RALLY will get a shot in the arm and fresh start as the Juneau School District Board of Education has approved two changes.
The program, Recreation, Arts, Learning, and Leadership for Youth, was facing a $304,000 debt, had almost all morning programs closed and two afternoon programs faced combination.
The board ultimately unanimously approved transferring $304,000 from the Pupil Transportation Fund to the RALLY fund to cancel the debt. The biggest reason cited that RALLY incurred so much debt was because the district was charging the program with wildly fluctuating indirect costs. The program actually was not eligible, according to board policy, to be charged for indirect costs — only grant funded programs. Most of RALLY is paid for by parent user fees.
This movement of funds leaves both fund balances positive.
Board member Mark Choate suggested waiting 60 days to approve the transfer. He said he was uncomfortable with this transfer as a solution and wanted the parent group and administration to work together for a different solution. Choate also asked if the district could simply write-off RALLY’s debt because the debt in question was inappropriately charged. Director of Administrative Services David Means said they cannot because the district does double-entry bookkeeping, not single entry.
“We use a balanced economy system here in the district,” he said. “We have to identify a source of income to transfer in. We can’t just forgive it. ... It would be an ongoing concern for auditors.”
Scott Miller, a Mendenhall River Community School parent who worked extensively on the RALLY issue, said that RALLY has been charged more than $800,000 in these costs. He said they are not asking for a free ride, parents of the program are willing to give their fair share. Miller said another issue with the program has arisen, that staff has been cut so deeply in the program that his family is now on a waiting list.
“There are two RALLY issues,” said board member Barbara Thurston. “One is an accounting gimmick to move money from one invisible fund to another invisible fund to absolve the debt. The other is the issue of indirect costs. What I’m not sure, where are we going now from RALLY? Does it make the program back to the way it was in the fall? What’s happening with RALLY, what’s the plan going forward?”
Superintendent Glenn Gelbrich said that the fee fluctuation and charges to RALLY caused a wave, and that wave needs to stabilize. He said the two motions before the board are an effort to do that. One goal would be to eventually reinstate the morning programs. Aside from that, after there is a certain threshold of students on the waiting list, another person is hired. Gelbrich said they can’t add another person until there are enough students involved to make adding that person financially viable.
“I can see no value in not doing this transfer of funds right now,” Thurston said. “Without it, administration doesn’t really know where we’re going. I would like to approve both and then see a plan from administration about where we’re going with RALLY.”
Board member Sean O’Brien said he views this as a corrective step, not the final answer to making RALLY viable and sustainable again.
The board also unanimously approved setting a 2.5 percent indirect cost rate for non-grant funded programs, where applicable by law. Board member Sally Saddler abstained, as she participated via teleconference and could longer hear the discussion.
Victoria Johnson, a parent, said she used RALLY for her children and she had to use Catholic Community Services just to pay for it.
“I am really surprised there is this huge debt,” she said. “I could not afford to pay for RALLY on my own.”
• Contact reporter Sarah Day at 523-2279 or at sarah.day@juneauempire.com.





Comments (7)
Add commentSo, according to yesterday
So, according to yesterday and today's article. The school is aware that they erroneous over charged rally, but refuse to fix their error, blaming the debt on rally? ...
Am I missing something here?
How are the overages
How are the overages "indirect costs" of RALLY? They are either costs resulting from RALLY or not.
RALLY is a childcare (babysitting) program. Funds from other school budgets shouldn't be drained off to pay parent's babysitting bills for them.
For all the cries of I can't afford to pay my child's bills; I rarely see an older vehicle picking up kids at the school near my home.
Childcare is a necessity-one for which parent's need to pay the same as they should be responsible enough to support their kids by buying their food and healthcare from their salaries. If one job doesn't cut it; you need to get a second job.
Whatever
Just an FYI Do the Right Thing...We used childcare assistance when our kids were young, prior to them being school aged. Eventually we had enough income that we were able to pay childcare costs in full. Not everyone who is using support programs is a "Taker".
Overages
Do the Right Thing, you seem to have missed some information. RALLY was being charged indirect costs inappropriately. Indirect costs are costs for general services provided by JSD that are not billed directly - such as facilities maintenance, payroll, etc. Indirect costs are generally charged to outside sources of funding - such as grants - to help pay for administering these programs.
Not being a grant program, RALLY could not be charged these costs under JSD rules, even though JSD has been charging these costs since 1995. RALLY also was being charged these costs at rates ranging between 3% and 8% of total RALLY revenue - resulting in a payment much greater than the indirect services RALLY uses. This resulted in a deficit in the RALLY budget as indirect and administrative costs surpasses the amount of revenue being paid by parents.
So, no. The costs are not costs resulting from RALLY - which is exactly the issue that was being addressed by the change in policy. As indicated in the article, RALLY parents are not opposed to paying their fair share of indirect costs, and that is what the 2.5% rate is proposing to do. The transfer of funds from other programs to alleviate RALLY's paper debt is fair because these other programs have NEVER been charged indirect costs at all. So, RALLY has been subsidizing them. RALLY is self-supporting and fully paid for by tuition - no school district or local money goes to support the RALLY program.
In the future you might want to educate yourself before sharing your misplaced outrage.
Empire Reporting
My daughter went to the School Board Meeting last night. She saw the room full of her teachers talking about issues that affect her and her friends.
This is what the Empire reports back -- RALLY?
I have nothing against RALLY but I've never used it, like most school district parents. It seems like a lot of time talking about a babysitting program if there's a room full of people who want to talk about school. If the JSD misuses funds for its babysitting programs, what are they doing with the millions of dollars that's supposed to actually teach children to read and write and add? Maybe we should be looking really hard at that.
Are people really only concerned about the bad use of money for the babysitting program? Can we actually read about EDUCATION programs next time?
So, Where does
The $304,000 cost come from? If it is not an indirect expense incurred by Rally then how was it incurred? Does this mean that the JSD has an unfunded continuing liability going forward? It would be nice of the Empire to report important facts like that....
A little information
AH HA -
$304,000 was the amout that RALLY is in deficient. RALLY is a seperate fund for the district, kind of like a seperate checkbook which is overdrawn. The checkbook is overdrawn because the districts general fund has been incorrectly charging an indirect rate. It isn't an unfunded liability, more of a due to/due from between funds.