Equity in School Fundraising

In the 2023-2024 school year, we as Black Student Union (BSU) clerks were trying to raise money for our student organization. In an effort to do so, we learned that there were a number of parents who wanted to donate money to BSU and BSU only. We were excited because we figured that we would be able to finally do all the things we had planned for our student organization. We walked into the upper school office, wondering things like, “Would it be okay if parents were able to Cash App us” or  “Can we take checks?” 

Our excitement quickly plummeted when we were told they can’t do that. We were told parents—or anyone else for that matter—cannot donate money to any specific student organization. Of course, we were upset and angry, especially to this day. I do think we missed out on a lot of money we could have gained. But after, I wondered, “Why don’t people have the freedom to support and give their money to the things they want to support and give their money to?”

Understanding the School’s Financial System

After experiencing the restrictions firsthand, I dug deeper into how the school’s financial system works and how it impacts student organizations. I learned that this centralized approach—while well-intentioned—can create real challenges for students and their clubs. Schools across the country have financial systems that aim to distribute resources in ways that reflect the varying needs of different student organizations. The goal is to prevent wealthier families from donating large sums to certain groups, which could result in an unfair advantage for those organizations. But is this system truly equitable, or does it create its own set of frustrations and limitations?

To understand the broader context, I turned to an explanation of “equity” in educational finance. 

The goal of equitable funding is to ensure that every student, regardless of background, has access to the tools they need to succeed. However, in schools with limited resources, this often means that money must be distributed in ways that don’t always align with the preferences or desires of individual families and students.

In an effort to ensure fairness and equity, schools and universities across the country have implemented financial systems that centralize funding for student organizations, often prohibiting direct donations from parents to specific clubs. While these policies aim to level the playing field and prevent wealthier families from giving certain groups an unfair advantage, they also create frustrations for parents, challenges for underfunded student organizations, and debates about whether these restrictions truly promote equity or stifle opportunity. This article explores the complexities of these financial systems, their impact on student life, and whether there’s a middle ground that balances equity with the generosity of engaged families.

In our school, Abington Friends School (AFS), the financial system centers on tuition payments. 

According to Martha Sache, the AFS Director of Business and Operations, “At the start of each year, we see how much we’re expecting to collect for tuition, and we allocate that among a variety of budget lines, and there’s a lot of them.” 

Much of the funds go toward faculty salaries, benefits, and maintaining the school’s infrastructure. Another major budget priority is tuition assistance, which helps make the school accessible to a more diverse group of students. 

Brendon Jobs, Head of Upper School, says, “I know that when we’re thinking about areas of greatest need, that [tuition] is a big one, because of our commitment to making sure that we have a community that feels like the world.” 

This approach means that a large portion of the school’s budget is dedicated to ensuring that students from various socioeconomic backgrounds can attend and succeed. Yet, within this system, there’s little flexibility for families who wish to directly support specific student organizations.

 According to Jobs, the policy is designed to “prevent inequitable funding of certain aspects of a school program” by ensuring that donations aren’t skewed toward certain groups, potentially disadvantaging others.

The Role Of Student Activities

Although the policy aims to provide an equitable distribution of funds, it can feel restrictive for groups that lack resources. “

“We don’t have a specific budget that’s connected to individual clubs,” Said Jobs. 

Instead, the funds for student organizations are distributed from a broader account labeled “student activities,” which is meant to support all student groups equally. However, not all groups need the same amount of funding. 

Jobs says, “Every group is offered $200, right, as a baseline, to encourage people to spend, but to also let people know who have… we can make allowances for groups that might need a bit more.”

While this system is meant to ensure fairness, it doesn’t necessarily reflect the specific needs of every group. As a student organization like BSU, which is focused on supporting underrepresented students, we found that this system didn’t always align with our financial needs. A $200 baseline might be enough for a small club with limited activities, but it doesn’t stretch far for groups like ours, which often face higher costs for events, speakers, and initiatives. 

 Mikael Yisrael, the Director of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion at AFS, says, “If you have a larger group, that $100 might not go as far…But everyone’s still getting the same amount of funding.”

The reality is that money doesn’t come out of thin air. It’s carefully allocated by the school and donors, but there’s only so much to go around.

Scache says, “What’s unique to AFS is the amount of tuition assistance we provide, so that we can have as diverse a student population as we can. And so, as you can imagine, with such a high level of tuition assistance, there’s that much less money from tuition to spread throughout all those budget lines.” 

Essentially, the school is working with a finite pool of resources, and they’re trying to balance competing needs.

At the same time, the financial system is designed to maintain fairness. The school cannot allow direct donations to specific student organizations because it would create disparities in funding across groups.

 “If we allowed specific donations, it would undermine the work of the development office and make families feel like they were being asked to contribute to everything,” said Scache. 

This is a challenge that many private schools face: how to balance the needs of individual groups with the collective needs of the entire community.

The Larger Context: A National Issue

The conflict between equity and targeted donations is not unique to AFS. Across the country, schools and universities grapple with similar challenges. In wealthier schools, the issue is often compounded by the size of their endowments. Colleges, especially Ivy League institutions, operate on a much larger scale. Thanks to massive endowments, they can offer 100% need-based financial aid and still have resources left over for student organizations. 

“Ivies because they have these larger endowments or financially elite independent schools have more flexibility because of the amount of dividends that they get from [endowments],” Jobs noted.

While universities often have more resources, they face similar challenges in balancing equity and opportunity. Some universities allow clubs to fundraise independently, creating a mix of centralized oversight and organizational freedom. Could something like that work in high schools?

In schools like ours, fundraising efforts often focus on larger, institutional goals rather than individual student organizations. This means that while a large donation might go toward capital projects like the construction of a new building or the expansion of the school’s endowment, it’s unlikely to benefit specific clubs or affinity groups. 

“Giving to a capital improvement…or giving to a building everyone is going to benefit from is the rationale,” said Jobs. 

This type of fundraising, which supports long-term institutional growth, can clash with the desires of parents who want to donate directly to causes they care about, like BSU or the Roobotics club.

The Human Element: Frustrations and Questions

For students, these financial systems can feel deeply personal, even if they’re designed to be fair. I remember sitting in the BSU meeting after learning about the donation restrictions, looking around at my peers. Some were angry, venting about how much we could have accomplished with more funds. Others sat quietly, their disappointment written all over their faces. It wasn’t just about the money—it was about feeling like our voices and our efforts weren’t being fully supported.

Parents, too, often feel caught in the middle. I’ve heard from parents who wanted to donate, who believed in our mission and wanted to help us make a difference. Their generosity felt blocked by a system they didn’t fully understand.

On the administrative side, there’s a real fear of favoritism and inequity. 

“Best practice is everyone gets the same amount of funding because then it gets very dicey,” said Yisrael. “People could start to manipulate the system.” 

While that logic makes sense, it doesn’t erase the frustration of feeling like your hands are tied.

This isn’t just a theoretical debate—it’s about the people who live and work within these systems every day. It’s about students who dream big but feel confined, parents who want to support their ki

ds but can’t, and administrators who are trying to do the right thing but face difficult choices at every turn.

A Balancing Act

The debate over equitable financial systems boils down to one key question: balance. How can schools ensure fairness without stifling creativity and generosity? Is there a way to let parents support the clubs they care about without jeopardizing equity for everyone else?

As I reflect on my experience with BSU, I keep coming back to that question. Could there be a way to allow targeted donations without compromising the integrity of an equitable financial system?

What do you think?  How can we create a system that both promotes equity and allows for more flexibility in fundraising?