October 30, 2023
Hello,
Welcome to the REIGNITE SPARK campaign. I still find it hard to believe that we have ended up here from what started as an invitation from Dr. Geithman to serve on the Board of Trustees for LCMSD. While I decided that role wasn't a great fit for my skillset, I was interested in serving the community and asked about potentially serving on Spark's board. In considering pursuit of this role, I started to familiarize myself more with Spark's operations and financial filings.
When I initially came across some discrepancies, I forwarded my questions on to Spark's Executive Director Sara Ryba. It began quite friendly, and I expected that attaining the answers would be simple and quick. Instead, I quickly became much more concerned. First, my concern surfaced following a phone conversation on May 26th with a Spark Director where she told me in response to my question that 96 cents of every dollar donated to Spark goes to the kids. I told her that was great news, and asked how I could replicate that calculation from Spark's financials. She promised to follow up with the math on the call and over subsequent text, but never did. Then, my concern grew when Spark proved unwilling to disclose Ms. Ryba's 2020 compensation (despite the law requiring such) or provide its bylaws. This behavior didn't make sense and I was forced to decide if I would push the issue or simply move on. While tempted by the latter, my experience in the corporate world sensed these were concerning red flags and Spark's cause is too important to have seen something and still not say something. And here we are today.
This petition was the brilliant idea of a concerned district parent (thank you, you know who you are) who explained that while many parents privately share my concerns regarding Spark's Efficiency and transparency, they also are cautious to speak up for fear of being publicly bullied and / or ostracized. To solve for this, by design this petition will remain private by default until there is safety in the masses (100+ signatures). At that time, all signators will be asked to permit their identity to be made public. This will be totally optional, and all will still have the ability to remain private in perpetuity if they so choose. If enough do choose to become public at that time, we will present the signed petition to Spark and the district. If you don't foresee ever wishing to become public on this matter, please still sign in private. Every bit helps.
I have also fielded a lot of questions. This accompanying website is a response to a large number of requests made to me in private from district parents and community members that wanted to better understand why I have chosen to engage with Spark to advocate for change, what I am trying to accomplish and how a simple email asking for obviously incorrect information to be corrected back in May '23 has escalated into something much bigger and more concerning. This website will provide much needed transparency on these matters to all who seek it.
This petition and website is admittedly a sharp pivot from my initial approach to address these issues completely in private (via several letters, one co-authored by district parent Stephen Marotto) to minimize any reputational risk to Spark. Those efforts, while extensive, proved fruitless. The transparency and Efficiency issues were still too important to ignore, so I changed course in Fall '23 to start more publicly sharing my concerns, first at the Spark Coffee Chat and then in the press.
There has been some progress: i) Spark has had to restate its financials for the last three years; ii) Spark has now publicly acknowledged the PPP loans; and iii) a nonzero Ryba 2020 compensation figure has now finally been provided (135 days after my initial request, same year as initially unreported PPP loans were taken out). At the same time, when measured by the simple goal of getting more money to the kids, from i) improving Efficiency (more money to kids, less to salaries); and ii) improving transparency to reinstill trust so people will give more, still no progress has been made.
Spark continues to label what I term Efficiency as "irrelevant," refusing to commit to any cost reductions, and has rejected my calls to conduct an audit to bolster community trust in their latest restated financials. The initial premise for rejecting an audit was cost. I subsequently have repeatedly offered to do it as a volunteer (since mid-June in a meeting with Dr. Geithman and Trustee Eric Schmautz) for free alongside two other community members they can select to ensure impartiality and report the findings to the public so they can again trust Spark when deciding how much to give.
An audit is not an allegation, but rather a means to grow trust and fundraising dollars. If people trust, they will give more. That is why Reed School District's nonprofit gets an audit every year, despite also being, like Spark, slightly below the $2m revenue threshold where it becomes legally mandated. I will publicly commit that I will accept the outcome of a well-designed audit. If nothing else, this should mean no more legal fees. In addition, my family has committed to making various levels of donations to Spark on a sliding scale, starting with if they simply do the audit no matter the outcome and going all the way up to a $15k donation (was termed at a level exceeding any of our prior years' giving in the email) if a clean audit and Spark returns to 95% Efficiency. I will happily advertise that I am giving which should also help to reinstill trust and confidence for other families that are considering making a donation. So far they have declined this offer. I hope they will change their minds, and I think they will if you and others in the district sign the petition and make your voice heard.
Since the 1980s, the Spark Foundation has been an invaluable champion in our community for art, music, wellness and science programming for students that otherwise wouldn’t be possible, and a shining example of community partnership. Indeed, it is a partnership whose existence and operations rely entirely upon the generosity of the vast number of community members that give in time as volunteers and in funds as donors. I am extremely cognizant that oftentimes it is the same people that give generously in both.
To any volunteers and donors that read this letter, I extend my heartfelt gratitude. I believe what you are doing deeply matters, and indeed that is why I have elected to so staunchly advocate for change at Spark. Improved Efficiency translates to more money going to these programs and benefiting the kids. Improved governance and transparency leads to donors having greater confidence that the hard-earned money they elect to donate to Spark will be treated with appropriate care when they are reaching into their pockets and deciding how much to give. A stronger Spark is possible, and it is the kids who will directly benefit.
Also, I welcome feedback. If you have questions, ideas, or concerns please don't hesitate to reach out. It would be fair to say this has taken much more of my time than originally anticipated. I confess I eagerly seek a path to addressing the issues at Spark as a community and all moving on. If anyone has ideas, I would be very very appreciative.
The stakes are high, and the kids are counting on us to right the ship. I have chosen to advocate for change, and give my time and voice, because I cannot support Spark financially again until I have faith in their numbers and I think we all have a duty to our community that if we see something we say something. It remains critical for Spark, Dr. Geithman and the community to find a way to move forward (and stop lighting money on fire with unnecessary legal fees), and a (free) audit is the first step to rebuilding trust. It also remains simply unacceptable for Spark leadership to solicit funds for the kids without committing to those same donors what % of the dollars donated we should expect to actually go to the kids. So far Spark has decried Efficiency as a metric because Efficiency has plummeted the last decade under Ms. Ryba from 95 cents to just 74 cents of a dollar donated making its way to the kids. While the math is unpleasant, Spark leadership needs to hear that, in fact, Efficiency is highly relevant to donors, and promptly take action to substantially grow revenues or reduce expenses to bring Efficiency back up to historical and peer levels.
Also, I note that both Spark and Dr. Geithman have started to make the argument that we as a community should not seek transparency and accountability because these efforts are a distraction and "to the detriment of our (Spark's) primary mission, which is to raise money for the kids (quote from Spark October 4th letter on ParentSquare)." In private, I have heard others extend that argument further to that if more unpleasant facts come to light it could negatively impact giving, and even the exercise of asking questions could convey an air of distrust.
I find this argument non-sensible on two fronts. First, transparency and accountability are foundational principles for any organization, especially one that relies on community donations and trust. Hiding behind potential negative outcomes to deter questions undermines the very essence of democratic participation and informed decision-making. And plugging our ears at the doctor's office is silly and dangerous and won't actually save anyone from a bad diagnosis. Second, donors and community members have the right to understand how their contributions are utilized. Instead of discouraging questions and labelling them "detrimental," a transparent organization would welcome them, using them as an opportunity to showcase their integrity and commitment to their mission. Shielding information under the guise of potential fallout is not only counterproductive but also raises more concerns about what might be hidden from public view. It's crucial for organizations like Spark to remember that trust is earned through openness and consistency, not by suppressing inquiries (especially after the financials did in fact require substantial restatement).
The below behaviors have created real questions and weakened trust. Now is the time for Spark to shift course, embracing and running towards the opportunities that true transparency presents. Spark has much to gain from a free audit, and nothing to lose.
While the above behavior has been an unnecessary distraction, Spark's cause has never mattered more. And while Spark and Dr. Geithman are acting as if this cause entitles their actions to be beyond reproach, I believe instead we should insist on the exact opposite. The greater the importance of the cause, the more accountability matters to make sure we as a community get it right.
Now to the good news: the opportunity in front of us to have a significant impact is large, actionable and exciting. If Spark reestablishes the community's trust to maintain current $1.5m annual giving levels and improves its Efficiency back to 95%, I estimate that will drive an incremental $3.3m of proceeds to the kids over the next decade. Now that is an outcome we should all get behind. The kids are worth it.
And if you haven't yet, I will ask again: please sign the petition and make your voice heard.
Best,
Matt