortfall in funds. I'm sure the school would welcome constructive suggestions.

However, in anticipation of suggestions that pupils shouldn't have it so easy these days because "it wasn't like that in our day", please don't forget that there are statutory requirements now that didn't exist before, plus today's expectations are different. We can't go back to the old days of long dormitories and inedible food.

So, what ideas does anyone have that might help the school to save money, or generate alternative income, whilst preserving its ethos?

The communications issues referred to make this task difficult as ideas may well be founded on outdated information.

However here goes for better or worse:

It is my understanding that the School / Foundation owns a substantial portfolio property in Central London and the City of London. Social Housing is at a premium in those areas because of the high commercial rental values to the best of my knowledge.

Could it be feasible to link up with one or more Housing Associations and offer "our" property as social housing the "rent" payable by the Housing Association being (say) the revenue equivalent to 90 full fee paying pupils?

If the Housing Association wished to pay more they could participate in the selection process, rather as donation governors do I believe, although the ultimate admission criteria would rest with the school.

To my simple mind this scheme would ensure that Foundation/School property directly helps those in "need" as traditionally defined and monies raised fromthat "help" in turn enable the school to continue educating academically able pupils in "need" as traditionally defined by CH.

Not a bad idea Andy, HOWEVER....................

I seem to remember that several years ago, CH did dispose of some property in London, and after the event, there were many rumblings and grumblings of what, we in the footy word, describe as the 'under the counter' distribution of 'brown envelopes', (ALLEGEDLY), though I don't think anything was actually proved at the time.

Your suggestion is fine, if complete transparancy is observed !

[ailurophile]

It is my understanding that the School / Foundation owns a substantial portfolio property in Central London and the City of London. Social Housing is at a premium in those areas because of the high commercial rental values to the best of my knowledge.

Could it be feasible to link up with one or more Housing Associations and offer "our" property as social housing the "rent" payable by the Housing Association being (say) the revenue equivalent to 90 full fee paying pupils?

If the Housing Association wished to pay more they could participate in the selection process, rather as donation governors do I believe, although the ultimate admission criteria would rest with the school.

To my simple mind this scheme would ensure that Foundation/School property directly helps those in "need" as traditionally defined and monies raised fromthat "help" in turn enable the school to continue educating academically able pupils in "need" as traditionally defined by CH.

Not a bad idea Andy, HOWEVER....................

I seem to remember that several years ago, CH did dispose of some property in London, and after the event, there were many rumblings and grumblings of what, we in the footy word, describe as the 'under the counter' distribution of 'brown envelopes', (ALLEGEDLY), though I don't think anything was actually proved at the time.

Isn't this the sort of gossip which is normally removed by the Forum moderators, JR?

Mid A's interesting suggestion has got me thinking... presumably, if the Foundation do own a substantial property portfolio in central London, they will already be maximising the rental income. (If not, why not?!) The property market seems to be one area which is holding up well in the current downturn; indeed, an entrepreneurial accquaintance of mine is making a mint by borrowing capital at a low rate of interest and investing this in buy to let properties which bring him a high rate of return.

I have always understood that CH's income relies primarily on revenue generated from property assets, which begs the question of why they should be suffering quite so badly in this recession? Unless, of course, JR is right and some short-sighted and disastrous financial decisions were made a few years ago... I seem to recall that some rumours were sparked when a Clerk came and went suspiciously quickly.

[NEILL THE NOTORIOUS]

I am sorry to read that many of you feel the ethos of CH has gone. My DS only started last year so we are ofcourse new, but we love the school's ethos! We felt it is very much there. We would have been unable to pay for our DS to have this wonderful chance, the experience, the high level education that he is thriving on. We are very very grateful to have been given this opportunity and I am sure we are not the only family that feel priviliged. Whilst I can see how it must have changed over the years,it's very tough at the moment, so if it is a case of sink or swim then I suppose the day pupil / full fees agreement makes sense for now.

You have expresssed, quite clearly, your appreciation of the education which your son is receiving, and which you could not, otherwise afford.

This is precisely the purpose for which the School was founded, in a nutshell --- "For the bright poor"
Entry has, to one extent or another, been competitive, and may still be, even for full fee payers, but the factor of "We need your money" may cloud this.

Even we, "Geriatric Old Blues (Rising 84) realise that things must change, and CH could never be what it was 60/70 years ago (Corporal Punishment ?)
but we love the School, and whatever may devolve from future plans, this will, above all, remain.

[J.R.]

It is my understanding that the School / Foundation owns a substantial portfolio property in Central London and the City of London. Social Housing is at a premium in those areas because of the high commercial rental values to the best of my knowledge.

Could it be feasible to link up with one or more Housing Associations and offer "our" property as social housing the "rent" payable by the Housing Association being (say) the revenue equivalent to 90 full fee paying pupils?

If the Housing Association wished to pay more they could participate in the selection process, rather as donation governors do I believe, although the ultimate admission criteria would rest with the school.

To my simple mind this scheme would ensure that Foundation/School property directly helps those in "need" as traditionally defined and monies raised fromthat "help" in turn enable the school to continue educating academically able pupils in "need" as traditionally defined by CH.

Not a bad idea Andy, HOWEVER....................

I seem to remember that several years ago, CH did dispose of some property in London, and after the event, there were many rumblings and grumblings of what, we in the footy word, describe as the 'under the counter' distribution of 'brown envelopes', (ALLEGEDLY), though I don't think anything was actually proved at the time.

Isn't this the sort of gossip which is normally removed by the Forum moderators, JR?

Mid A's interesting suggestion has got me thinking... presumably, if the Foundation do own a substantial property portfolio in central London, they will already be maximising the rental income. (If not, why not?!) The property market seems to be one area which is holding up well in the current downturn; indeed, an entrepreneurial accquaintance of mine is making a mint by borrowing capital at a low rate of interest and investing this in buy to let properties which bring him a high rate of return.

I have always understood that CH's income relies primarily on revenue generated from property assets, which begs the question of why they should be suffering quite so badly in this recession? Unless, of course, JR is right and some short-sighted and disastrous financial decisions were made a few years ago... I seem to recall that some rumours were sparked when a Clerk came and went suspiciously quickly.

I think you'll find if you have the time to search, this particular subject was coverered on here a few years ago, and I did use the magic word, ALLEGEDLY

[YadaYada]

It was because of the mention of poor communication that I mentioned the article in Housey!

Although I have gleaned certain things via DS who says things like "the Headmaster said that....." the school has been fairly upfront with current parents via newsletters - although if SAS didn't get Housey! I wonder how many others didn't.

SAS - will pop in post

[CHDad]

As I posted a couple of days back - there is a huge amount of financial info freely available for all to see on the school website. It does help to read this as it clarifies a great deal of the problems that the school is experiencing.

http://www.christs-hospital.org.uk/foun ... review.php