Here you go, folks! Calling all Boosterthon haters and lovers, Tag Day people, etc.

This is a brand-new draft of the fundraising regulation. Remember, it is just a draft. Some good stuff, lots of problems and questions. I also attached the audit done last fall by Internal Audit. Read it closely. It has some important stuff in there, particularly what constitutes a school-sponsored fundraiser. There is also the current Risk Management sheet regarding sponsorship, plus the new 5810.

What defines a school-sponsored fundraiser? It looks like it involves staff, students, etc., but it is not consistent.

What is co-sponsorship? There are multiple references to it. Absolutely no description anywhere that I can find. None. Zero. Nada. Zip. Somebody has to hold the liability, particularly for kids and money. I think the school system wants the parent groups to assume all the liability and they want to keep all the money. Are you OK with that?

They are talking about school-related groups opening their books on all fundraisers. I think. Maybe. It is not clear. They are talking about having to discuss all school-related fundraisers with the principal and some are "on behalf" of the school, others are yours. Do you think you should have to open the books to the school on all your fundraisers? Their record on prying records out of parent groups hasn't been too great lately by the way, so don't count on this. Have fun with this one.

If school-related groups are fundraising "on behalf" of the school, they can collect the money, put it into their bank account, but have to turn it over to the school. Along with complete records. Hopefully. What exactly does "on behalf" mean to you? Are you acting as a formal representative of the school, or aiding the school more indirectly? Why not just run the money through the school in the first place? How is the school really going to know if they got it all? How can you tell people it is "on behalf" of the school but the money is going into somebody else's bank account FIRST? Promises are made to be broken sometimes. Stuff tends to disappear with too many cooks in the kitchen. Money can have a very wayward path. It trickles out everywhere.

I can't tell what the policy is on using students to fundraise. This is all over the map. Does it have to be school-sponsored? The Internal Audit report clearly says it does, several times. The draft is very vague. The 5810 says any revenue of a school-related organization involving students has to be receipted into the school accounts. Right from the beginning or later on? The Risk Management sheet says anything involving students and staff and during the school day is generally school-sponsored. How about students and staff outside of the school day? Anytime staff are involved in their official role, it should be school-sponsored. If students are fundraising, even on a Saturday, for their classes or school, is that not an activity of the school? That looks like school activity funds, which have to run through internal accounts. How do you feel about your kids being used to fund a private corporation? I did not like doing that. You can't see where it goes. It could go to Cornell. They could send somebody on vacation. (And they do.) Some of these parent groups have some wild ideas. So do some of the schools, but at least you can see it. You can also do a directed donation to a school.

They are talking about using instructional hours to fundraise. For either the school or the school-related groups. Whose said that was okay? They just don't want "significant" interruptions. What is significant? How do you feel about using taxpayer funded instructional time for fundraisers, for either the school or what are technically private corporations? School activity funds are NOT supposed to be used to fund school-related organizations. That is very clear in the 5810. School activity funds are funds related to any and all activities of the school involving students, staff, property, etc. The school system holds the ultimate responsibility for what goes on during the school day. This is a big problem to work out.

They have a plan for crowd funding!!! Hey, you Facebook people! This could work really well. GoFund Me, here you go.

And they also have a little section about how if school-related groups don't cooperate you are basically done for. Nice addition there!

They also make it very clear fundraisers are optional. Good.

They have a ways to go with this.

Speak up!
Attachments:

http://www.fcps.edu/schlbd/members/bdmembers.shtml

http://www.fcps.edu/fs/comptroller/index.shtml

From a Boosterthon-centric point of view...

R1370 draft reads, "Avoid fund-raising activities that require students to solicit funds via telephone (e.g., cold calling), social media, or email."

This speaks to stuff like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dB6Yu77yJdk
... and to some of the other suggestions Booster makes here: http://www.boosterthon.com/pledgesecrets/

"The Office of Procurement Services (OPS) maintains a list of approved fund-raising services contracts. Activity sponsors must refer to this before entering into ta contract with a fund-raising vendor. Contact OPS if the vendor selected is not included on this list. The list can be found at the following website: http://fcpsnet.fcps.edu/fs/procurement/vendorlinks/FundraisingServicesContracts.shtml. This link is available only through computers within the internal FCPS network (FCPSnet)."

Sorry, that list of approved fund-raising services contract is not for you to see. Meanwhile, Booster Entprises is not on the publicly-viewable list of "of commonly used vendors that have submitted their certification documents centrally." http://www.fcps.edu/fs/comptroller/riskmanagement/certifiedvendors.shtml

"Risk Management must review all contracts, regardless of value."

Maybe Risk Management will take a hard look at the part of Booster's PTA/O contract which reads (all-caps theirs), "19. Jury Trial Waiver. BOOSTER AND THE CLIENT HEREBY WAIVE ANY AND ALL RIGHT TO ANY TRIAL BY JURY..."

Maybe Brett Trapp will have to postpone or cancel the elephant walk and toga party at the ATO reunion to deal with this. There's also something in there about interfering with educational activities.

This draft is a total mess.

So will this affect our relationship with Boosterthon or not? We're already in planning stages for school year 2015 - 2016.

Booster Booster Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So will this affect our relationship with
> Boosterthon or not? We're already in planning
> stages for school year 2015 - 2016.

Yes it will as there will be restrictions on the use of school time.

If Boosterthon wants to survive, it needs to learn how to operate without the use of school facilities. Maybe there's a GMU frat house that needs a little extra money? I'm sure parents will be more than happy to have their kids transported over there for pep rallies. Oh and of course, the transport would be on Boosterthon's dime, no use of school buses.

Booster Booster Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So will this affect our relationship with
> Boosterthon or not? We're already in planning
> stages for school year 2015 - 2016.

It's a draft. So technically, no.

But the changes being made to R1370 - as inadequate as they are - are put there for a reason. What's that reason? I would submit many of the changes are there in the interest of the kids.
If you agree, then for the sake of the kids, I would argue that you should already be thinking about ways to hold to the "safer" version of R1370.

If your group is a PTA, then let me mention that there are also long-standing PTA standards to consider....

---

"Children should not be the primary means of soliciting within fundraising activities."
"The anticipation of a successful fundraising event should not cloud the judgment of the PTA or be exploited by those outside the PTA who may have something to gain privately."
"And children should never be exploited or used as fundraisers."
National PTA - http://www.pta.org/mobile/OCArticle.cfm?ItemNumber=4192

" The regular school day schedule should not be disrupted, nor should the children be expected to give up their free time"
" A PTA or PTSA is not a moneymaking or money-raising organization."
" Material aid to the school is not the function of a PTA or PTSA."
VA PTA - http://www.vapta.org/new-unit-document-package/doc_download/2345-section-04-financial-management.html (PDF)
Boost the Children   

-------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.fcps.edu/schlbd/members/bdmembers.shtml
>
>
> http://www.fcps.edu/fs/comptroller/index.shtml

http://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/86NHVL4A541C/$file/R1320.pdf

The scoop Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This is a brand-new draft of the fundraising regulation.

Hey - how'd you do that?

They've been pretty consistent up to now about denying requests for this stuff with the explanation that, "drafts of the regulation are considered privileged as attorney work product and exempt from disclosure obligations, pursuant to Va. Code §2.2-3705.1.2."

NewHorizon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The scoop Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > This is a brand-new draft of the fundraising
> regulation.
>
> Hey - how'd you do that?
>
> They've been pretty consistent up to now about
> denying requests for this stuff with the
> explanation that, "drafts of
> the regulation are considered privileged as
> attorney work product and exempt from disclosure
> obligations, pursuant to Va. Code
> §2.2-3705.1.2."

Angela Atwater, Ed.D. will still say the matter is closed. Steve Lockard, Ph.D., will simply refuse to take questions. Just wait until their lord protectors, Ryan McElveen and Ted Velkoff get thrown off of the board.

"Hey - how'd you do that?"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I asked again! And I got this draft. It just depends on where they are at with the process.

Anybody figured out what co-sponsorship means? I seriously don't follow this yet it is sprinkled everywhere. Major buzz-word.

They say no staff, letterhead, etc. are to be involved in a school-related sponsored activity. That includes FCPS volunteers.

They say if an activity is FCPS-sponsored, they are totally in charge of everything and all their stuff has to be used.

These are mutually exclusive situations.

So, what the heck is co-sponsorship? Somebody please figure this out, because I really don't get it and it looks like the wave of the future.

Anybody figured out the deal if students are involved yet? The Internal Audit paper clearly shows that makes something school-sponsored. Several times. The draft is nebulous.

Is anybody coming up with creative ideas to raise money "on behalf" of their school, slide it into their bank account instead of the school's, and skim a bunch off just to drive the principal crazy?

Anybody's lawyer working on if/why school-related groups have to open their books on all fundraisers? The School Board already reserves the right to audit all school-related group sponsored classes, leagues, and camps and things that are on school grounds. Did you know that? That doesn't look like it applies to fundraisers.

Anybody come up with a rationalization for pulling kids out of class to fundraise (maybe for a private corporation) when half of our property taxes go to keeping them IN classes?

They are weaving all over the road with this thing.

The Scoop Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Anybody figured out what co-sponsorship means?

A Delaware school district says, “'Co-sponsorship' by the school district means one or more agencies, organizations or entities through a joint arrangement provide assistance to one another and the school district in putting on an event or activity by coordinating, funding, planning and/or providing in-kind services."
http://policy.osba.org/sps/KL/KG%20R%20D1.PDF

FCPS may yet come out with some document with its own definition of "Co-sponsorship", I suppose - and maybe it's just that this draft got out of the gate first...?

They say no staff, letterhead, etc. are to be involved in a school-related sponsored activity. That includes FCPS volunteers.

They say if an activity is FCPS-sponsored, they are totally in charge of everything and all their stuff has to be used.

These are mutually exclusive situations.


Still not feeling it, NewHorizon..................

http://www.fcps.edu/fs/comptroller/riskmanagement/factsheets/RM-34.pdf

I think there is great risk in having unqualified Boosterthon people teach values, character, and leadership.

The Scoop Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Still not feeling it, NewHorizon..................

Hey, don't look at me. :)
I agree the draft has a ton of ambiguity and dead-ends.

Maybe we set our hopes too high about this draft. Who knows, they spent about a year on it so far (not including the audit) - they may be at it for another year.

NewHorizon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Scoop Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Still not feeling it,
> NewHorizon..................
>
> Hey, don't look at me. :)
> I agree the draft has a ton of ambiguity and
> dead-ends.
>
> Maybe we set our hopes too high about this draft.
> Who knows, they spent about a year on it so far
> (not including the audit) - they may be at it for
> another year.


Thanks. I needed to hear that. My impression of this thing is if people take a look at it and really try to use it they will immediately run into confusion.

Somebody else analyze this thing in relation to something they want to do, reading all the information, and see if they can figure this out.

+

++

It is only a matter of time before the Carneal-Trapp spin machine goes into action.

In the past, Marshall Brett Trapp has not hesitated to defend Boosterthon's methods.

Trapp, it should be mentioned, took five years to get a degree in English. He was active in the Alpha Tau Omega fraternity, and continues to be active in "Greek" affairs today. One must ask if this is a value system fit for children.

Chris Carneal, a seminary graduate, has been trained in church planting. One must ask how this prepares him to develop "character, fitness, and leadership" lessons for children of all faiths.

The scoop Wrote:
> They are talking about using instructional hours
> to fundraise. For either the school or the
> school-related groups. Whose said that was okay?
> They just don't want "significant" interruptions.
> What is significant? How do you feel about using
> taxpayer funded instructional time for
> fundraisers, for either the school or what are
> technically private corporations? School activity
> funds are NOT supposed to be used to fund
> school-related organizations. That is very clear
> in the 5810. School activity funds are funds
> related to any and all activities of the school
> involving students, staff, property, etc. The
> school system holds the ultimate responsibility
> for what goes on during the school day. This is a
> big problem to work out.
>

when i was a kid Fairfax County Schools allowed, to raise money for (gov workers), a Tobacco company to come into a 6th grade class to promote tobacco and also give each of the kids a pouch of "sample VA tobacco"

other kids already used it i knew of, and i had a nervous condition due to a serious accident

after (consuming) the tabacco i was hooked permanently , still am

--------------------

talk to me about school legal debts please

i'm ready anytime you step up to the plate Mr.

Boosterthon must change or die. Not being able to use instructional hours and keep the kids captive for their crap is going to hurt, big time. They're probably pulling a marathon session in Atlanta trying to figure this one out.

Let's see who in FCPS leadership is foolish enough to side with these clowns.

The End of an Era Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Boosterthon must change or die. Not being able to
> use instructional hours and keep the kids captive
> for their crap is going to hurt, big time. They're
> probably pulling a marathon session in Atlanta
> trying to figure this one out.
>
> Let's see who in FCPS leadership is foolish enough
> to side with these clowns.

This draft says fundraisers can be done during the school day. The Booster contract says no. They need to do a lot of work on this regulation.


It does seem to be problematic that children are locked in a school building and have to be involved without really having a choice.

Parents need a way to opt their kids out of Boosterthon. Given how Boosterthon takes over a school, this could be difficult. Pressure needs to be put on FCPS to provide for opt-out, even if it is to the detriment of Boosterthon.

If Boosterthon can't play by the rules, then Boosterthon needs to go somewhere else, even if that somewhere else is out of business.

Chris Carneal, the founder of Boosterthon, was trained in church planting. Let him go do that. Brett Trapp, Boosterthon spokesman, is very proud of the English degree it took him five years to get. He can write fundraising letters for Peter Popoff or something.

Orlando Opt-Out Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Parents need a way to opt their kids out of
> Boosterthon. Given how Boosterthon takes over a
> school, this could be difficult. Pressure needs to
> be put on FCPS to provide for opt-out, even if it
> is to the detriment of Boosterthon.
>
> If Boosterthon can't play by the rules, then
> Boosterthon needs to go somewhere else, even if
> that somewhere else is out of business.
>
> Chris Carneal, the founder of Boosterthon, was
> trained in church planting. Let him go do that.
> Brett Trapp, Boosterthon spokesman, is very proud
> of the English degree it took him five years to
> get. He can write fundraising letters for Peter
> Popoff or something.

You are a psycho.

Fhgrdhhg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Orlando Opt-Out Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Parents need a way to opt their kids out of
> > Boosterthon. Given how Boosterthon takes over a
> > school, this could be difficult. Pressure needs
> to
> > be put on FCPS to provide for opt-out, even if
> it
> > is to the detriment of Boosterthon.
> >
> > If Boosterthon can't play by the rules, then
> > Boosterthon needs to go somewhere else, even if
> > that somewhere else is out of business.
> >
> > Chris Carneal, the founder of Boosterthon, was
> > trained in church planting. Let him go do that.
> > Brett Trapp, Boosterthon spokesman, is very
> proud
> > of the English degree it took him five years to
> > get. He can write fundraising letters for Peter
> > Popoff or something.
>
> You are a psycho.

Why is it "psycho" to insist that Boosterthon follow the law?

Ever since I saw the letter from Angela Atwater telling some parent to get lost, I decided there was something suspicious about Boosterthon.

I intend to ask about it at school board campaign sessions.

The previous principal of White Oaks, Connie Goodman, should be questioned about allowing Boosterthon people into classrooms. The second year of Boosterthon there fell under Ryan Richardson. The same PTA president was in office both years. I don't know what became of the funds that were raised but the class disruption and the pressure on kids to solicit pledges for cheap toys wasn't worth it. So glad it's no longer part of any school near me.

You have apparently never written Ryan Richardson about Boosterthon. Do it, the results are really funny. What a fool that man is. A legend in his own mind.

Co-sponsorship is a fantasy term. I knew it. I have lost track of how many times I have seen this term and the number of documents it is in.

Back to the drawing board...........
Attachments:

A myth!!!!! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Co-sponsorship is a fantasy term. I knew it.

Thanks for posting!

"'Co-Sponsorship' .... is being considered in our fundraising draft regulation."

Looks like the "real" (non-draft) R1370 might de-myth-ify...

It isn't even up for public review yet. The draft was a working draft.

A myth!!!!!! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It isn't even up for public review yet. The draft
> was a working draft.


"Co-sponsorship" is a made-up term to get parent groups to assume all the liability and do all the work and for FCPS to keep all the money and not be held accountable for anything.

What do schools really need so badly that makes Boosterthon is soooo necessary? Get out of our schools but run the kids. Remove the stupid toys and the in school access. They can host the Field Day events after background checks and if they're assigned a FCPS employee sponsor who will be responsible for every move they make. Do it the last week of school, on a Saturday, the week before spring break. Otherwise, get out! Subpoena the White Oaks PTA pres and previous principal and find out just what went on and what was allowed there. We're busy allowing transgender shit into the curriculum and concerned about the Boosterthon character ed piece? Hilarious. What we need to watch is how we support our teachers and the distraction this stupid fundraising causes.

Ihateboosterthon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What do schools really need so badly that makes
> Boosterthon is soooo necessary? Get out of our
> schools but run the kids. Remove the stupid toys
> and the in school access. They can host the Field
> Day events after background checks and if they're
> assigned a FCPS employee sponsor who will be
> responsible for every move they make. Do it the
> last week of school, on a Saturday, the week
> before spring break. Otherwise, get out! Subpoena
> the White Oaks PTA pres and previous principal and
> find out just what went on and what was allowed
> there. We're busy allowing transgender shit into
> the curriculum and concerned about the Boosterthon
> character ed piece? Hilarious. What we need to
> watch is how we support our teachers and the
> distraction this stupid fundraising causes.

+1,000

Someone, probably several someones, have good reasons for wanting to keep Boosterthon in FCPS. Who are they? What are their reasons? Why is instructional time being squandered?

You people are absolutely nuts with WAY too much time on your hands...

Instructional time is being squandered by administrators who think instructional hours are free. They see income for them and don't think about the actual cost of using staff, etc. to do this during school hours. Funny money. That is why somebody needs to get firm on this issue. The current fundraising reg clearly reads one assembly a year. That is the policy right this very minute. The 5810 says no interruptions of the school day for fundraising. That is brand-new. They match. If they are going to put out a conflicting fundraising reg. then they need to re-do the 5810. Why did they put that in there if they weren't serious about it?

So, do what the policy says right now.

They are still wandering around with this. The draft from last spring was a disaster. The current one is still in effect. No fundraising during the school day, folks.
Attachments:

Actually..... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A myth!!!!!! Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > It isn't even up for public review yet. The
> draft
> > was a working draft.
>
>
> "Co-sponsorship" is a made-up term to get parent
> groups to assume all the liability and do all the
> work and for FCPS to keep all the money and not be
> held accountable for anything.

They are supposedly working on a new 1370 and finishing up soon...........

rumor has it Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> They are supposedly working on a new 1370 and finishing up soon...........

R1102.9(III) reads, "Regulations are reviewed and updated every five years or sooner."
So FCPS stands in violation of R1102 by 2-1/2 years.

If FCPS requires us to abide by their regulations, then what kind of example does this set?

NewHorizon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> rumor has it Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > They are supposedly working on a new 1370 and
> finishing up soon...........
>
> R1102.9(III) reads, "Regulations are reviewed and
> updated every five years or sooner."
> So FCPS stands in violation of R1102 by 2-1/2
> years.
>
> If FCPS requires us to abide by their regulations,
> then what kind of example does this set?

They are and were about 10 or 15 years behind on a LOT of their regulations. They have been working on many of them. Dozens of them have been revised. Digging out of this mess takes a long time. Years of neglect. Admin running amok. Parents and children being hurt.

435yrty Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>Admin running amok. Parents and children being hurt.

This forum needs a "Like" button. ;)

Finally-FCPS gets something right.

Next step, defeat the meals tax so they have to continue the trend of behaving responsibly. Demoting that idiot Pat Hynes was a good step as well.

Has anybody seen a copy of the new regulation? or a draft? It was supposed to be ready in July.

Have fun with this. The latest draft. 5/16/16.
Attachments:

If anybody's got something to say to FCPS about R1370, NOW would be an excellent time to speak up.

In the July 8th Superintendent’s Update, I'm told, there's a section section about updating fundraising regulations which tells of a meeting with about 50 stakeholders recently conducted. As a result of that meeting and other Emails received, a decision was made to create a task force. There are plans to post information about this task force on the web site (which I assume means fcps.edu).

Whoever finds that web address first, I hope it gets posted in this FFXU thread. I gather any parent can join this task force.

Anywho, the upshot is that the implementation of a new R1370 is pushed off again - saying only that it will be implemented sometime during the next school year. And then even when the new R1370 is implemented, and because fundraisers are planned well in advance, there will be a transition period where compliance with either the new or old R1370 will be allowed.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/29/2016 05:26PM by NewHorizon.

Oops, no more "homework holidays" for getting the most Boosterthon pledges. I wonder if Brett Trapp and Chris Carneal have figured this out yet?
Attachments:

Boosterthon is criticized not only for tying pledges to reprieves from homework, but also for the backgrounds of its employees…
Attachments:

https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/media/pdf/1370KeyRevisionsPresentation.pdf

What exactly does "fundraising on 'behalf' of the school" mean?
Does anybody have a clear grasp of what has to be a school-sponsored fundraiser as vs a parent group sponsored fundraiser?
Can anybody tell if students are used to raise funds does the fundraiser have to be school-sponsored?
I found a lot of the terminology to be "fuzzy" in the proposed regulation.

Newest version of FCPS regulation R1370 finally published.

New thread: http://www.fairfaxunderground.com/forum/read/2/2646631/2648317.html