Chariho School Parents’ Forum

June 7, 2007

RYSE expenditures according to 1) Chariho &, 2) In$ight

Filed under: RYSE,RYSE paperwork — Editor @ 11:01 pm

The first page is the RYSE expenditures per Kathy Perry.  I would hope we have a better method of record keeping than a single page but this is all that was provided when I asked for documentation that RYSE was saving us money.

Not included on this sheet are the overlapping costs such as the nurse and the administration duties performed by the Chariho administration (payroll, etc..). 

Note the “in tuition” fee listed on the bottom.  When asked, Perry said this was the calculated per pupil expense, not including transportation.  Also notice that there are no insurance reimbursements noted in the revenues.  As we learned when Elaine Morgan tried to speak to the board, her child was utilizing services paid for by her insurance.  But when she was “forced” to enroll her child at RYSE, the taxpayers picked up the bill.

The second page is also from Perry and is her estimate of what it would have cost to send the RYSE students to other schools.   According to an email from Perry, students have also been sent to Riverview, Briggs, Valley Community, Spurwink, St. Mary’s, Devereaux and Thames Valley.  I’m not sure why she only used Bradley, Forwardview and South Shore for this comparison.

The final page is the In$ight report.  The per pupil fee is larger than Perry reports.  This is most likely because it includes the overlapping costs that Perry omitted from her report.  No other explanation was given and Supt. Ricci said the In$ight numbers “may or may not be accurate.”




  1. I don’t see transportation listed as an expense. If I read this correctly, it appears to be missing.

    Comment by Lois Buck — June 10, 2007 @ 8:48 pm | Reply

  2. Since transportation is a big expense, it should be listed. If we are ever going to get to the point of comparing apples to apples, this needs to be listed.

    I apologize, Bill. I see you were aware that this expense was left out too. Thanks for being so diligent.

    Comment by Lois Buck — June 10, 2007 @ 8:53 pm | Reply

  3. When RYSE was developed, saving on transportation was considered. Some of the non-RYSE placements would be about the same cost (such as South Shore) but anything out of district would be more. Especially since we would use a bus to transport a single student.

    Legislation passed this session (which will go into effect next school year) allows single and small groups of students to be transported using cars. I wouldn’t be surprised to see a statewide transportation system within a few years. But I digress,,,

    There are other expenses not listed but, as far as I can tell, mostly small expenses and overlapping in other schools (nurse, payroll, etc..). But I will say I am not confident in the accuracy, and this isn’t an attack on anyone’s integrity. We don’t keep a separate set of books for RYSE (this was put together from my request). Having run a few businesses, I know its not that easy to get a handle on costs, especially so quickly.

    However, it’s just a snapshot. We have already heard about the new programs and changes, so who knows what it will look like in the future. Like any gov’t agency, RYSE just grows and grows. As we see in the fact that we now offer psy services for the family and even services for diabetics. I just am not comfortable expanding for these “educational needs” (as the John Earle letter classifies them). It’s not our job.

    I wonder how many parents would accept the responsibility of home schooling their child if we gave them the $52,000 per year? Plus think of the legacy costs we would save!

    Comment by Bill Felkner — June 10, 2007 @ 10:47 pm | Reply

  4. I, for a minute, do not believe they do not know how much this costs. How in the world do they generate an operating budget for the whole school system. Do they pull numbers out of a hat? This is a 50 million dollar spending machine. That is an awful lot of money to be unaware of where the moneys, our tax dollars, are going.

    And the whole school system needs to be evaluated. I agree with those who have suggested a management study. An independent, objective agency could give us a clue on how efficient the system is. Then, if we can clean up the waste, more money can go to the children and the buildings.

    I’ll tell you right now, if there is no room for efficiency, I will not be voting for the bond vote in November. I’m not set to a no vote yet, but if things don’t change, I’m not going to vote for more money into the current situation. Perhaps, Mr. Stanley should audit and analyze the whole district and publicize his findings. There’s nothing wrong with doing an internal audit.

    Comment by Lois Buck — June 11, 2007 @ 11:24 am | Reply

  5. […] only data presented to the board is located here.  I will re-post the images […]

    Pingback by RYSE saves us “hundreds of thousands of dollars” « Chariho School Parents’ Forum — October 30, 2007 @ 11:17 pm | Reply

  6. […] have previously posted the documentation provided for RYSE.  Originally, I had difficulty accepting a single page document as […]

    Pingback by “saving millions” « Chariho School Parents’ Forum — November 15, 2007 @ 4:23 pm | Reply

  7. […] per student on the rise (RYSE?) Filed under: Chariho, RYSE — Bill Felkner @ 12:46 pm Last year we reported that RYSE costs per student were $57k and Chariho told us that number was inaccurate but […]

    Pingback by Chariho’s costs per student on the rise (RYSE?) « Chariho School Parents’ Forum — June 29, 2008 @ 12:46 pm | Reply

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: