Greater Latrobe School District had hired Pursuant Ketchum in 2011 to do a feasibility study to raise $15 million. Sound familiar?
Through a Right To Know (I didn't realize this could be done), the results and contract follow.
Greater Latrobe Fundraising Study
Of Counsel Philanthropy
What I find interesting is how thorough PK was with Greater Latrobe. The first link is 42 pages. Either our school board is holding back or PK didn't put as much effort into our study as they had with Greater Latrobe. The second link is the 8 page consulting agreement. I guess this is what we are in for...
HAHAHA
ReplyDeleteHey, I'd like to know who they approached. You know, all those "affluent" residents of whom they spoke.
Let me guess... PK will be hired to raise $15 million, ... I mean $7.5 million,... er, - ah, actually $1.5 million?
ReplyDeleteMaybe the better question is, "How many cars will the kids need to wash at $5 per car to raise the $1.5 million?"
Has anyone thought about a cafeteria style approach to education? Our tax money pays for the state required minimum and then every other "option", like athletic services, would come at an additional cost to the parent of that child who participates.
27 confidential interviews were conducted in both studies. Coincidence ? I think not !
ReplyDeleteI seem to recall that the Ketchup guy stated in a recorded SB meeting the we were the 1st. public school district they had worked with and for. Anyone else recall that as well ?
ReplyDeleteIf so, are we being bamboozled ?
That is what I remember too!
ReplyDeleteThis reminds me of working with Wildlife Services for the deer culling.
Dale Colby: Were there ever any accidents?
Wildlife Services: No sir.
I found seven!
Elaine
The "Of Councel Philanthropy Consulting Agreement" and "Addendum" terms and conditions should really excite Larry Lebo and potentially cause acute angina or even apoplexy for Queen JoPo if required for Lebo.
ReplyDeleteHer court of the Seven Silent Ones will remain silent true to fashion in all probability as they allow her to speak for them on all matters, regardless.
Hiring John might save the day !
Yes, this Board remains the mouthpiece of the administration instead of the mouthpiece of the residents.
ReplyDeleteFrom $30 million to $15 million to maybe $3 million over 5 years, this is silly stuff.
From the Tribune Review, Thursday, March 15, 2012, in an article by Matthew Santoni entitled "Mt. Lebanon School District considering funding study":
ReplyDelete"The company has never run a campaign for a public school district before, although it did a study for the Pittsburgh School for the Creative and Performing Arts.
Is there no end to these ridiculous information conflicts?!
Yeah, I think PK has been busted.
ReplyDeleteElaine
The greatest challenge, though, is that GLSD does not have an established culture of
ReplyDeletephilanthropy and, thus, does not have connections with individuals who are accustomed
to making gifts to the District. It is very rare for an individua|’s first gift to an organization
to be considerable in size. Making GLSD a top philanthropic priority among top donor
prospects, while challenging, will be essential for a campaign to be successful.
Boy, does that sound familiar???
With just a few changes, this presentation works anywhere. I know Dave Franklin made an offer, partly in jest, to do this for half of PK's fee. I will undercut his offer 50%! Like I said, PK has quite a racket going. And of course, the SB, in their infinite wisdom and perfect track record in making the worst possible decision will go for PK's proposition hook, line, and sinker.
ReplyDeleteElaine
If JoPo had to follow all the P-K consulting agreement contractural requirements, she wouldn't have time to also micromanage operations as District Queen, continue seeking but failing to finesse the water job and even run for higher office.
ReplyDeleteThere may be some "word juggling" going on with respect to P-K and whether they have worked with other school districts. P-K certainly did the study for the Greater Latrobe School District, as their extensive report shows; but another entity, Of Counsel Philanthropy, got the actual fundraising job. Has P-K been employed by another public school district before Mt. Lebanon to do a study concerning the feasibility of fundraising? - yes. Has P-K ever performed actual fundraising for a public school system? - that seems to be the point of confusion.
ReplyDeleteIn Mr. Santoni's story he writes, "The company has never run a campaign for a public school district before, although it did a study for the Pittsburgh School for the Creative and Performing Arts." Why would P-K not have mentioned their study for the GLSD? That happened well before the date of Mr. Santoni's story, and seems more relevant to Mt. Lebanon's situation than the Pittsburgh school for the Creative and Performing Arts.
Please define what particular "racket" it is that PK has?
ReplyDeleteRacket: "a belief that it is engaged in the sale of a solution to a problem that the institution itself creates or perpetuates, with the specific intent to engender continual patronage."
ReplyDeleteBut I think I am just wasting my time answering your question.
Elaine
Hey Elaine, look at the ip address for 2:44pm. Was that Dave Franklin?
ReplyDeleteI think it is pretty obvious what is going on. We've either been lied to, or the SB is in this so deep, there is no turning back.
ReplyDeleteWhy does MTLSD post five pages plus a coversheet from PK on their website, but Greater Latrobe shares 42 pages to a stranger? Why does PK hide the fact that they HAVE worked with a public school? And the only question asked of me is to define "racket." Is that the only thing that deserves an explanation here? Really?
Elaine
Oh silly rabbit, tricks aren't just for kids..I have a lot of question but there will never be answers. Gideon nailed most of them on a different thread. What kind of data supports calling Lebo "affluent"? Who are the people they interviewed? Who are the people they missed? Why aren reporters asking these questions? Why did the amount go from 30 to 15 to "whatever" with no mea culpa from JoJo and the Puddytats? Yes, why did PK hide their previous work and then LIE about it in a public meeting? Why so short on detail? Why aren't reporters asking these questions? Has PK ever been sued and if so, for what? What will the mystery money actually offset at any point in the life of the school? If we're comingling public and private money, will we now get more information or even less? Why aren't reporters asking these questions? Where does the investigation of Low Road Rodella stand? Who's next? How has the PTA retained its not for profit status? Why aren't reporters asking these questions?
ReplyDeleteI think it's time to bring in Big John, deciple of P-K, who will share all knowledge, resolve all inconsistancies and contradictions and provide a clear path for moving forward to raising a fat million or two. Rumor has it the $50,000 hot prospect might have just moved to Main Line II.
ReplyDeleteI don't know that this is a "racket" per se. I personally was hopeful that they would come in and find the $30 million or even $15 million that they hoped to find. It would have meant a better Mt. Lebanon.
ReplyDeleteYes, they have cookie-cutter approaches to their reports and it is quite the coincidence that both of their studies for public school districts rely on the same verbage...but is that so strange? They are talking about the school boards ability to raise private capital here and not many school boards have that expertise on staff.
Additionally, I wouldn't expect them to recreate every report they do from scratch. That would be quite ineffecient.
The risk in this case is not worth the reward. At most we get $3 million. But we have to pay more than $1 million more to find out (to PK and to the staffer).
PK has done good work in the past, what they do just doesn't seem to be a good fit for the two public school they looked at in PA. If they guaranteed the $3 million, I would change my tune. But as it is, they will expect payment of over $800k plus staff regardless of whether they raise one cent or not.
Funny how they interviewed 27 people in both school districts. How does that happen? Why does Greater Latrobe get a thorough presentation and we don't? I am betting that this is just like the cost reduction list which we were not able to see. Remember the above the line and below the line crap?
ReplyDelete8:50 AM, how can they have a cookie cutter presentation if we were the only public school district? We just happened to stumble across Greater Latrobe. How many more are out there? They work all over the country.
Things are just not adding up.
Elaine
8:50, Doesn't it bother you that such a large percentage of the money that would be collected [for the children] is going to pay for a consultant? Has the Board asked for the salary info of the PK employees? The citizens should know!
ReplyDeleteJust because the District hired P-K to do the study does not mean the District has to hire P-K to do the fundraising. Greater Latrobe obviously felt that way, as they hired Of Counsel Philanthropy to do the work. If I remember correctly we have some professional fundraisers right here in Mt. Lebanon who have offered to help. (Blog readers will correct me if I am wrong, but I seem to recall a Board meeting where a lady stepped up to the microphone and offered her services for that very thing.)
ReplyDeleteI'm all in favor of raising funds as a way of reducing the final cost of the new high school to the beleaguered Mt. Lebanon taxpayer, but I hope the Board explores all its options before hiring any firm to do the work.
According to the Almanac, I see that USC is starting to fundraise. USC plans to start annual fund (Saved in Google Docs)
ReplyDeleteUSC is paying $50,000 a year for this part time position. USC is applying for grants. Are we applying for grants? They are hosting fundraisers? Are we hosting fundraisers? Instead of relying on a few wealthy donors, USC is working for their donations. I find the last paragraph interesting. "Hall said loyalty is not as "translatable" for high school alumni as it is with college alumni."
Elaine
Your last quote makes sense.
ReplyDeleteWe choose where we go to college, but our parents or guardians choose where we go to high school.
David Huston
Her PT salary is $50K. "Getting 1 in 10 grants is considered successful." That might pay her salary.
ReplyDeleteAnd you are complaining about $48K to PK for a study?
I want to know how much all of those high-flying billionaires that have been paraded across the pages of MtL plan to give back? Hell, talk about money to burn - my God, there was actually an article that showcased that we have people cook on $6000 grills! These folks don't have millions- they have BILLIONS!
ReplyDeleteHow much are they going to give back to he community that gave them so much?
12:09 PM, in one word: Yes.
ReplyDeleteElaine
Someone just gave $100,000 to the Denis Foundation and offered an additional $100,000 in a matching grant if matched by February.
ReplyDeleteMust not have been on the P-K interview list, or someone who declined to be a possible gifter to the District. If so, was it because there was no compelling case given for giving ?
1:35, you nailed it! The compelling case is the same case that is being made to extinguish Bird Park for the benefit of the teachers! Think about it... contributions for the PK drive are in the name of funding a project, but aren't they really subsidies for what is in my opinion the financial mismanagement of the SD solely for benefit of the teachers union?
ReplyDeleteThis Board has not been a mouthpiece for the residents - this Board has been a megaphone for the teachers union!
The residents are smart enough to see through it and they won't contribute one f'n dime!