Sunday, April 29, 2007

Fees will rise

The ESF Executive committee met on 24 April, and have confirmed that there will be fee increases again this year (minutes of the meeting on the ESF website here). The exact figures have not been announced.

According to the minutes, a letter will be sent to parents explaining the need for an increase, and a reply will also be sent to Parents for ESF.

Saturday, April 21, 2007

Fee increase?

Parents for ESF are concerned about a possible fee increase:

The ESF plans to raise school fee again in Sep07.

The ESF had an annual surplus of HK$26m in 2005-06 and projected HK$40m in 2006-07. There was already large scale fee rise in Sep06.

There were fixed assets of HK$704m in 2005-06 (according to the ESF website).

We expect further significant expenditure reduction from efficiency cost saving / salary cut.

Therefore we do not see the justification for fee rise again. We sent a letter to ESF ExCom to express our view (attached). We encourage parents to express your views or offer any suggestion (you might use this as a forum) on this issue which has great impact to most ESF families, so that these could be reflected before ESF's final decision.

Parents for ESF

This is the letter:

Dear members of the Executive Committee

We note that fee levels were discussed at the Executive Committee meeting on 27th March and, although understanding that a final decision has yet to be made on this issue, are concerned about the possibility that fee levels might rise in the 2007/08 school year.

The members of our group are receiving a number of queries from parents. Several areas of concern are beginning to emerge. These can be summarised as follows:

► whether with the ESF’s assets and income a fee increase is necessary this year; and

► what other funding options are being explored by the ESF.

In order that we have an understanding of some of the contextual issues, might we be permitted to enquire about the following:

1 What proportion of the ESF’s fixed assets of $M 704 in 2005/06 were property assets and how much annual income do these generate for the ESF?

2 Following the fee rise in 2006/07 and the expected drop in staff costs during the same year, what is the projected surplus for 2006/07?

3 What other funding opportunities is the ESF exploring to fund its major building projects?

4 Is the ESF making use of capital grants from the government? And what is the basis for the remark in the ESF Annual Report that government assistance with building projects is “less likely to happen in the future”?

5 What is the level of government subvention for 2007/08 and does this represent a similar level to last year?

6 What is the ESF doing to restore the principle of parity?

Thank you for your assistance in this matter.

Yours sincerely

Parents for ESF
Alex Chiu (SJS), Stephen Fong (SIS), Sarah Rigby (QBS), Ana Wei (SIS), Audrey Wong (KJS)

Some comments from parents:

I am most surprised to learn that ESF is considering raising school fees again this year after a substantial rise of school fee last year! ESF is already having surplus so there is no reason at all for raising shcool fee. As for big projects like building new schools ESF should seek alternate funding rather than rely on raising school fees as this is unfair to parents of existing students.
I do believe school need to think whether the rising of school fee is reasonable and responsible to the majority, do think whether it is fair to parents or far away from the spirit of eduction, do hope the managment thinking of the necesary before coming to a decision.
I have 2 kids in ESF. I chose ESF for my kids, with reasons like some of you. After so many years, I viewed ESF as a big family, rather than an organisation, a service provider.I believe the kind of close and harmonious relationship with school and parents can provide the optimal and favorable circumstances to nuture our next generation, who are successful with achievement, alongside with character of integrity, honesty and being responsible to the community.

In the past 3 years, the audit report, the salary cut and the fee rise in 2006 (9 % rise without our notice), these series of event, all tossed up turbulence in ESF circle which has wounded our relationship.

Our feeling is hurt by knowing the possible fee rise again.

We are not convinced by Headquarter for another fee rise !!

Please voice out your opinion before it is too late!!
I am a parent from one of the ESF school in the N.T.

I know for sure that there are lots of mums like myself that volunteer every week at the school on regular basis.

So, actually the school is saving a lot on manpower which we don't mind to contribute.

And I have always felt that school, students and parents are like a community. But now after all these issues coming up, I don't feel confident and trust in the future with the ESF.

Now, I feels that ESF are becoming more and more selfish and too greedy.

Another thing, most of the new teachers are from Australia and New Zealand. I am not trying to be prejudice but I assume that it cost cheaper for the ESF to recruit from these countries. May be we should ask for a good explanation and clarification about that.

Sunday, April 01, 2007

Legco Education Panel discusses the new ordinance

[From Alex Chiu Chi-Suen of Parents for ESF] The Education Panel meeting on the new ordinance was held on 22 March. It went well. The only Legco member who mentioned the Subvention issue was Cheung Man-kwong - and he thinks it is justified / fair for ESF students to have similar level of subvention compared with local school students once the new ordinance has been passed and ESF reform has been successfully completed.

The SCMP also had a report from its education correspondent:
Chief vows ESF will keep tight rein on spending
LIZ GOOCH

The makeup of the English Schools Foundation's board of governors and the organisation's auditing system were among issues raised yesterday when lawmakers discussed amendments to the ESF's Ordinance bill.

The bill, which contains substantial changes to the ESF's governance, will be proposed as a private members' bill by Abraham Razack, legislator for the real estate and construction sector.

The bill will replace the ESF's 130-member foundation and executive committee with a 25-member board of governors. The board will consist of 10 independent members, seven parents, three ESF staff representatives, three school council members and two legislators.

At the meeting of Legco's education panel, accounting sector legislator Mandy Tam Heung-man asked how ESF management would prevent a repeat of the excess spending that had occurred in the past, such as seafood banquets. ESF executives made headlines in 2004 when they tried to claim a lunch bill that included oysters and wine.

The foundation's chief executive, Heather Du Quesnay, said the organisation was in the process of implementing an internet-based financial system that would show how schools spent their budgets.

"We're very strict over things like expenses," she said. "You can't put through a claim for expenses that you're not entitled to." She said the ESF hoped to do an internal audit of schools every two years.

Social welfare legislator Fernando Cheung Chiu-hung questioned why the new board would not include a position for parents of children with special needs. Ms Du Quesnay said the board and school councils would be encouraged to invite experts as the need arose.

Catering sector legislator Tommy Cheung Yu-yan, who is a foundation member, called for the positions allocated for Legco members to be given to stakeholders more closely related to the ESF. He said he was unable to attend many meetings because of other commitments.

But a parent representative, Alex Chiu Chi-Suen, said he hoped the board would include Legco members. "It's about monitoring the work of ESF because the ESF gets a subvention and Legco members are well-respected and they would act as independent monitors."

ESF chairman Felice Lieh Mak said the organisation hoped the bill, which was formulated after the Public Accounts Committee called for reform of its governance in 2005, could be passed as soon as possible.