"Donna Metler" wrote in message
...

The one thing on this-in my experience, such grants come with strings, so
I wouldn't assume that the money could be used wherever the school needs
it. A lot of the basic classroom needs just aren't "sexy" to
grantors-whether it's the federal government or private industry. So, you
get schools where you have thousands of dollars in computer technology,
but not enough books to go around, or situations (which happened to me),
where the band program has gotten several large grants for instruments so
low income students can participate, but no funding to purchase reeds and
care items or pay for ongoing maintenance and repairs, and so on. Lots of
positive press for the donations, but in reality, it still ended up
largely that kids who had parents who could pay could do band-it just
reduced the amount they needed to pay because the school now had an
instrument for them to use.

But if the school wanted computers and instruments, then it is free money
and they can use the money they would have used for computers and
instruments on paper and pencils. If the companies had paid for paper and
pencils, the school would have used the money they had for computers and
instruments, which means it's all the same in the end. Now, if the school
never wanted computers, they could just as well have turned down the offer.

As for just reducing the amount the parents had to pay for band, well that
might just be about what they needed in order to have the kids play in band.
That many more children can now afford it because the instruments were free.

If a business gives a needed supply, I think it should be appreciated.
Sure, it's good publicity for them, but it is a generous offer. We
shouldn't be grubbing for "what about this? what about that?" That's a
good way to discourage donations altogether. We use the money we save from
the donation for this and that. If the donation isn't needed, turn it down
and make suggestions for alternatives.