School District Funding Models

If we want technology to work for everyone, it needs to be built by everyone ❗ But can someone tell me how everyone can build companies/tech if only one type of person is funding them? 🤔 In the UK, 71% of ALL Partners at VC firms went to a private school. This is maaaad, when you consider that only 7% of the UK population go to a fee-paying institution 🤯 The lack of socioeconomic diversity in VC has a massive knock-on effect on the type of Founders that get funding. The advantages of strong networks, family wealth and polished cultural capital farrrrr extends outside of traditional industries such as Banking and Law. & as a Founder from a low socioeconomic background but who has somehow broken into networks of influence and privilege, I can tell you this stuff gets MUCH easier, when you know the right people. This is all such a shame because entrepreneurship has more potential to level the playing field and create rapid generational wealth than anything else in my opinion. Thoughts? 👇🏾 #SocialMobility #Tech #MadFactMondays ------- Hey 👋🏾 I’m Gary, Co-Founder of Tangent. Every Monday I share a “Mad Fact” about socioeconomic background to raise awareness of its overlooked significance. If you like this content, repost ♻️ it to your network and follow me for more like it every week!

Budgeting is dead. Capital allocation is the future. Most finance teams are still budgeting like it’s 2005: Last year’s numbers plus 5%. Every department gets a slice. We debate over line items no one remembers by Q2. But here’s the truth: You don’t grow a business by budgeting. You grow it by allocating capital. The best CFOs don’t think in cost centers—they think in investment portfolios. They don’t ask: “How much should we spend on marketing?” They ask: “If we put another $500K into marketing, what do we expect in return? And is that a better use of capital than product or headcount?” Here’s how to shift your mindset: 1️⃣ Start from ROI, not last year’s spend Every dollar should fight for its life. If it doesn’t generate value, cut it. 2️⃣ Kill “evenly distributed” budgets Not every department deserves more. Cut what doesn’t work. Double down on what does. 3️⃣ Turn your finance team into capital allocators Train them to evaluate investments, not just track expenses. Teach them to ask: What’s the return on this project? What’s the payback? What are the risks? The future of finance isn’t about tracking the budget. It’s about owning the company’s financial strategy. Because in the end, capital allocation IS strategy. 💬 How many times a year do you reforecast? #CFO #FPandA #StrategicFinance #CapitalAllocation #FinanceLeadership #BusinessGrowth #CFOInsights

💰 🧮 💸 🎓 A common refrain I hear when talking to college and university trustees: budgets in higher ed are unlike anything in the business world. How colleges make and spend money remains mysterious even to those who've spent their careers in higher education. That's why in the latest installment of the Higher Ed 101 series on the Future U Podcast, Michael Horn and I took a deep dive into college budgeting with Rick Staisloff, a former college CFO and founder of RPK Group. Whether you're a board member, college professor, or tuition-paying parent, this episode offers valuable insights into college budgeting—what works and what doesn't. My three takeaways: 1️⃣ College budget buckets are too large. Most institutions don't really know where they're making money or where they're spending it. "We have to get into unit cost to really understand the financial health of an institution," Staisloff told us. Most colleges don't know how much it costs to graduate a biology major versus an English major, for instance. When enrollment was growing and public funding flowed freely, this approach probably wasn't fiscally responsible but it functioned. Now, when institutions need to be strategic, leaders need greater insight into resource allocation—otherwise they're moving pennies instead of dollars. In other words: show me where you spend your money, and I'll show you what you value. 2️⃣ The lack of transparency leads to lack of accountability. While colleges might set enrollment goals, their leaders often don't know what financial targets they should be hitting. "I'm always struck at the institutions we work with at how seldom deans, chairs, budget unit heads are given a clear sense of what good looks like and what they're supposed to be achieving," Staisloff explained. 3️⃣ It's business intelligence, stupid. My biggest takeaway: how little higher ed leaders know about their business. Part of this is cultural—campuses resist discussing ROI of individual programs. Part is technological—colleges have underinvested in ERP systems, leaving them flying blind in financial forecasting. This becomes increasingly problematic as we face an enrollment cliff and federal funding uncertainty. 🎧 Listen to the full episode here: https://lnkd.in/e8zV_PSy 📺 Watch highlights of this episode as well as select full episodes on our YouTube channel: https://lnkd.in/dRRBvpiR I'm biased, but this episode should be required listening for new board members:

Excellent new study on the unintended consequences of the "mansion tax" in Los Angeles -- with takeaways that could/should be applied to other cities tempted by the politically attractive idea of taxing high-dollar real estate transactions (including multifamily!) to fund affordable housing. Top takeaways from the UCLA researchers who authored the paper: "The Unintended Consequences of Measure ULA." 1) Property sales plummeted -- even when adjusting for market shifts. Controlling for higher interest rates and construction costs, the authors "found that high-value transactions in the City of LA dropped 30-50 percentage points more than in the rest of the county. That's the effect of ULA (the tax's formal name) specifically," wrote Mott Smith, one of the UCLA researchers. 2) Measure ULA applies a 4-5.5% tax on all property sales above $5 million -- even older "Class C" apartments that look nothing like the "mansions" that the tax was marketed to be for. Reduced sales on >$5mm properties resulted in lesser housing production, lesser job growth, lesser property tax growth and lesser ULA revenue. For multifamily construction: ULA is a double tax -- taxing developers on the land acquisition and then the exit. 3) "We estimate ULA reduced multifamily sales by >60%. That makes housing production riskier and less attractive," Smith wrote. 4) ULA led to reduced property sales which, in turn, reduced property tax growth significantly. "We estimate that sales (among properties subject to ULA) drive approximately 40% of LA property tax growth. Cutting those sales in half cuts growth proportionally. That means less funding for schools and county safety-net services," Smith wrote. "Slower tax base growth compounds over time. So, in 10–12 years, the annual property tax revenue suppressed by ULA could actually exceed the annual ULA funds raised." 5) It takes awfully rose-colored glasses to label LA's mansion tax anything other than a poorly designed, abysmal failure resulting in LESS affordable housing despite promises for more of it. "The more it suppresses transactions, the less it raises for low-income renters. Despite projections it would raise $600mm-$1.1b/year, so far it's averaged just $288mm/year." Conclusion: The authors propose modifying ULA to apply only to "actual mansions" as it had been sold to voters, thereby excluding multifamily and other commercial real estate. Measure ULA is one of numerous examples of cities pursuing half-baked ideas with good intentions but little study -- resulting in unintended consequences on the very people these programs are intended to help. We see the same with rent control, inclusionary zoning, eviction moratoria, etc. It always amazes me that in an era of "trusting the science," the science is continually ignored when it comes to housing. #housing #multifamily #ULA https://lnkd.in/gFhJgic8

𝗔𝗿𝗲 𝗵𝗶𝗴𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗽𝗲𝗿𝘁𝘆 𝘁𝗮𝘅𝗲𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗯𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝘄𝗮𝘆 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗩𝗶𝗰𝘁𝗼𝗿𝗶𝗮 𝘁𝗼 𝗱𝗶𝗴 𝗶𝘁𝘀𝗲𝗹𝗳 𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝗼𝗳 𝗱𝗲𝗯𝘁? One of the topics I covered at yesterday's Real Estate Institute of Victoria (REIV) economic outlook focused on revenue from property related taxes. This topic came after exploring state government debt levels, where Victoria stands out in all the wrong ways with net debt of $167b that is forecast to rise to $194b over the next three years. Victoria stands out with a higher portion of state and local government revenue coming from property taxes at 53% (down from a recent peak of 59.3% in 2021/22). This isn't a new phenomenon - Victoria has been deriving a larger portion of revenue from property related taxes relative to other states and territories consistently over the past decade... but the components of this revenue are changing as stamp duty revenue ease (due to fewer properties transacting) and revenue from other taxes rise. Stamp duty comprises the largest portion (stamp duty rates in Vic are higher than most other states), but has been easing simply due to less transactional activity. This easing in stamp duty income is the main driver of the lower portion Victorian tax of revenue coming from property related taxes. Land tax is on a strong upwards trajectory - the result of changes to the threshold which fell from $300k to just $50k at the beginning of 2024 as well as higher land tax rates over the $300k mark. The lower threshold means a much larger number of Victorian investors are paying land tax. Municipal rates have seen a consistent rise and 'other' property taxes such as the absentee owner surcharge, short stay levy, vacant residential land tax etc are also on the rise. Cotality Australia

Important new report from the great McKinsey & Company team Emma Dorn, Wayne Redmond, Jacob Bryant, and Neil Shelat. America’s public schools are heading into a perfect storm: federal stimulus dollars are gone, costs are climbing, and enrollment is shrinking in most states. McKinsey's look at district finances reveals just how steep the challenges are and where leaders are bracing for impact. 📉 –22% federal funding in one year → $24 billion drop in 2025–26 as ESSER stimulus dollars expire. 💸 “Flat funding” is a cut in disguise. Districts expect nominal funding to remain flat in 2025–26 and 2026–27 but with inflation at ~3%, that equates to real dollar losses. 👶 Enrollment is collapsing in 34 staten. Between 2025 and 2031, 34 states will see declines, with 11 states falling by 5% or more. Fewer kids means fewer dollars since funding formulas are based on enrollment. ☔  Rainy-day reserves being tapped. In 2024–25, 69% of districts used reserves (averaging 9.8%) and 75% expect to tap more in 2025–26. 🚨  Challenges at every turn: 63% of leaders say students haven’t recovered learning losses. Inflation is pushing up maintenance, pensions, utilities, and benefits. 🧑🏫 Staffing is threatened: 69% of districts are not hiring new teachers, relying on attrition to cut costs. Many expect to expand roles for substitute teachers (48%), mental health professionals (41%), special ed teachers (37%), and transportation staff (36% 🧠 Mental health is now among the top 3 district priorities (46%), along with teacher retention (64%) and special education (46%), with many turning to outside providers to meet rising needs. 📚 Outsourcing accelerates: The categories seeing the biggest outsourcing spikes: cybersecurity (46%), facilities maintenance (44%), new-construction (44%), AI (39%), transportation (37%), special education (31%). But 61% of districts expect to reduce the number of vendors post-ESSER, concentrating contracts among fewer outside providers. Read the report here: https://lnkd.in/gGraqEFM

A very worthwhile research report has been released today by Progress Together. It found that socio-economic background is more likely to impact a person’s route to success in #financialservices than gender or ethnicity. ‘Shaping our Economy’ is the largest study into socio-economic diversity and progression in financial services in the world - just under 150,000 people took part in the study, which examined socio-economic background and how it impacts career progression in the sector. The researchers also found that: • Women from working class backgrounds have a significant ‘double disadvantage’, progressing 21% more slowly than their peers from more advantaged families • White men from higher socio-economic backgrounds are more than 20 times more likely to succeed in financial services than working class ethnic minority women • People from higher socio-economic backgrounds are twice as likely to make it into a senior role than working class ethnic minority women • 20% of senior employees attended an independent school – more than triple the national average of 6.4% • Half of all senior roles in UK FS are held by white people from a higher socio-economic background • Men from higher socio-economic backgrounds were 2.4 times more likely to be in senior roles than women from a lower socio-economic background The full report is attached – it’s well worth a read. Social mobility is an issue that we are passionate about at Rostrum and we're doing our best to make a difference in our own small way via support for initiatives like this. #socialmobility Calista Lewis Mona Vadher FRSA

Big wins in education funding are worth celebrating—but only if we read the fine print. Texas just approved an $8.5 billion public education package. Headlines are calling it “historic.” And in some ways, it is. Raises for veteran teachers. More equitable funding for special education. Extra dollars for early learning and school safety. But here’s what’s keeping educators up at night: 😱 The base per-student allotment barely moved. Inflation-adjusted? Most districts are still operating in the RED. First- and second-year teachers—the most vulnerable to burnout—won’t see a dime in raise money. And while the state is cracking down on uncertified teachers, it’s not clear how they’ll backfill those roles in rural and high-turnover districts. This is progress, but it’s not a fix. ☑️ Real reform means ensuring every student has a certified, supported teacher in front of them. ☑️ Real reform means giving school leaders flexible funding to meet their community’s unique needs. ☑️ And real reform means valuing all educators—not just the ones who’ve hung on the longest. Now is the time to demand better, for teachers, for schools, and most of all, for students! What do you think? #FundPublicSchools #SupportTeachers #EquityInEducation #InnovativeEducationSolutions

Not to ruin your Thursday, but there are about 68 working days left until Jan 1. Unless of course you are one of the psychos doing 996, then you have more days but your thursday is probably already awful. Which means one of two things is happening inside most companies right now: > Everyone is blissfully ignoring 2026 planning. > Or…the CFO/CEO are already sharpening their pencils to hand down growth targets that will make everyone sweat. Here’s the ugly truth: the way most SaaS companies do planning is broken. The usual cycle looks something like this: > The CEO or CFO picks a number to hit some magical valuation. > Sales & Marketing leaders are told, “Here’s your number, go figure it out.” > The number almost always requires growth rates the company has never pulled off before. > Sales & Marketing leaders backload their plans, praying momentum will magically appear. Shockingly…targets are missed, burn is too high, headcount is bloated, and the company ends up cutting back hard. Sound familiar? But it doesn’t have to go this way. Here are 5 ways to avoid it: 1. Flip the Model: Go Bottom-Up Don’t start with top-down fantasy targets. Ask GTM leaders to build a model with their actual budgets. Then ask: > What could accelerate this number? > Could earlier key hires make a difference? > What if you doubled down on a program that’s working? This gets you grounded in reality—and shows you where true upside exists. 2. Bring Everyone to the Table Planning isn’t just a Sales + Marketing exercise. Loop in: > Product → New launches, upsell opportunities, pricing/packaging shifts > Support → Can they handle the volume? How does this impact churn? > People/HR → Can you even hire fast enough to support the plan? Cross-functional input prevents “surprise problems” that derail execution later. 3. Ask the Hard Questions (Nobody Does This Enough) If your plan assumes everything goes right, you’re already screwed. Push your team: > What’s the worst-case scenario? > What are the biggest risks? > What’s keeping you up at night about this plan? A little paranoia early saves a ton of pain later. 4. Don’t Obsess Over Net-New Logos Spend as much time modeling revenue expansion from current customers as you do on acquisition. Upsell, cross-sell, reduce churn, those levers compound faster than chasing shiny new logos. 5. Remember the Human Factor A realistic model = better team morale, clearer board expectations, and tighter alignment. When people feel like the targets are achievable, execution improves. When they know they’re running at a brick wall? Burnout, misalignment, and attrition follow. Don’t let 2026 planning be another round of miss big, cut hard. You’ve got 68 working days to get this right.

This is one of the most profound fundraising documents I've read. Fundraisers and fundraising as a profession have the power to heal our "crisis of spirit." The Surgeon General's final report reveals that loss of community is driving widespread illness and despair. But we can change that. Here's how top teams turn fundraising into community building: ✔️ Reframing the mission: Healing the "crisis of spirit" ✔️ Redesigning donor engagement: Focus on fostering genuine relationships, not just transactions ✔️ Creating purposeful volunteering: micro-opportunities for donors to find meaning through service ✔️ Leverage the power of love: Frame giving as an act of love that strengthens community bonds ✔️ Measuring community impact: social connection can be tracked and can be seen as part of our impact in addition to fundraising goals These approaches address what the Surgeon General calls our "defining health challenge": the loss of community. Who's ready to lead this fundraising revolution?