document resume ed 320 651 jc 900 385 author ...development, the community college, and technology...

ED 320 651

AUTHORTITLE

INSTITUTION

SPONS AGENCY

REPORT NOPUB DATECONTRACTNOTE

AVAILABLE FROM

PUB TYPE

JOURNAL CIT

EDRS PRICEDESCRIPTORS

ABSTRACT

DOCUMENT RESUME

JC 900 385

Catanzaro, James L., Ed.; Arnold, Allen D., Ed.Alternative Funding Sources. New Directions forCommunity Colleges, Number 68.ERIC Clearinghouse for Junior Colleges, Los Angeles,Calif.

Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ED),Washington, DC.ISBN-1-55542-843-689

RI88062002128p.; Part of the Jossey-Bass Higher EducationSeries.

Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers, 350 S3nsome Street, SanFrancisco, CA 94104 (14.95).Collected Works Serials (022) ReportsDescriptive (141) -- Information Analyses ERICInformation Analysis Products (071)New Directions for Community Colleges; v17 n4 Win1989

MF01/PC06 Plus Postage.Alumni; Ancillary School Services; CommunityColleges; *Corporate Support; Economic Development;*Educational Finance; Endowment Funds; FinancialNeeds; *Fund Raising; *Philanthropic Foundations;*Private Financial Support; Program Descriptions;Program Development; *School Business Relationship;School Community Relationship; School Support; TwoYear Colleges

In an effort to identify and tap new sources of fundsfor community colleges, this monograpt: presents a series ofdescriptive articles on the most successful alternative fundingventures. In addition, the sourcebook provides a sense of where andhow new ventures have aided two-year colleges and how otherinstitutions might follow in this pursuit. The following articles areincluded: (1) "The Community College Foundation Today: History,Characteristics, and Assets," by Dan Angel and Dale Gares, and"Reasons for Success," by G. Jeremiah Ryan; (2) "FoundationRestricted Funds, A Special Application: Miami-Dade's EndowedTeaching Chair," by Horace Jerome Traylor, Stephen G. Katsinas, andSiegfried E. Herrmann; (3) "Alumni: Friends and Funds for YourInstitution," by Richard J. Pokrass; (4) "AlternativeEducation/Alternative Revenue: Contract Training--Public and PrivateSector Models," by Raymond Lestina and Beverly A. Curry, and "MediaTechnology Begets Revenue," by Jana B. Kooi; (5) "EconomicDevelopment, the Community College, and Technology Training," bySteve Maradian; (6) "Entrepreneurship in the Community College:Revenue Diversification," by Richard W. Brightman; (7) "A Case forCommercial Development of College Property," by Richard W. McDowelland W. Kennett Lindner; and (8) "Performance Contracting: Profits andPerils," by Charles C. Spence and Jeffrey G. Oliver. Appendixesprovide a guide to key resources and a list of companies that providematching funds to junior or community colleges. (VVC)

NEW DIRECTIONS FOR COMMUNITY COLLEGES

Alternative Funding Sources

James L. Catanzaro, Allen D. Arnold, Editors

ri4

1ER I 161

"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

A. Cohen

TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)."

A

U S DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOffice of Educational Research and ImprovementEDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION

CENTER IERIL))(This document has been reproduced asreceived Item ITC person or ofganizanororiginating it.C Minor changes have been made to improve

reproduction quality

Pointsofvieworoprmon $slatcdrnthrsdocu-ment do not necessarily represent officialOERI position or policy

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

2

F

Alternative Funding Sources

James L. Catanzaro, EditorTriton College

Allen D. Arnold, EditorTriton College

NEW DIRECTIONS FOR COMMUNITY COLLEGESARTHUR M. COHEN, Editor-in-Chief

FLORENCE B. BRAWER, Associate Editor

Number 68, Winter 1989

Paperback sourcebooks inThe Jossey-Bass Higher Education Series

Jossey-Bass Inc., PublishersSan Francisco Oxford

'.";

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION rENTER

UNIVERSITY Of CALIFORNIA. LOS ANGELES

James L Catanzaro, Allen D. Arnold (eds.).Alternative Funding Sources.New Directions for Community Colleges, no. 68.Volume XVII, number 4.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1989.

New Directions for Community CollegesArthur M. Cohen, Editor-in-Chief; Florence B. Brawer, Associate Editor

New Directions for Community Colleges is published quarterlyby Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers (publication number LISPS 121-710),in association with the ERIC Clearinghouse for Junior Colleges.New Direct:07u is numbered sequentiallyplease order extra copiesby sequential number. The volume and issue numbers above areincluded for the convenience of libraries. Second-class postage paidat San Francisco, California, and at additional mailing offices.POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Jossey-Bass, Inc., Publishers,350 Sansome Street, San Francisco, California 94104.

The material in this publication is based on work sponsored whollyor in part by the Office of Educational Research and Improvement,U.S. Department of Education, under contract .. -nber RI-88-062002.Its contents do not necessarily reflect the views c. Lie Department,or any other agency of the U.S. Government.

Editorial corresponeence should be sent to the Editor-in-Chief, ArthurM. Cohen, at the ERIC Clearinghouse for Junior Colleges, Universityof California, Los Angeles, California 90024.

Library of Congress Catalog Card Number LC 85. 644753

International Standard Serial Number ISSN 0194-3081

International Standard Book Number ISBN 1-55542-843.6

Cover art by WILLI BAUM

Manufactured in the United States of America. Printed on acid-free paper.

Ordering Information

The paperback sourcebooks listed below are published quarterly and can beordered either by subscription or single copy.

Subscriptions cost $64.00 per year for institutions, agencies, and libraries.Individuals can subscribe at the special rare of $48.00 per year if payment is bypersonal check. (Note that the full rate of $64.00 applies if payment is by institu-tional check, even if the subscription is designated for an individual.) Standingorders are accepted.

Single copies are available at $14.95 when payment accompanies order.(California, New Jersey, New York, and Washington, D.C., residents pleaseinclude appropriate sales tax.) For billed orders, cost per copy is $14.95 pluspostage and handling.

Substantial discounts are offered to organizations and individuals wishing topurchase bulk quantities of jossey-Bass sourcebooks. Please inquire.

Please note that these prices are for the calendar year 1989 and are subject tochange without notice. Also, some titles may be out of print and therefore notavailable for sale.

To ensure correct and prompt delivery, all orders must give either the nameof an individual or an official purchase order number. Please submit your orderas follows:

Subscriptions: specify series and year subscription is to begin.Single Copies: specify sourcebook code (such as, CC1) and first two words

of title.

Mail all orders to:Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers350 Sansone StreetSan Frarcisco, California 94104

New Directions for Community Colleges SeriesArthur M. Cohen, Editor-in-ChiefFlorence B. Brawer, Associate Editor

CCI Toward a Professionai Faculty, Arthur M. CohenCC2 Meeting the Financial Crisis, John LombardiCC3 Understanding Diverse Students, Dorothy M. Knoell

CC4 Updating Occupational Education, Norman C. HarrisCC5 Implementing Innovative Instruction. Roger H. GarrisonCC6 Coordinating State Systems, Edmund J. Gleazer, Jr., Roger YarringtonCC7 From Class to Mass Learning, William M. BirenbaumCC8 Humanizing Student Services, Clyde E. BlockerCC9 Using Instructional Technol9gy, George H. VoegelCCI O Reforming College Governance, Richard C. Richardson, Jr.CCI I Adjusting to Collective Bargaining, Richard J. ErnstCCI2 Merging the Humanities, Leslie KoltaiCC13 Changing Managerial Perspectives, Barry HeermannCCI4 Reaching Out Through Community Service, Hope M. HolcombCC15 Enhancmg Trustee Effectiveness, Victoria Dziuba, William MeardyCC16 Easing the Transition from Schooling to Work, Harry F. Silberman,

Mark B. GinsburgCCI7 Changing Instructional Strategies, James 0. HammonsCCI8 Assessing Student Academic and Social Progress, Leonard L. BairdCCI9 Developing Staff Potential, Terry O'BanionCC20 Improving Relations with the Public, Louis W Bender,

Benjamin R. WygalCC2I Implementing Commt.nity-Based Education, Ervin L. Harlacher,

James F. GollattscheckCC22 Coping with Reduced Resources, Richard L. AlfredCC23 Balancing State and Local Control, Searle F. CharlesCC24 Responding to New Missions, Myron A. MartyCC25 Shaping the Curriculum, Arthur M. CohenCC26 Advancing International Education, Maxwell C. King, Robert L BreuderCC27 Serving New Populations, Patricia Ann WalshCC28 Managing in a New Era, Robert E. LahtiCC29 Serving Lifelong Learners, Barry Heermann, Cheryl Coppeck Enders,

Elizabeth WineCC30 Using Part-Time Faculty Effectively, Michael H. ParsonsCC31 Teaching the Sciences, Florence B. BrawerCC 2 Questioning the Community College Role, George B. VaughanCCA Occupational Education Today, Kathleen F. ArnsCC34 Women in Community Colleges, Judith S. EatonCC35 Improving Decision Making, Mantha MehallisCC36 Marketing the Program, William A. Keim, Marybelle C. KeimCC37 Organization Development. Change Strategies, James HammonsCC38 Institutional Impacts un Campus, Community, and Business Constituencies,

Richard L. AlfredCC39 Improving Articulation and Transfer Relationships, Frederick C. KintzerCC40 General Education in Two-Year Colleges, B. Lamar JohnsonCC4 I Evaluating Faculty and Staff, Al SmithCC42 Advancing the Liberal Arts, Stanley F. TureskyCC43 Counseling. A Crucial Function for the 1980s, Alice S. Thurston,,

William A. RobbinsCC44 Strategic Management in the Community College, Gunder A. MyranCC45 Designing Programs for Community Groups, S. V. Martorana,

William E. Pi landCC46 Emerging Roles for Commun.', College Leaders, Richard L. Alfred,

Paul A. Elsner, R. Jan Le Croy, Nancy ArmesCC47 Microcomputer Applications 171 Administration and Instruction,

Donald A. Del low, Lawrence H. Poole

6

CC48 Customized Job Training for Busines,) and Industry, Robes, J. Kopecek,Robert G. Clarke

CC49 Ensuring Effective Governance, William L. Deegan, James F.Gollattscheck

CC50 Strengthening Financial Management, Dale F. CampbellCC5I Active Trusteeship for a Changing Era, Gary Frank PettyCC52 Maintaining Institutional Integrity, Donald E. Puyear,

George B. VaughanCC53 Controversies and Decision Making in Difficult Economic Tunes,

Billie Wright DziechCC54 The Community College and Its Critics, L. Stephen ZwerlingCC55 Advances in Instructional Technology, George H. VoegelCC56 Applying Institutional Research, John LosakCC57 Teaching the Developmental Education Student, Kenneth M. AhrendtCC58 Developing Occupational Programs, Charles R. DotyCC59 Issues in Student Assessment, Dorothy Bray, Marcia J. BelcherCC60 Marketing Strategies for Changing Times, Wellford W. Wilms,

Richard W. MooreCC6I Enhancing Articulation and Transfer, Carolyn PragerCC62 Issues in Personnel Management, Richard I. Miller,

Edward W. Holzapfel, Jr.CC63 Collaborating with High Schools, Janet E. LiebermanCC64 External Influences on the Curriculum, David B. Wolf, Mary Lou ZoglmCC65 A Search for Institutional Distinctiveness, Barbara K. TownsendCC66 Using Student Tracking Systems Effectively, Trudy H. BersCC67 Perspectives on Student Development, William L. Deegan,

Terry O'Banion

Contents

Editors' Notes 1

James L. Catanzaro, Allen D. Arnold

I. The Community College Foundation Today 5

A. History, Characteristics, and AssetsDan Angel, Dale GoresB. Reasons for SuccessG. Jeremiah Ryan

Community college foundations have come of age. Proper planning anddetermined execution under effective leadership can result in significantcorporate support.

2. Foundation Restrict _ vuncii, A Special Application:Miami-Dade's Endowed Teaching ChairHorace Jerome Traylor, Stephen G. Katsinas, Siegfried E. HerrmannMiami-Dade's remarkably successful transfer of the endowed chair conceptfrom the four year to the two-year institution has become a nationalmodel for other community colleges.

3. Alumni: Friends and Funds for Your InstitutionRichard J. PohrassMany community colleges are learning that there are long-term paybacksto institutions that make friends of their alumni.

21

29

4. Alternative Education/Alternative Revenue 35

A. Contract Training: Public and Private Sector ModelsRaymond Lestina, Beverly A. CurryB. Media Technology Begets RevenueJana B. Kooi

Contract training not only means additional institutional revenue furcommunity colleges but strengthens important connections with busi-ness/industry and public agencies.

5. Economic Development, the Community College, andTechnology TrainingSteve MaradianEconomic development is tied in most states to the community college'srole in training and retraining of employees to meet industry needs.

i

51

6. Entrepreneurship in the Community College:Revenue DiversificationRichard W. BrightmanAn unexpected number of community colleges are increasing revenues bygoing into business.

7. A Case for Commercial Development of College PropertyRichard W. McDowell, W. Kenneth LindnerCommercial development of college land requires the deft hand of thecollege's board of trustees. Schoolcraft College has integrated the publicand private sectors compatibly.

8. Performance Contracting: Profits and PerilsCharles C. Spence, Jeffrey G. OliverHigher education, especially at research universities, has long felt theeconomic impact of grant funds. For the community college, the perfor-mance contract may provide an equal opportunity for alternate funding.

Appendix 1. A Guide to Key Resources

Appendix 2. Companies that Match to Junioror Community Colleges

Index

9

57

67

75

85

111

121

Editors' Notes

Since the 1970s the search for alternative funding sources has been one ofthe most distinctive and important endeavors of public two-year colleges.In college after college administrative effort has shifted to the pursuit ofnew funding, in many cases as a top priority.

The most significant reason for this recent and intense preoccupationwith fresh revenue sources is the softening of governmental support forpublic higher education. Though varying from state to state, federal andstate subsidization of public higher education generally has declined,even in the one sector that has displayed the most growth and commit-ment to societal needs: two-year colleges.

This decline has occurred at a time when the costs of education havebeen higher than ever. Sagging enrollments in many places have nutpermitted the scale economies of previous times and have checked thecommon penchant of community colleges to risk-taking based on confi-dence that enrollment growth would Lover the down side.

The most remarkable expenditure is the cost of setting up and sus-taining new academic service programs. Fewer courses can be taughteffectively in a standard classroom with the instructor limited to the useof chalk and chalkboard. Technical courses now require equipment andfacility outlay. well beyond any thing that would have been imagined inthe 1950s and 1960s. Even liberal arts courses increasingly arc taught inspecialized environments with expensive hardware and software. Manyinvolve use of the computer, many more rely on film, videotape, andcostly learning resources with the paiaprofessionals to support them.

At the same time, thc. burden of large tenured and mature faculties hasproved greater than traditional revenues can support. These faculties alsofind themselves limited by obsolescent equipment and facilities, replace-ment of which was deferred during the 1980s because of spiraling Lusts.

These elementsthe reduction of public 'support, high setup costs,salary requirements for a mature faculty, and the need to replace equip-ment and modernize facilities purchased in the heyday of communitycolleges (the 1960s and early 1970s) together nave heightened thedemand on shrinking resources.

The cc,.t of doing business is not the only source of financial con-straint. Society has increased rather than reduced its expectations forcommunity colleges. Community development via local economic devel-opment and the rescue of the underclass has, in many states by publicpolicy and in other stnes by expectation, widened the mission andadvanced the financial obligation of colleges.

1

2

In large and small institutions across the country, the new mandatehas been to identify and tap new sowces of funds. This volume presentsa series of position papers on the most successful alternative fundingventures. Clearly some are possible only in certain domains and in certaincircumstances. The efforts required in each search must also be weighedagainst the possible gain. Those energies sometimes could have producedmore remarkable results if spent on traditional sources. For example, insome districts a new tax initiative or referendum could lead to manytimes the return of even a most successful foundation or outside businessventure.

Nevertheless, the purpose of this sourcebook is to indicate wnere andhow new ventures have aided two-year colleges and to prov ide a sense ofhow other institutions might follow in this pursuit. Chapter One dis-cusses the most obvious means of alternative funding. the foundation.The two segments show, first, the current high significal.ce of the foun-dation in the community college, as well as an overview of its develop-ment, and, second, the reasons for its success as patterned in the moresuccessful colleges.

The first segment, by Dan Angel and Dale Gares at Austin CommunityCollege, ties together their 1980 and 1987 surveys and provides not only ahistorical perspective on the foundation in the community college but alsoa profile of combined assets. Their puira is that the community collegefoundation has come of age, with 1988 combined dollars exceeding a quar-ter of a billicn. They have measured and recorded the SW-ebb Jf the com-munity college foundation movement, their article also shares the meansby which an individual foundation in judge its own individual success,

The second segment, by G. Jeremiah Ryan, delineates specific strat-egies community colleges have used successfully to br ing in dollars, tothe point of hit...hiding "salable" responses to often-posed objections.Although most of these techniques am common to fund raising in highereducation in general, Ryan points to one notable exception.

Chapter Two describes what has surely become the new nationalmodel for fund raising for "learning projects" in the community college.Miami-Dade's Endowed Teaching Chair Program. Horace Jerome Tray-lor, Stephen G. Katsinas, and Siegfried E. Herrmann show the "transla-tion" of a four-year college paradigm into a two-year college conceptThis superb idea allows fund-raising efforts to focus on the centralmission of the collegeexcellence in teaching.

In Chapter Three, Richard J. Pokrass brings to community collegeadvancement officers an important insight their four -year counterpartshave learnedsometimes the hard way. Funds come from friends. Fundraising must begin as friend raising and provide a benefit to the alumniinvolved.

Contract training has increased significantly in the past ten years as

1I

3

a means of producing institutional revenues. Chaplet Foul illustrates anexcellent model. The first segment, by Raymond Lestina and Beverly A.Curry, deals with contract training in both the public and wham swots.The second segment, b) Jana B. Kooi, deals with numerous media deliv-ery systems, including teleconferencing, Instructional Television FixedService (ITFS), and cable networks, and their capabilities for enhancingrevenue generation.

Government at both state and local levels has become increasinglyinterested in joint economic development climb with two-year collegesbecause they arc the educational institutions best prepared to pros ideaccess to technology. Chapter Five, b) Steve Nlaradian, focuses on thefact that in today's high-tech society, economic development is linked toensuring that local industry possesses the technological know-how todevelop the products and services appropr iate to impiov ing productionand service capabilities.

In Chapter Six, Richard W. Brightman makes a bold argument. acollege can increase revenues by going into business. Fur- profit activitiesby colleges not only are legal, Brighttr...n points out, but more of themalready exist than most of us are aware of.

The traditional revenue sources for the community college have beenlimited to state appropriations, tuition, and local taxes. Chapter Seven,by Richard W. McDowell and W. Kenneth Lindner, illustrates how theleasing of college land has provided significant additional 'mimes toSchoolcraft College in Michigan. The issues of whether puLlic Lind canbe used for private commercial enterprise and what lok trustees have asholders of the land in public trust are both addressed.

In Chapter Eight, Charles C. Spence and Jeffrey G. Oliver lay theground rules tut ensuring the profitability of that vellum. Not only therelative merits and availability of funds are covered but also the risks andthe down side of performance contracting versus grants.

Appendixes One and Two, developed b) G. Jeremiah Ryan, will serveas excellent information resources. a bibliographic reference guide and alist of companies that match employe( gifts to two -year institutions.

The editors arc indebted to Sunil Chand, Kim Ileintzelman, CaroleJackson, and Debbie Spair for their contributions to this volume.

James L. CatanzaroAllen D. ArnoldEditors

James L. Catanzaro is president of Triton College, River Grove,

Allen D. Arnold is executive vice-president of Triton College.

The Community CollegeFoundation Today

A. History, Characteristics,and Assets

B. Reasons for Success

13

Commu.city college foundations have come of age, with 1988combined dollars ex- -',ding a quarter of a billion.

A,History, Characteristics,and Assets

Dan Angel, Dale Gares

Before the late 1970s the community college foundation was an un-common phenomenon, but by the end of the 1980s it has becomecommonplace. This decade has witnessed unprecedented foundationsuccesses. in Florida, Miami-Dade Community College n cei%ed the thirdlargest single gift to any higher education institution in America. InTexas, Midland College Foundation recei%ed $600,000 to pay the tuitionof 450 high school graduates. Patrick Henry Community College Foun-dation in Virginia was gi%en $3 million to build a fine arts and commu-nity center. In Ohio, the Lakeland College Foundation receiyed a bequestof S1.2 million in land for botanical studies and to serge as a futureretreat. Miami-Dades Foundation accepted a special landscaping maintenance endowment fund (popularly labeled "The Grass Fund") dedi-cated to the beautification and maintenance of .mpus grounds. Andbecause of donations, California's Santa Barbara Community CollegeFoundation was able to equip its hotel and restaurant training facilitycompletely.

Clearly, the community college foundation has come of age. Accord-ing to a comprehensi%e study (Angel and Gares, 1987), in 1987 America's1,222 community colleges had at least 619 affiliated foundations withcollective assets of over a quarter billion dollars.

J. L Catanralo and A. D. Ainold (eds.). Allernatice Fundur: Sources.New Directions for C.ommunny Colleges. no 68. San Francisco Jossey-Bass, Winter 1989 7

In

8

Historical Perspective

The first important American educational foundations were estab-lished in the late 1800s. Community college foundations came muchlater, and there is some dispute over the specific details. Degerstedt (1979)reported that just one community college foundation had been incorpo-rated by 1950. Luck and Tolle (1978) noted that there were two commu-nity college foundations that were at least forty years old in 1973. Robison(1981) claimed that Long Beach City College records showed that a foun-dation was organized there in 1922. Nusz (1986) argued that the firstprogram of annual giving started at Midway Junior College in Kentuckyas early as 1906.

Regardless of the disagreement about the early foundations, the Angeland Gares survey indicates that by 1987 community colleges of all typesand sizes had established foundations. As Figure 1 shows, fully 82 percent(649) of the 793 public and private community colleges reporting claimedto have a foundation, and of those that did not, one-third were consider-ing establishing one. This survey was sent to all 1,222 public and privatecommunity colleges, the response rate was 64 percent. Extrapolating fromthe response data, if they were extended to include institutions that didnot respond, the number of foundations could exceed 800, assuming aconsistency of pattern.

Figure 1 reveals further that there is a clear relationship between theexistence of a foundation and the size of the institution. Of the 144institutions without a foundation, 123 are relatively small (head-count

Figure 1. Community College Foundations, Fall 1987

Number or Community Collegesc...0

100

350

300

250

200

150

100

112

1311 110119 7

4-,,,11 ...-.-,.r,.

1921)60

13115

5. 5.000 9.99910. OW- 9. grora thou 26' °C°

Head-Count Enrollment

Pi

0 F000dot I on

t...:;., No Foundot: on

9

enrollment fewer than 5,000). In mid-range institutions t5,000 to 9,999),only 9 of the 120 reporting institu,.ans did not have a foundation. At thenext institutional level (10,000 to 19,999), only 7 of the 73 institutionshad no formal fund-raising operation. Finally, in the large communitycollege category (enrollment over 20,000), just 5 of the reporting 65institutions had no foundation.

Figure 2 provides a graphic representation of foundation maturity,indicating that of the schools that responded, only sixty-four had foun-dations before 1966. Community college foundations appear to have beenencouraged by the 1965 Higher Education Act, which often offered federalfunds for grants and contract competitions with a match requirement.About the same time, Internal Revenue Service tax-exemption rulingsbegan to stimulate giving. Of course, the phenomenal growth in thenumber of community colleges in the late 1960s and early 1970s translatednaturally into more foundations. The most compelling cause, however,seems to have been the decline in public funds over the past two decades.That decline has led to a search for other revenue sources, particularlyin states that have seen a steady increase in tuition and fees the nationalaverage was $287 in 1974, S464 in 1980, and $642 in 1987). Pressure onboards an administrators to find relief has spawned private fund drivesit. community colleges and public universities.

The net effect of these factors was a bull market fot community col-lege foundations in the 1970s and 1980s. It is no surprise, then, that 83

Figure 2. How Long Foundations Have Been in Existence

Number of Community Colleges

200

180

160

140

120

100

eo

60

197

0 9,44 2.04 4954 919 sg9 og0,30aoc 90" 000- co-' sg- ' 0- A - 2.1 25

%. 2.5 9.0 1.5 . GO° . 1OHO 0°- twe%,4*

14or°

Head-Count Enrollment

[::}0-1 Years

1-5 Years

06-10 Years

11-15 Years

16-20 Years

11 20. Years

were established between 1966 and 1970, 122 between 1971 and 1975, 151between 1976 and 1980, and 220 between 1981 and 1987 (Angel andGares, 1987).

Asset Growth

Luck and Tolle (1978) presented the first comprehensive look at foun-dation assets. Of the 192 foundations they studied, over half had assets ofless than $25,000. Angel and Gares (198') found that total foundationassets were growing rapidly. They noted that 31 percent of communitycollege foundations had assets of more than 5100,000 in 1980, while 11percent had more than $500,000. Seven percent had more than $1 million.Crowson (1985) found that of the 185 foundations providing data, 40percent had assets between $100,000 and $500,000 and 26 percent hadassets over 5500,000. The Angel and Gares (1987) Comprehensive Survey(summarized in Figure 3) shows a remarkable gain in total assets 84foundations reported assets of more than $1 million each.

Angel and Gares (1981, calculated aggregate minimum, mximum,and average dollar assets in community college foundation coffers. It re-ported that minimum projections accounted for some Sl l million, max

Figure 3. Community College Foundation Assets, Fall 1987

Number of Institutions

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

121

88

121110

79 84

0 I I I I I

Less than $50,000- $100,000- $250,000- $500,000- Over $1$50,000 $99,99 $249,999 $499,999 $999,999 Million

Assets

I

11

imam projections would a;:ow for $86 million, and the average figurefor the all - communitycolleges aggregate would be $65 million.

In just seven years the numbers jumped dramatically. By the samemethodology, the minimum aggregate assets in community college foi ..-dations in 1987 were $167 million, $123 million greater than in 1980.The maximum rose from $86 million to $349 million, while the averageincreased from $65 million to $258 million. Therefore, it seems safe tosay that community college foundatio.i assets in 1988 totaled more thana quarter of a billion dollars. By the late 1980s, private source funding isa demonstrated success.

Establishing a Foundation

How foundations are established and funds collected has been -1:-scribed by a number of authors. Graham (1983) presents a ten-step pro-cess; Duffy (1980) identifies seven steps, Hollingsworth (1983) speaks offive phases of development, Sharron (1982) refers to three; Reilley (1985)provides1a tome on the topic; and Walters (1987, p. 1) refers to a "three-legged stool."

Perhaps the most useful, because it is inclusive, is Wattenbarger's(1982, p. 27) "typical evolution process," a ten-step format. The processcan be summarized as follows. (1) formulate the case statement, (2) de-scribe educational needs in community terms, (3) identify inhabitantfactors, (4) analyze the attack; (5) outline needed resources, (6) analyzepotential sources of support, (7) establish priorities, (8) des elop a founda-tion program that fits with the college's plans, (9) demonstrate that fit,and (10) evaluate college, community, and foundation activities to ensurethat steps 1 through 9 are faithfully followed. This approach appears tobe commonly adopted and successful.

Measuring Success

Most analysts seem to agree on a number of key ingredients for suc-cess. A first step is to overcome the myths of foundation development.Sharron (1982) presents eight such myths. (1) people will not give to alocal tax-supported institution, (2) people will nut donate because theeducational content is suspect, (3) people will not give because of theconstituency of community colleges, (1) people will not give because thecommunity college is seen as an extension of K-12, (5) community col-leges do not have adequate prestige to attract contributions, (6) whengiving, alumni first think of the four-yea: college they attended, (7) ade-quate foundation staffing is usually not available or is too costly to dothe job, and (8) the college president is too busy to be effectively involved.

Reversing these eight myths is a good way to pinpoint what it takes

1 :3

12

to be successful. Each myth must be specifically dealt with before thepotential donor is solicited. Complete success depeno., on such things asa commitment from the entire board of trustees; a strong foundationboard to lead the way, supported by the college trustees; a concise andcompelling case statement associated with the college's needs, an effectiveprogram of community relations already in place; a vigorous specialproject campaign, an award program to recognize outstanding donors,and full and public accountability. When these requirements are met,appeals can be made to qualified potential donors. area residents, corpo-rations, private foundations, employees, alumni, members of advisorycommittees, and so forth. These appeals come through annual givingcampaigns, memorial giving, and even planned giving programs. Specialefforts can be made for capital projects or special programming as well.

Active Versus Passive

The vitality of existing foundations is of interest. Hollingsworth(1983) noted that the 546 foundations she examined fell into two catego-ries: active and inactive. Explaining the latter, Robison (1981) found thatmany foundations were "set up to receive funds rather than to activelyseek them" (p. 24). In fact, Sharron (1982) estimated that only about fiftytwo-year public institutions in 1982 had aggressive foundation opera-tions. Glandon (1987) made one of the most thorough evaluations of theactive/passive dichotomy. He identified 227 colleges having "active" foun-dations. Of these he found that 107 had achieved "low success" (raisedless than $50,000) in 1985, and 120 had "high success" (raised more than$50,000).

Althour,h one may question whether an annual revenue of $50,000 isthe by .t criterion for success, or even a significant criterion, in view offur-a-raising costs, there is no doubt that a valid distinction can andshould be made between active and passive foundations. According toAngel and Gares's (1987) survey, the community college foundation move-ment is fast becoming dominated by active- status foundations.

A Revitalization Case

Citrus College, located in the suburbs of Los Angeles, prov ides agood case study of a foundation's passage from passive to active status(Rasmussen, 1986). The Citrus College Foundation was established offi-cially in 1966. Fifteen years later, in June 1981, this 10,000-student cam-pus could show total foundation assets of only $38,000. "It was strictlya receiving organization," says the foundation's first executive director(p. 39). But 1981 was a difficult time for Citrus College because the effectsof California's Proposition 13 were beginning to be felt. The board and

19

13

new president decided to activate the foundation to see if they couldmake up some of the anticipated snortfall.

They set out to assemble a strong foundation board made up of com-munity leaders who traveled in moneyed circles. In discussions withleaders on and off campus, two prominent citizens were mentioned: thefounder of a worldwide manufacturing corporation and a well-knownarea resident who had a history of invol lent with the college and washimself a man of means. These two key players were approached throughclose associates. The latter was immediately interested. By chance, thescheduled contact with the former conflicted with an accreditation teamvisitation. The new college president was torn between the two appoint-ments, so he attempted to keep both. Arriving some twenty minutes latefor the luncheon .%ith his foundation prospect, the somewhat apologeticpresident explained that he had been delayed by the accreditation visit.That remark drew a rather unexpected response: "You mean you leftthe accreditation team just to come and visit with me?" Tile presidentnodded. "Well, if its that important, then I will serve on your foundationboard" (Rasmussen, 1986, p. 39).

With two key members secured, other powerful community leadersrallied to the cause. During the next few months, the newly formed boarddiscovered that prominent people knew there was a community collegein the area, but did not know what the school was doing or that itneeded direct support. Most of the early work at Citrus dealt with orga-nization and campaign preparation. developing the argument, writingthe literature; and planning, planning, planning.

Finally, contacts with potential donors on and off campus began:$100,000 was raised in one hundred days, and $200,000 more during thefoundation's second year. The foundation also participated in a voluntarytuition campaign known as "Saw Our Community College." Studentsat the college were asked to contribute money to help the college in thewake of Proposition 13 losses, and the foundation matched the amountcontributed by students. Although some dot;oted whether such an effortwould work, a $50,000 goal was established for student contributions.The goal was exceeded and it was matched with $50,000 from outsidedonors.

The point was made: foundations of two-year colleges can raise sig-nificant amounts of additional re%enue when there is proper planningand determined execution under effective leadership.

References

Angel, D., and Gares, D. "A Bull Market for Foundations." Community andJunior College Journal, 1981, 52, 5-6.

Crowson, J. "Boards of Directors of Community College Foundations. Charac-

14

teristics, Roles, and Success." Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University ofMississippi, 1985.

Degerstedt, L. M. "Non-Profit Foundations Formed by Public Community Col-leges: Profile of Their Use for External Funding." Doctoral dissertation,Brigham Young University, 1979.

Duffy, E. F. "Characteristics and Conditions of a Successful Community CollegeFoundation." Washington, D.C.. National Council for Resource Development,1980. (ED 203 918)

Glandon, B. L. "Critical Components of Successful Two-Year College Founda-tions." Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Brigham Young University, 1987.

Graham, F. R. New River Community College Educational Foundation, Inc. Dub-lin, Virginia: New River Community College, 1983. (ED 283 457)

Hollingsworth, P. "An Investigation of Characteristics of Successful CommunityCollege Foundations." Graduate seminar paper, Pepperdine University, 1983.(ED 233 756)

Luck, M. F., and Tolle, D. J. Community College Development. Newkirk, 1978.Nusz, P. J. "Development of Foundation Guidelines." Unpublished doctoral dis-

sertation, Nova University, 1986.Rasmussen, P. "Citrus College Foundation." The Glendoran, 1986, 38-42.Reilley, T. A. ''Raising Money Through an Institutional lv Related Foundation."

Washington, D.C.. Council for the Advancement and Support of Education,1985. (ED 256 198)

Robison, S. "The Sky's the Limit." Community and Junior Co::ege Journal, 1981,52 (3), 24-26.

Sharron, W. H., Jr. The Community College Foundation. Washington, D.C..National Council for Resource Development, 1982.

Walters, L. "Dollars Equal to the Margin of Excellence." Southern Associationof Community and Junior Colleges Occasional Paper, 1987, 5 (2). (ED 281 600)

Waitenbarger, J. L. "The Case for the Community College Foundation." InW. H. Sharron, Jr. (ed.), The Community College Foundation. Washington,D.C.: National Council for Resource Development, 1982.

Dan Angel is president and Dale Gares is associate vice-president for academic affairs at Austin Community f.:ollege,Austin, Texas. They have collaborated previously on both the1981 and 1987 research surveys on the status of foundationsin the community college.

21

Community colleges have successfully used professionaladvancement officers to attract significant corporate dollars.

B.Reasons for Success

G. Jeremiah Ryan

As the Angel and Gares chapter points out, public community collegesare rushing to find additional financial support from the private sector.Their success, although to this point modest compared to the total mon-eys gained in educational advancement, has nonetheless contributed tothe phenomenon that public colleges in the United States now raise morefunds from the private sector than do private colleges.

The level of this achievement has surprised the advancement commu-nity at large and amazed even the presidents of the recipient. colleges. It isin large part the result of community college foundations' having cometo terms with the ground rules of privatesector solicitation. One ,ignifi-cant step toward this point was taken in 1981 when the National Councilfor Resource Development commissioned W Harley Sharron, Jr., to edita book that to this day serves as a primer for community colleges wishingto establish a foundation (Sharron, 1982).

How is it that the community college advancement teams translatedSharron's guidelines into strategies that could bring such overwhelm-ing success? The answer has not been immediately appakent. With thisquestion in mind, the Council for the Advancement and Support ofEducation (CASE) established a research team to approach successfulcommunity college fund raisers in 1986 and again in 1987 to identifythe elements individual colleges used to solicit corporate donations. Thereport of that study (Ryan and Smith, 1987) indicated two remarkable

J.1. C.atanraro and A. D. Arnold (eds.). Alternative Funding Sources.New Directions for Community Colleges, no. 68. San Francisco. Jossey.Bass. {tinter 1989. 15

16

similarities. One, there is a striking similarity in the individual schools'approaches to fund raising. Second, although this was not surprising tothose who had experience with fund-raising effort, there is also a markedsimilarity between what forks best for ,:ommunity colleges and whatappears to have been working best for some time br successful privateand public colleges and universities.

Elements of the Study

The researchers for the project were John Hall, vice-president, CASE;Nanette Smith, vice-president for development at Edison CommunityCollege (Florida); and G. Jeremiah Ryan, vice-president for institutionaladvancement at Monroe Community College (New York). In this study,development officers at selected community colleges that were highlysuccessful in fund-raising activities were contacted and asked the samenine questions:

1. What factors contributed to the college's success?2. Is there a chief development officer? To whom does the individual

report?3. What solicitation publicatinns were distributed?4. What solicitation programs were sponsored?5. What other personnel, if any, exist to support the following dew'.

opment activities:a. annual fundb. alumni solicitationc. corporate solicitationd. foundation solicitation

6. What is the time commitment to private fund-raising developmentof the chief executive?

7. What is the time and financial commitment of the college's boardof trustees?

8. What is the time and financial commitment of the college's andfoundation's board of directors?

9. What organizational changes will be needed to increaLe success?

Patterns of Success

The research team found the development officers eager to share theirexperiences, and the original nine questions quickly proved to be onlythe start of lengthy telephone interviews that yielded helpful insights.The respondents reported that the transition from failure to success com-monly required three changes. (1) an exceptional commitment by thechief executive, (2) a full-time person, with sufficient rank in the institu-Lion to get people's notice, to manage the development effort, and (3) theadoption of the "spend money to make money" approach.

--,4

17

Figure 1 shows the relative significance of the factors credited with afoundation's successful soliciting of private sector funds.

Suggested Organizational Changes

The team also found in this interview that certain organizationalchanges were consistently recommended as a rreans to increasing theeffectiveness of the college's fund-raising efforts. Of those reported (Figure2), the chief development officers said that adequate support staff to serethe fund-raising process was the most important.

A Notable Exception to the Rule

It was particularly noteworthy th,7' the factors the team found thatcould be credited with most of the success of fund-raising programs (Fig-ure 1) could as easily have beer reported by the development officers at

Figure 1. Factors Credited with Successof Colleges' Advancement Programs

Involvement of President

Institutional Reputation

Talent/Energy of Dev. Officer

Composition of BoardStrong, Active Board

Donor Recog. Program

Fund< %; : IraniAsset Invest./Mgt

Org. of Dev. Office

Volunteer Involvement

Faculty Involvement

Planned Giving Prog.

CASE Activities

Donor & Grants Res. Prog.

Alumni Program

NCRO Activities

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Source Adapted from Smith, 1986, p. 14.

Percent

2,;

18

Figure 2. Organizational Changes Needed toImprove Effectiveness of Advancement Office

Add clerical staff

identify & cultivate donors

Add a professional person

M2EIMMII

Computerize office operations

Use external investmentmanagement "1

Strengthen research function

I t I

0 5 10 15 20 25 10 35 40 45 50

Source: Adapted from Smith, 1986, p. 21. Percent

traditional public or private four-year institutions. There was one signif-icant exception. trustees in community colleges, whether elected ur polit-ically appointed, are not active participants in the fund-raising process.This factor is so important that it affects the organizational structure ofthe fc,undation itself. In community colleges separate foundations withtheir own directors are prevalent.

Recommendations of the Team

The study yielded information that confirmed that good organization,leadership, and resource commitment are essential if fund raising is to besuccessful. Specifically, the respondents told the research team.

1. Few foundations were successful in early efforts.2. The "spend money to make money" approach is necessary for

success.3. The rich will get richer.4. The president's involvement is necessary fur success and crucial fur

excellence.5. Many foundation boards arc in transition from inactie to active.6. The existence of a full-time development person with an office is

essential for success.7. College trustees are not active fund raisers and probably will not

become so.In sum, what it takes to make a successful community college fund-

raising program is w adapt a traditional organizatiun and implement atraditional approach.

2F

:9

Figure 3. Overcoming Public Skepticism

Question Response

Why do public institutionsof higher learning needprivate-sector funding?

Why are additional facilitiesand equipment needed?

Why do low-cost communitycolleges need scholarshipfunds?

How will funds for facultyenrichment provideopportunities?

How do membe,s of theboard of dirt:ems help thefoundation?

The moneys received from state and federalfunding are insufficient for capitalimprovements necessary to train firstrateemployees in the technologies in which slate-of-the-art equipment changes rapidly.

State-of-the-art equipment and facilities arcneeded to keep pace with rapidly developingtechnology in business and science. Studentaccess to computers is a growing requirement,as is the separation of academic andadministrative computer needs.

The community college population is divers:-recent high school graduates, older adults,including retum:ng women; workers updatingskills; and handicapped students. Recentfederal and state reductions in studentassistance underscore the need for additionalsources of revenue. In this situation, thegroups mentioned need financial aid morethan would be expected of a morehomogeneous population.

Special leaves are needed for studying newdisciplines, for exchanges with business andindustry that allow faculty to gain relatedwork experience; for special faculty projectsin research, curriculum development, andretraining; and fur recognition of excellencein teaching through endowed chairs.

Through activities such as developing fund-raising strategies and priorities, panicipatingat foundation meetings and special events;identifying, cultivating and solicitingcorporate, individual, and foundationprospects; and managing and disbursingfoundation funds.

20

Resource Guide to Case Preparation

The survey respondents frequently reported that when they begantheir efforts there had been considerable public skepticism about a pub-licly financed community college's entry into private resource develop-ment. Some typical questions and responses are provided in Figure 3 forthe reader's use in preparing his or her own case.

References

Ryan, G. J., and Smith, N. J. "Characteristics of Excellence in Community Col-lege Fund Raising." Paper presented at 67th annual convention of the Ameri-can Association of Community and Junior Colleges, Dallas, Tex., April 1987.

Sharron, W. H., Jr. The Community College Foundation. Washington, D.C.:National Council for Resource Development, 1982.

Smith, N. J. "Organizational Models of Successful Advancement Programs."Paper presented at the Annual Conference on Advancing Two-Year Institutionsof the Council for the Advancement and Support of Education, Alexandria,Va., December 9-11, 1986.

G. Jeremiah Ryan is vice-president for institutionaladvancement at Monroe Community College, Rochester,New York. As an AACJC Fellow in 1988, he made considerablecontributions to the literature available on community collegefoundations.

2"'i

Miami-Dade has a consistently high track record in solicitingcorporate donations. Their most recent approach, whichtransfers the endowed chair concept from the four-year to thetwo-year institution, has been remarkably successful and hasbecome a national model for other community colleges.

Foundation Restricted Funds,a Special Application:Miami-Dade's EndowedTeaching Chair

Horace Jerome Traylor, Stephen G. Katsinas,Siegfried E. Herrmann

Distinguished Professors Concept

The distinguished professorship has long been a tradition at manyuniversities. It is most often used to lure eminent researchers to collegecampuses, typically at a cost of $1 million per chair. The Endowed Teach-ing Chair Program at Miami-Dade Community College takes that tradi-tion and molds it to the requirements of the community college. Themore modest sum of $75,000 per chair is required to gt.nerate roughly$7,500 per year in discretionary funds to be awarded to teaching facultywho have already distinguished themselves in the classroom. Throughthe use of the Florida Academic Improvement Trust Fund (FAITF), astate "eminent scholars" endowment match program for public commu-nity college foundations, a $45,000 private contribution creates a $30,000state match (60-40 basis).

J. 1- Ca:ammo and A. D. Arnold (eds.). Alternative Funding Sources.New Directions for Community Colleges. no. 68. San Francisco. Jossey.Bass. Metter 1989.

t)21

22

The FAITF program is discussed below in detail along with the oper-ational strateg} employed b) Miami-Dade Community College's institu-tional advancement office to endow 100 teaching chairs over three years.

The concept of endowed teaching chairs is new to community col-leges, even though teaching is at the center of the mission of the Amer-ican community college. The program at Miami-Dade is intendedto stimulate and honor teaching excellence. To understand why andhow Miami-Dade Community College developed the Endowed TeachingChair Program, it is necessary to understand the history of fund raisingat the college, its philosophy of external funding, and the Teaching.Learning Project of which the Endowed Teaching Chair Program is anintegral part.

Development at Miami-Dade

The development function at Miami-Dade, as at most communit}colleges, is relatively new, having been established in the late 1960sfollowing the passage of the landmark Higher Education Act of 1965(Keener, 1982). The Miami-Dade Community College Foundation grewin prominence as the college examined and adopted portions of the uni-versity private fund-raising model. Keener (1982) specifically cites theimportance of "integration of institutional external lesuutces with de-fined pursuits of the College."

At Miami-Dade Community College the following philosophy offund raising has evolved. the institutional advancement office believesthat a direct-support, nonprofit foundation attached to an institution ofhigher education is most successful when a public-spirited group of citi-zens understands the central mission of the college, is in agreement withit, and can articulate it to the business and civic community. The Miami-Dade Community College Foundation, therefore, has two key functions.(I) to manage and administer the various gifts made according to thewishes of the uonor consistent with foundation policy and procedureregarding acceptance of gifts and (2) to raise additional dollars in supportof the institution. Of these two functions, the first is more importantthan the second. people make major gifts to charitable organizations inwhich they trust that the dollars they worked so hard to earn will bemanaged with the same care required to ereate such wealth. If there is aperception that the community college will manage a donor's gift betterthan other charitable repositories, the donations will come forth. If thatperception does nut exist in the minds of potential donors, a developmentcampaign is doomed to failure.

For a community college fund-raising campaign to succeed, therefore,it must be rooted, as Wattenbarger (1982) and others have noted, in themission of the institution. The role of staff, including the development

2)

23

office and the presidents office, is to empower the foundation board ofdirectors to ..rticulate to the business community how that specific giftwill make a qualitative difference. To accomplish this, the foundationmust be involved in and informed about the strategic planning processof the college. This has long been the case at Miami-Dade.

The Teaching/Learning Project

The Fndowed Teaching Chair Program fits into the Miami-DadeTeaching.' earning Project and demonstrates that the institutionaladvancement function is integrated into the college's long- and short-term planning. A 1975 study of the college's general education require-ments made it clear that the critical issue facing Miami-Dade was thedeclining academic skills of its entering students. A series of systemicchanges were initiated, funded in part by a substantial Department ofEducation Title III Strengthening Developing Institutions grant. Thekey elements of the 1975 -eforms included mandatory entrance testingand placement, the "Academic Alert- early warning and related systemsfor improving the speed and quality of communication with students,and prescriptive advisement. These major reforms were cited by commu-nity college researchers Roueche and Baker (1987).

It has been estimated that one-third of the college's faculty will retireduring the late 1980s and early 1990s. This fact has provided the collegewith a tremendous opportunity in three important areas. (1) hiringa faculty consistent with Miami's dynamic multicultural demography(approximately 40 percent Anglo, 40 percent Hispanic, 20 percent black),(2) developing a system of profession.: faculty development that willhelp new professors learn what experienced professors already knowabout teaching students who often are underprepared academically (espe-cially important in view of the differences between student populationsin a typical state flagship, a private research university, and the commu-nity college), (3) developing a new evaluation, hiring, and reward systemthat will improve classroom teaching by new faculty as well as existingfaculty. Thus rewarding outstanding teaching was seen as the best way toplace teaching at its rightful center of the community college mission.Baker sees the Teaching.' earning Project as the inevitable next step forMiami-Dade. "They've gotten the curriculum straightened out, they'vegot support systems in place to help students through the institution,now they've got to help the classroom teacher" (Heller, 1988, p. 13).

There are three major goals of the Teaching:Learning Program.i. To improve the quality of teaching and learning at Miami-Dade.2. To make teaching at Miami-Dade a professionally rewarding career.3. To make teaching and learning the focal point of college activities

and decision-making processes.

24

The Teachingl Leammg Project 1986-87 Summary Report (1987) dem-enstrated how the institutional advancement function was integratedinto the college's program planning process. The following key projectelements were named:

Creation of subcommittees to address the issues that will ensure insti-tutionalization of the outcome of the Teaching/Learning Project, e.g.,changes in the way tenure is granted, modifications of the evaluation andpromotion system for teaching faculty, support personnel and academicadministrators, among others.

A focus on mechanisms by which teachers can get feedback on theirteaching and creation or a support system to strengthen their skills dndknowledge of instructional delivery.

Implementation of an Endowed Teaching Chair Program as one meansof recognizing outstanding faculty.

Exploration of the "learning" side of teaching, learning relationship (howstudents learn).

Provision for participation in the Project for those not on the SteeringCommittee or its Subcommittees (e.g., retreats, open meetings).

Opportunity for interaction with external consultants and with collegesacross M-DCC campuses around matters of vital educational concern.

Linkages with other institutions having similar teaching, learning goals.

Tangible recognition of the learning environment as the central focus ofcollege operations (through enhanced support services to teaching faculty,upgraded classrooms, shifts in priorities for decision making).

The Endowed Teaching Chair Program is a $10 million, three-yearfund-raising campaign to endow 100 chairs for outstanding teaching fac-ulty and to produce an additional $2.5 million in scholarship and pro-gram support. The funds are allocated according to the following formula.$5,000 in a salary supplement and $2,500 for the discretionary use of theprofessor awarded the chair, related to the academic teaching area.

Planning and Organizing the Campaign

There are four key elements to the strategic plan on which the En-dowed Teaching Chair Program has been based:

25

I. Channeling the volunteer support developed in the $5,000 "Marginof Excellence Endowment Campaign" directly into the EndowedTeaching Chair Program.

2. Involving the institutional leadership, particularly the college pres-ident and the four campus vice-presidents (campus chief executiveofficers), in the fund-raising efforts.

3. Recruiting dynamic leadership, especially from the foundationboard of directors, to lead the campaign.

4. Providing as many attractive methods for donor participation aspracticable.

5. Involving the foundation board of directors as much as possible inall aspects of campaign planning and execution.

It was our desire as institutional advancement professionals to struc-ture the campaign for success lnd to maintain and build on an existingbase of grass-roots volunteers. Responsibilities were clearly defined, andtwo dynamic foundation board members, Louis Wolfson III and AndrewS. Blank, agreed to cochair the Endowed Teaching Chair campaign. Theyeach agreed personally to endow a chair and through their professionaland business contacts, to identify and attract a total of five chairs over athree-year period. Each of the other twenty-two members of the boardwere asked eit..er to endow or to assist in identifying and attracting achair, an effort that would produce an estimated twenty chairs (andwould be reinforced by the leadership of the campaign cochairs and thesupport of the chairman of the board of directors, Martin Fine, and thechairman of the Miami-Dade Community College District board of trus-tees, Daniel Gill). The Miami-Dade foundation board of directors hastwenty-five members, including all seven of the district trustees, who areappointed by the governor of Florida and confirmed by the Florida cabi-net, the chief executive officer of the college, Robert H. McCabe, andseventeen elected directors from the business and community of DadeCounty. Of the twenty-five board members, roughly one-half served onthe college district board of trustees at one time or are graduates of theinstitution. College president Robert H. McCabe agreed to attract tenchairs, and each of the four campus vice-presidents agreed to attract aminimum of five chairs, for a combined total of thirty.

The foundation's chief of protocol, Peter C. Clayton, agreed to takethe leadership in promoting the Willing Founders Program. This pro-gram makes it possible for a person fifty-five or older to endow a chairwith a bequest of $75,000. Because value is receivedthe chair is madeoperational as soon as possible by the commitment of dollars from thecollege's auxiliary services funds, such as vending machines and book-store revenuesthe contractual legal effect is quite solid. The WillingFounders Program gives potential donors another opportunity to par-ticipate through either a charitable remainder trust created during the

26

donor's lifetime or a bequest. It is expected that the Willing FoundersProgram will produce twenty chairs over three years, thanks in large partto the strong, able leadership of Peter Clayton, who has been pro% ided anoffice and staff support in the institutional advancement quarters. Clay-ton agreed to take the volunteer leadership for this program only afterthe foundation board of directors agreed to double his annual salary to$2 per year.

Thus, by the end of June 1990, we expect that eighty chairs willbe identified and attracted through structured efforts mentioned above.Another structure for success is the President's Blue Ribbon Committee,consisting of corporate and civic leaders of Dade County. Each of theseleaders agreed to endow a chair and to attract an additional chair overthe three-year life of the program. To create the Blue Ribbon Committee,solicitations on behalf of President McCabe were made by institutionaladvancement staff.

Although the commitments to establish the chair and structure thecampaign were completed by December 1987, the formal campaign di.:not kick off until June 7, 1988. This six-month period was critical toobtaining the commitments of those serving on the President's Blue Rib-bon Committee to endow a quarter of the teaching chairs before theprogram was officially announced. Other community colleges consider-ing development programs are strongly advised to delay the officialannouncement of the campaign until at least one-quartet of the commit-ments needed to obtain success are in hand. This strategy creates theperception of success, which is critical to institutions seeking private -sector contributions.

Motivating Contributors

What motivates individuals to contribute to a community college? Atthe top of the list one would likely find the belief that the institutionrepresents quality, support for the community college's mission, andunderstanding of the community college's vital role in contributing tothe educational, cultural, awl economic well-being of its service area. Forcommunity colleges to succe in private fund raising, it is essential thatthe same promotional facto presented to the state legislature be forth-rightly con munit ted to business leaders. Time after time, institutionaladvancement staff four...t genuin, inkiest among the business communityin the "access Iv: h opportunity" mission of the community college. Theroster of supporters present at the Endowed Teaching Chair campaignkick-off luncheon looked like a corporate and professional "Who's Who"of South Florida. In other words, the community college and its upliftingmission are great selling points.

The Endowed Teaching Chair Program dramatically recognizes the

1",

27

commitment of the college to attracting and retaining outstanding facultywith demonstrated teaching excellence. It will be a recruitment tool ofinestimable value at a critical juncture in the history of Miami-DadeCommunity College. Fifty percent of the college's full-time faculty willreach retirement age over the next five to seven years. The EndowedTeaching Chair Program addresses a vital need of the college as it pre-pares students for success in the twenty-first century.

References

Heller, S. "Miami-Dade College Begins Project to Bolster Teaching by EvaluatingNew Professors and Rewarding Classroom Performance." Chronicle of HigherEducation, 1988, 34 (31), 12-13, 18.

Keener, B. J. "The Foundation's Role in Resource Development." In W. H. Shar-ron, Jr. (ed.), The Community College Foundation. Washington, D.C.. NationalCouncil for Resource Development, 1982.

Roueche, J. E., and Baker, G. A., III. Access and Excellence. The Open Door Col-lege. Washington, D.C.: Community College Press, 1987.

Teaching' Learning Project 1986-87 Summary Report (Year One). Poster. Miami,Fla.: Miami-Dade Community College, 1987.

Wattenbarger, J. L. "The Case for the Community College Foundation." InW. H Sharron, jr. (ed.), The Community College Foundation. Washington,D.C.: National Council for Resource Development, 1982.

Horace Jerome Traylor is vice-president for institutionaladvancement and president of the Miami-Dade CommunityCollege Foundation.

Stephen G. Katsinas is associate director of institutionaladvancement at Miami-Dade Community College.

Siegfried E. Herrmann is director of development at Miami-Dade Community College.

Interest in alumni relations at public community colleges isrelatively new. But many colleges are learning there are long-term paybacks to institutions that make friends of their alumni.

Alumni: Friends and Fundsfor Your Institution

Richard J. Pokrass

A solid alumni relations program is the cornerstone of institutionaladvancement efforts at most four-year colleges and universities through-out the United States. The Handbook of Institutional Advancement(Rowland, 1986) devotes twelve chapters to the development of alumnirelations. Alumni serve as a valuable resource in fund raising, studentrecruitment, job placement, and volunteer programs.

Yet until recently little emphasis has been placed on alumni relationsat two-year colleges, especially public community colleges. The reasonsare twofold. First, because of the relative youth of the community col-legesmost are now in only their ,bird or fourth decade of operationadministrators and faculty often felt their alumni were not sufficientlyv 11 established in their respective careers or highly placed in the "sys-tem" to be of benefit to the institution. A second and closely relatedfactor is an insufficient understanding of all that a sound alumni pro-gram can accomplish for an institution.

As more two-year colleges have, in the past decade, either establishedor examined the benefits of alumni associations, many have done so withonly one thought: money. They have seen colleges and universities raisehundreds of thousands, even millions, of dollars from alumni to endowfaculty chairs, to fund new facilities, to provide the difference betweenJ. I.. Catalan-) and A. I Arnold (cds Alternative Funding Source.New Dilections (or Community Colleges. no. 68 San Francisco Jossey.Bass, Winter 1989

3529

30

ordinary programs and truly superb ones. A word of caution. these com-munity college advancement types, with their new-found desire to pursueperceived riches, need to remember that the first step to getting donationsis building friendships. Most of the four-year colleges and universitiesthat have long-term success with their alumni programs have learned theconcept of mutual benefits. the institution provides something of valueto the alumni that makes them want to support their alma mater.

With this point in mind, I suggest that a successful two-year collegealumni program, especially in its early years, should not be based onfund raising at all, but rather on friend raising. Financial contributionswill come later, the result of those other actions that carefully nurturealumni.

A mong the common friend-raising activities are free job placementservices, free use of college facilities, discounts to campus events, news-letters and magazines highlighting college happenings and alumni activ-ities, and programs that recognize graduates' personal and professionalachievements. None of these activities need be cost') to the institution,yet they are of Lnmense interest and value to alumni. The job placementservices and free use of facilities are especially useful to young alumniwith limited financial resources.

It is equally important to make alumni feel diet they are still an impor-tant part of the college. A vital step is formally to establish an alumniassociation. Alumni can serve as officers or members of committees, workdirectly with the college staff, and feel that they are providing importantinput into the institution's future success. A formal organization is hecenterpiece of a successful two-year college alumni program, especially ifthe organization enjoys some independence from the coll,:ge's main admin-istrative structure. Many alumni aie in .n excellent position to advise thecollege staff on key issues. In addition, they want to have some say in thedestiny of their association. Thus many two-year college alumni groups,with the support of their colleges, have pursued incorporation.

Incorporation gives the alumni group a formal structure, greatercredibility in the eyes of some alurm.ii, and in mAny cases, protectionhum lawsuits against individual offuxis. Some colleges, however, choosenot to pursue this avenue.

Whether or not an alumni program is officially incorporated, thebasics of alumni relations remain the same. focused goals and objectives,effective olunteers, reliable avenues of communication with the hostcollege, and a source of operating funds.

The first of these tasks, establishing appropriate goals and objectives,is vitally important to an alumni association. These objectives must nciabe inconsistent with those of the host institution. such inconsistenciescreate counterproductive antagonisms between influ -ntial alumni andthe college staff and trustees.

36

31

The structure of the alumni program is an important component ofthe alumni relations process. Many ..No-year college alumni programsare highly centralized, with a strong general alumni association andperhaps a few specialized clubs within the association. Some colleges,however, have opted for the reverseseveral specialized alumni clubswith a deliberately weak central governing body or perhaps no generalalumni association at all. Whereas alumni clubs at major universitiesoften have a regional basis or reflect the college one attended within theuniversity, two -year college alumni clubs are typically established alongthe lines of academic majors (engineering, allied health, communications,and so forth) or specific interests (such as athletics or student honorsgroups). Each college must decide which model is best for its uniquesituation.

Closely related to the alumni program's structure is the question ofwhich administrative department, if any, will be responsible for coordi-nating alumni relations and providing the staff support for the alumniassociation. Since most two-year colleges have not traditionally assignedsignificant resources to alumni programs, only a small fraction have full-time alumni officers. Alunrm; programming has usua:ly been assigned asan appendix to departments with many other duties. Some colleges viewalumni primarily as a source of revenue and assign alumni responsibili-ties to the development staff. But there are several other models that havesuccessfully met colleges' needs.

The most common, other than the development model, is to tic inalumni relations with the public relations:public information,collegerelations function. Schools that have pursued this avenue have generallydone so to emphasize, at least initially, two-uay communication betweenalumni and the college. The public relations office is well equipped tokeep alumni abreast of ongoing college activities, to seek alumni inputon key issues, and even to utilize alumni success stories in advertisingand promotional activities.

Four-year colleges and universities frequently use articulate alumniin the admissions recruitment process. Alumni recruiters, especially inareas far from the main campus, help save costly and time-consumingtravel by members of the admissions staff. In addition, alumni recruitersare often perceived by prospective students as more credible th paidstaff For these reasons, a few two-year colleges have placed administrativecontrol of alumni programming in the admissions office.

Other relatively new two-year college alumni associations, seeking tocultivate alumni now and ask for money later, see job placement as themost important component of their present alumni program and haveplaced the alumni relations function within .he career development, jobplacement department. Some schools view alumni relations as an exten-sion of student activities and assign student and alumni programming to

32

the same department. Others identify graduate follow-up as their mostimportant need and place alumni relations within the control of thecampus research office. Whatever the campus structwe for alumni pro-gramming, it is important that it work for that college and meet theneeds of its alumni.

Perhaps the most vital aspect of alumni relations at any college oruniversity is the people in the programalumni volunteers, paid staff,and enrolled students. Volunteers can make ot break an alumni program.The entire process of recruiting the proper people, placing them in appro-priate assignments, training and motivating them, and evaluating theirperformance, though it requires significant time, is the key to successfulalumni programs. However, the vitally important area of alumni volun-tarism is frequently the most neglected, and alumni officers share horrorstories about problems experienced because they did not spend enoughtime on volunteer development.

Whether the aim is establishing a new alumni program, rebuildingan old one, or maintaining a program at its current level, certain elementsare common to the volunteer recruitment process. One of the most impor-tant is to recruit the right people, which requires an unde.standing ofwhat the institution wants the alumni program to accomplish. Fundraising, for example, requires certain skills, experience, background, trail:-ing, and time commitments. Activities such as finding jobs for fellowalumni, lobbying on behalf of the college, serving as role models forcurrent students, planning special events, ot advising the college on devel-opment of academic programs require others. In fact, further fine-tuningis needed to staff telephones during a "phonathon," meet face-to-facewith corporate executives, write letters, or address civic organizations.Each assignment requires different abilities.

We must know how many volunteers are needed and when, whetherthey are loyal alumni and truly want to help, and whether they haveleadership potential. We must be certain that our volunteers will acceptall persons, tegaidiess of race, religion, sex, national origin, of politicalbeliefs, can cote.mse easily with others and listen well, and want to bepart of a team effort.

Most of these skulls and personal qualities can be determined only ina personal interview. The best volunteer programs have leaders who taketime to seek strong prospects, conduct personal interviews, and learnfirsthand whether the prospects are right for their organization. Newrecruits need a comprehensive orientation, followed by opportunities lotgrowth and development, as well as tespunsible, suitable assignments.The individual's preferences, work and life experiences, and educationalpreparation must be taken into account. Throughout the volunteer assignment the organization must offer challenging work and recognition forachievement. Recognition can take many forms, from a simple "thank

3:,

33

you" to plaques, certificates, or dinners. Whatever the form, the conceptshould never be overlooked.

Effective volunteers will go a long way toward ensuring the success ofan alumni program, but staff support and a variety of resources arc alsoessential. When the goals of the alumni association and the college areconsistent, the paid staff in the alumni office must pros ide the necessarybackup. This support might be the handling of simple correspondenceor more complex tasks such as developing alumni publications, co Mdi-nating fund-raising efforts, processing pledges, and scheduling meetings.The job placement department might be called on to pros ide additionalassistance for alumni, and the computer center might be asked to write aprogram for alumni records.

Too often, community colleges in the early stages of developingalumni programs du not provide this support, and alumni volunteersquickly become frustrated and alienated. Computer support, once a lux-ury for two-year college alumni groups, is now a necessity. Whereas adecade ago the only alternative to manual record keeping was to use thecollege mainframe and computer staff, low-cost microcomputers and awick range of affordable software now put computerized records withinthe reach of most alumni associations. Computerized records allow quickaccess to details of alumni interests and vocations, financial information,and ...,-sarate mailing lists for a variety of uses. Ease of mail communi-cation is important. just as an effective alumni program is unquestion-ably the key to successful fund raising, so communication is unques-tionably the key to having and keeping effective people in your alumniprogram. Naylor (1973) and Wilson (1979) provide additional guidanceon the management of volunteer programs.

To sum up, then, it is clear that two-year institutions are learningfrom their four year counterparts that alumni are a supremely importantreservoir on which to draw for dollars and many other benefits. But theserewards are usually the by-products of genuine efforts by colleges to maintain a mutually beneficial affiliation with their alumni.

References

Naylor, H. H. Volunteers Today. Finding, Training, and 'Working with Them. NewYork: Dryden Associates, 1973.

Rowland, A. W (ed./. Handbook of Institutional Advancement. A Afudern Guideto Executive Management, Institutional Relations, Fund Raising, Alumni Admin-istration, Government Relations, Publications, Periud.cals, and Enrollment Atari-agernent. (2nd ed.) San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 1986.

Wilson, M. The Effective Management of Volunteer Programs. Boulder, Colo..Volunteer Management Associates, 1979.

34

Richard J. Pokrass is di7ector of college relations andpublications at Burlington County College, Pemberton,New Jersey.

4 0

Alternative Education/Alternative Revenue

A. Contract Training: Publicand Private Sector Models

B. Media TechnologyBegets Revenue

4

Contract training not only means additional institutionalrevenue but is an important business, industry, and publicagency connection for the community college.

4.Contract Training: Public andPrivate Sector Models

Raymond Lestina, Beverly A. Curry

The comprehensive community college arose chiefly to meet the growingemphasis on higher education placed on educational institutions by thepassage of the G.I. Bill of 1944. Returning veterans could increase theirearning power and career potential by taking advantage of the educa-tional opportunities provided for them (Blocker, Plummer, and Richard-son, 1965). These new entrants to the two-year colleges not only reshapedthe college community but brought a host of external affiliations thatultimately became fresh sources of revenue.

The process occurred naturally. To ensure that programs for careerswere properly designed (that is, aligned with the needs of business, indus-try, and external organizations as well as of students), relationships withrepresentatives of the specific occupations were identified. Often theserelationships took the form of consultancies and advisory committeememberships. Soon businesses and organizations sells the communitycollege as an economical resource for upgrading the professional skills ofstaff, as well as a unique access to additional facilities, expertise, andpersonnel (Powers, Powers, Betz, and Aslanian, 1988). As training oppor-tunities were presented to instructional administrators, many campusesformed separate functional units to handie the training requests.

By the 1970s, community colleges in every region of the country were

J. L. C.atanraro and A. D. Arnold (eds.) Altemante Funding Sources.N.w Directions for Communes) Colleges, no. 68. San Frantrsro jossey-Bass, Miner 1989.

4 ,-.0'-i

37

38

engaged in full-fledged quests for training contracts with business, man-ufacturers, health care providers, government agencies, and a host ofother profit and nonprofit enterprises. Fey, colleges, however, did morethan rover expenses. In fact, the real revenue source in many cases wasthe state, since those trained were often folded into the college's overallfull-time equivalent student report to state agencies.

In the early 1980s, tuition and state revenues began to decline, andcommunity colleges turned to partnerships with businesses and agenciesto increase revenues. The Employee Development Institute (EDI), TritonCollege's major provider of training for business and industry, is anexcellent example of effective contract training for revenue enhancement.Training activity at Triton is allied with the regional economic develop-ment center, Mid Metro Regional Development, Incorporated. Mid-Metrooffers such services to the local community as advice on small businessdevelopment; export, trade and government procurement, business reten-tion; new ventures incubation, and convention and tourism development.Triton College's president chairs the community-based board of directors.

Between 1985 and 1988, Triton's EDI, with a professional accountstaff of five, averaged two hundred on-site contracts, fifty-five seminars,and eighty short-term training programs per year. Ninety percent of con-tract training programs at Triton are noncredit and 10 percent are degree-credit courses. Approximately 85 percent of the contract training pro-grams are offered at the business location, 15 percent on campus. Themajority are tailored to the specific needs of au organization. Customizedcontent is a selling point emphasized in all advertising copy.

Even with significant expansion in service contracts and revenues,competition in contract training has increased substantially over the pastfive years. Tile primary competitors include private consulting firms,proprietary schools, four-year colleges and universities, formatted self-teaching videos, professional associations, and vendor-supplied training.An aggressive marketing strategy is clearly vital to a Lommunity college'ssuccess in the contract training area.

For EDI, effective marketing begins with research. First, informationabout the types of businesses and organizations in the service deliveryarea is developed. Data are accumulated on the "typed" product or service(manufacturing, retail, banking, and so on), number and classificationof employees, scope of market, and geographic location. All the infor-mation is needed to segment the various markets and then identify thetraining needs of each market segment. A marketing plan based on theresearch outlines promotional strategies. These include direct mail (bro-chures), media advertising, personalized letter with follow-up telephonecall (only feasible in low volume), personal-contact networking throughbusiness and professional associations, and cold calls by the profosionalstaff or Triton's president to the company chief executive officer, with

43

39

follow-up by the EDI staff. This last strategy is very powerful. Rarelydoes an industry's chief executive officer turn down a request from acollege president for an appointment. Once a meeting has taken place,the process accelerates. the company representatives are more responsivewhen their chief executive officer has been involved.

A vital component in marketing strategy is the development of repeatbusiness, without which it is difficult if not impossible to generate profitconsistently. At Triton College, 50 to 60 percent of a year's contract train-ing business is with organizations that have previously contracted withthe college. The keys to this success Lre quick response, flexibility inadjusting the training program content, solving problems as they arise,and, most important, delivering high-quality training. Satisfied clientsare one of the most effective marketing tools available. they will repeat-edly purchase additional contract training from the college, inform theirpeers in other organizations of the quality of training, and write testimo-nials that can be used as copy in other marketing materials.

Triton's EDI consists essentially of a mid-management-level group ofaccount executives whose role is to solicit training contracts from busi-ness and industry, manage the development, monitor the implementa-tion of the contract training program, and serve as liaison between thecompany and the college. Once a specific lead is generated, L. - collegeaccount executive needs to follow a number of steps to turn a contactinto a contract.

The creative revenue-producing partnerships that have evolved atTriton College resulted from this type of cooperation and follow threesignificant models. the contract or "workplace" model, the cosponsor-shiplcoprovidership model, and the distance learning model.

Contract or "Workplace" Model

The traditional "workplace," or contract, model is the most common.When a business or organization has a specific educational need, con-tracts for training, whether the pre gram ". new or already developed, aredesigned to meet the needs of that particular group. In all such requestscompanies guarantee the enrollment. Programs are sited for the con-venience of the audience. Contracting for training with the localcommunity college is considerably less expensive than u5ing an outsideconsultant who might charge S200 to S300 per person for a group ofthirty to forty, Besides serving industry and the community, contractinggenerates revenue for the college.

The specific steps of the contract model arc as follows:1. Meeting with the appropriate company representative to clarify

the nature of the training need and gather additional information aboutthe potential training topics.

40

2. Identification of subject matter experts and possible instructors.3. Meeting with the company representative, subject matter expert

or instructor, and college account executive. During this meetinb, addi-tional information concerning the training program will be discussed(for example, who will be trained, assessments, refinement of content). Inaddition, the company representative will have the opportunity to inter-view the potential instructor.

4. Development of the training proposal. The college executive willwrite a proposal that includes an outline of the training program content,dates and times, costs, and method of billing. The proposal should beconcise.

5. Presentation of proposal. The account executive and companyrepresentative meet to discuss the terms of the proposal and determinewhether any revisions are necessary. At this point the proposal will eitherbe accepted, rejected, put on hold, or returned for revisions. Revisionsusually pertain to program content, length of program, or start date.

6. Acceptance of the training proposal. Once the proposal isaccepted and contract signed by the company representative, the in-structor is hired by the college and begins the implementation of theprogram.

7. Orientation and assessment. During this step the instructor doesthe following:

Learns the company's procedures, policies, and products, andbecomes familiar with the facilityMeets with appropriate company personnel (for example, super-visors, foremen, employees, personnel director)Conducts assessments as agreed in the proposalPrepares training materials and handoutsAdvises account executive if textbooks need to be ordered.

The account executive does the following:Arranges for a classroom or lab if training is to be conductedon campusOrders textbooksCoordinates all administrative details.

8. Provision of training. It is important that the account executivemaintain communication with the instructor and the company repre-sentative, so that he or she can work through any problems that arise.

9. Evaluation. All employees participating in the training programare asked to complete a written evaluation of both course and instructor.Summaries of all evaluations are sent to the company representative andinstructor. The account executive and instructor also meet with the com-pany representative to evaluate the program verbally.

10. Follow-up. Company is billed. Account executive contacts com-pany representative to discuss future contract training programs.

41

Cosponsorships Model

In addition to the EDI, already discussed, another highly effectivecontract training arm at Triton College is the Continuing EducationCenter for Health Professionals (CECHP). For the past fourteen yearsTriton's CECHP has developed high-quality educational programs, onthe cosponsorship'coprovidership model, that have a positive effect onthe professional growth of over 10,000 health care practitioners annually.A staff of health professionals with master's degrees respond quickly,creatively, and effectively to the needs of health professionals for continu-ing education in-service training.

The CECHP voluntarily sought and received institutional accredita-tion for continuing education from seven national professional organiza-tions, the Illinois Department of Professional Regulation, and the IllinoisDepartment of Public Health. For example, CECHP staff are approvedas providers of continuing education for nurses by the American Nurses'Association.

Although competition has increa_ in the last five years, Triton'sCECHP has continued to grow in enrollment and revenue because of itscommitment to quality control, the certification capability of cxternalaccreditations, and, not least, the development of marketing strategies,especially on the cosponsorship/coprovidership model.

When a program is opened up to include other business organizationsor individuals to defray costs, the cosponsorship model emerges. Cospon-sorship is a means whereby another agency or group of interested profes-sionals (associations, for example) joins a community college to providea planned learning experience. The cosponsoring agency is listed as suchin the promotional literature. The responsibilities and involvement ofeach cosponsoring agency are determined by mutual agreement. In thismodel, a number of employees from the cosponsoring agency mightattend an event without financial charge to the agency. Partners mightagree to an equal distribution of excess revenues after all bills are paid.These agreements should produce win. win situations for both parties.

In this model, which is easily adapted to working with an agency,professional organization, college, or university, initial contact is madeeither by agency or the CECHP representative identifying an educationalneed. Planning and implementation of this type of nursing continuingeducation takes at least six months.

Most CECHP activities cosponsored with the Triton College creditarea have .A cure committee for the purpose of administering and coordi-nating the event. Comprising representatives from each of the agencynursing divisions, including education, the vice-president of patient caresery ices, and the Triton College f oordinator of continuing education fornursing, the Lure committee is ultimately accountable for the high quality

42

and educational soundness of the total program. To meet these respon-sibilities, the chairperson of the core committee, the Triton CollegeCECHP, the coordinator of nursing continuing education, and the corecommittee members have final review and determine the appropriatenessand quality of the continuing education program.

Each cosponsored offering is first planned by a subcomponent of thecore committee, a task force composed usually of two to five individualswith particular expertise in the content area of the offering. This groupestablishes the objectives and content, ensures accuracy and currency, and"certifies" the competency of the instructors and handouts.

Step 1: Generation of the Broad Concept. Ideas for viable nursingcontinuing education offerings come from many sources. administratorsor staff nurses may have areas of expertise to share or may have specificneeds they know their peers have also, the core committee for the nursingcontinuing education program may make specific suggestions; and reg-istrants at all nursing continuing education offerings are given theopportunity to suggest future topics. In all instances, the first step is adiscussion of the idea with the director of the nursing division.

The task force next meets to discuss:General program objectives. what the program is supposed toaccomplishPossible target audience. level of knowledge, size, and the college'sability to tapAppropriateness of the topic to the audienceGeneral competition. how many other similar programs are beingoffered in the areaBest teaching methodologies or format and the importance of usingadult education principles, particularly regarding relevance. of topicand involvement of registrants, are stressedSelection of faculty: a preferred and a possible backup slate shouldbe chosenPotential dates. consideration of information about upcoming orstanding conferences (regional or national) in the specialty areaBest location: at hospital, Triton, or elsewhere.

Step 2: Information Gathering. During this phase, the task forceshould do the following:

Checl possible dates for conflict with other major continuing edu-cation providers in the area (this does not guarantee lack of con-flict, but lessens the chance of major problems)Check location and food service facilities, if applicableRefine program ideas, objectives, and projected format, then discussas widely as possible with potential registrants to assess their opin-ions, interest, and perceived needMake preliminary contact with desired faculty by phone of letter.

1."ii1-.A..s.

Step 3: Decision. The task force now considers the informationgathered in stage 2 and makes the critical decision whether to present theprogram offering.

If they proceed, the following activities must be accomplished:Mutually agreed contract written by CECHP staff and signed by aTriton administrator and cosponsoring agency outlining financialarrangements, responsibilities, and so onObjectives, format, and schedule finalizedDefinite date selectedFinal faculty or speaker decisions signedFinal location chosenMethods and tools evaluated as determined by American Nurses'Association (ANA) approved criteriaTask list and assignments completedin writingMarketing plans discussedContinuing education offering submitted for peer review accordingto Triton College-approved ANA criteria.

Step 4: Confirmation. At thi3 stage all program arrangements anddetails are confirmed, usually in writing; speakers or faculty are con-firmed in writing; and the brochure is developed (the printer's draftshould be approved by the core committee).

Step 5: Preprogram Stage. Approximately three to four weeks beforethe program date, a series of checks and reconfirmation procedures areimplemented:

9 Reminder-reconfirmation letters sent out to facultyModerator duties assignedProgress communication from CECHP chairper,,on of task force(for example, current registration)Final recap of all plans.

Step 6: Tit!, Program Itself. The day of the program can be almostanticlimactic, all the planning is completed and details should be ac-complished. Task force members serve mainly as the hospitality group,meeting registrants, attending to faculty, and generally mixing to serveas resource persons. Evaluations are collected at the end of the day inexchange for the continuing education certificates.

Step 7: Wrap-Up Period. After the program offering, the followingshould be accomplished:

Evaluations summarized by CECHP and sent out to speakers bythe task force with thank-you letters, honorariums includedSurvey of files in the CECHP office: copies of all correspondence,attendance lists, certificates awarded, program objectives, facultyvitae, handouts, and copies of minutes of all planning meetingsEvaluation meeting with the core committee to discuss what hap-pened and future plans or modifications for additional programming.

44

Using the wrap-up period to identify needs for additional program-ming sets the wheels into motion for an additional marketing strategy,the development of a "tracking model." Continuing education for healthprofessionals consists of learning activities intended to build on the edu-cation and experience of professional training, to enhance practice, edu-cation, administration, research, or theory development and improve anindividual's ability to deal with the health of the public A trackingmodel allows the health professional to build his or her knowledge andpractice skills. By identifying in a carefully sequenced program the skillsnecessary for developing or enhancing a clinical specialty, the trackingmodel pros ides individuals and employers a carefully planned opportu-nity to meet the needs of nursing practice.

Colleges and agencies have cooperated for years to serve the interestsof both. As collaborators they move from individual goals and solveproblems through the convergence of values and by addressing the needsof the audience to be served. Needs ate met even beyond the interests ofthe individual parties in the relationship.

References

Blocker, C. E., Plummer, R. H., and Richardson, R. C., Jr. The Two-Year College;A Social Synthesis. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1965.

Powers, D. R., Powers, M. E, Betz, E, and Aslanian, C. B. Higher Education inPartnerships with Industry. Opportunities and Strategies for Taming, Research,and Economic Development. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1988.

Raymond Lestina is associate dean for continuing educationand director of the Employee Development Institute at TritonCollege, River Grove, Illinois.

Beverly A. Curry is associate dean for the ContinuingEducation Center for Health Professionals at Triton College,having moved to that position from the nursing faculty.

Media delivery systems such as teleconferencing, InstructionalTelevision Fixed Service, and ca. le networks are examinedfor their revenue-enhancing potential.

B.Media TechnologyBegets Revenue

Jana B. Kooi

Ever since RCA's idea of broadcasting pictures long distances became areality in New York in 1936, the public has been fascinated by this elec-tronic miracle. Attempts at providing education through various broad-cast systems have been made often during the last fifty years, but withminimal success, largely because traditional classroom instruction doesnot translate well without student interaction or variety of action inpresentation.

Distance learning !s, nonetheless, an alternative means of meeting theeducational delivery needs in a community college district and at thesame time of expanding into satellite communities outside the district,even nationally. It allows instruction to be offered in nontraditional timeslots and serves a target population that may not otherwise enroll in anycollege program. Financially, the educational products developed or pur-chased generally pay for themselves.

The distance learning model, as a revenue-generating enterprise devel-oped at Triton College, focuses on traditional and nontraditional learn-ing experiences delivered in a highly functional although nontraditionalmanner. The several areas of distance learning at Triton (cable network,Instructional Television Fixed Service, and satellite video teleconferenc-

J. I., Catanaro and A. D. Arnold (eds.) Alternative Funchng Sources.New Direetions for Community Colleges. no. 68. San Francisco JosseyBass. 'Winter 1989.

rJ Uz

45

46

ing) funct;on in an essentially integrated way so the direction taken bestrepresents the needs and philosophy of the institution.

Cable Network

The mere mention of "educational cable television" can bring onyawns and immediate channel flipping, but the right combination ofproduced and purchased shows, professional and creative talent, andsponsored or supported programming can provide an exciting alternativeeducational vehicle. In fact, among Triton's continuing education offer-ings, this area has the greatest potential for revenue gain, and an equalrisk of loss. In large part, the potential for loss arises from the significantup-front investment in staff and equipment to support the programming,all before any profits come in.

The technical capabilities of a cable television system can range fromsimple to sophisticated, depending on the initial and long-term investments the college is willing to make. It may choose a system that isessentially playback, with no in-house production facilities or staff. Theprogramming format in this system comprises telecourses or other po-groms that are purchased because they are in line with the programmingphilosophy of the institution. In addition to equipment, costs includer linimal playback staff, purchase of telecourses and shows, equipmentraaintenance, licensing fees, marketing of telecourses, and costs of instruc-tors to flesh out the telecourses. This is a very cost-effective method. Afterthe initial purchase of equipment, the y'Arly revenue of telecourses out-weighs the yearly costs.

Although this system should consistently provide a modest yearlyincome, it does have drawbacks. The network cannot be used effectivelyfor public relations for the institution. Promotions of the network haveto be purchased outside, which is costly, and the integration of the pro-motions into other programming ofter looks amateurish. The overalleffect is pleasant to the public (again, depending on the quality of pur-chased programming) but smacks of "educational television."

Any system more sophisticated than this requires a major financialcommitment of equipment and staff for a combination of playback andin-house production. Of course, the addition of a production studioopens up the college's promotional possibilities for academic-based en-tertainment programming and outside production contracts. The devel-opment and management of these components can make this system afinancial drain or a major revenue source for the institution.

The real potential for revenue comes from video productions spon-sored by contracts with business and industry. At Triton College aunique partnership has occurred. The Employee Development Institute(EDI) that procures contract training for business and industry also sells

t -t) i

47

the network sponsorships and video production capabilities of the tele-vision station.

Instructional Television Fixed Service

The second area of distance learning is Instructional Television FixedService (ITFS), a broadcast license issued by the Federal CommunicationsCommission to educational organizations for the transmission of instruc-tional, cultural, and other types of educational material to one or morefixed receiving locations. The open-air signal is transmitted via micro-wave at a frequency of 2500-2700 Mega Hertz.

The primary and most productive use of ITFS is custom-designedinteractive v,deo conferencing. An excellent example is the EmergencyMedical Technician (EMT) training for firefighters developed by the Con-tinuing Education Center for Health Professionals (CECHP) at TritonCu Hew. Since all firefighters are required to go through periodic retrain-ing in EMT, a custom-designed program was developed that could beaired to multiple fire stations during firefighters' work. hours. The tapedtraining program was produced by Triton's television studio, scripted byTriton's CECHP department, and hosted by one of Triton's allied healthfaculty. The taped shows were aired several times a week with a livewraparound segment hosted by the allied health faculty. The firefighterscall in questions during the live part of the show, speaking directly to thLinstructor and professional guests, who answer the questions on air.There is an initial cost for production of the taped series, but once pro-duction is completed the only cost is the instructor, who can be used in aratio to students of one to hundreds. This model of distance learningfunctions most effectively and efficiently with an in-house productionstudio and staff. There is also a second option. the institution can func-tion solely as receive and transmission sites. This option necessarilyinvolves an agreement with other institutions or production studios toproduce the taped program and the wraparound program to be transmit-ted to and received by the institution, and in turn transmitted to receiversites in the college district or receive area.

Satellite Video Teleconferencing

The satellite v;d,o teleconferencing area is divided into two parts. (I)receive teleconferences and (2) produced teleconferences. A receive tele-conference is a packaged, presold, live program that is purchased for aminimal cost, marketed to a targeted audience and pi esented, via satellite,live at the institution. If the following steps are taken, this can be astrong revenue-generating endeavor:

1. When purchasing a teleconference, carefully check the quality and

48

content of the production. Ask to see video clips of previous programsthe company or institution has produced. Many of the current teleconfer-ences available are of mediocre quality. Even though your institution didnot produce the program, its name is the one the audience will associatewith the poor production.

The content of a teleconference is not always as advertised. In a pro-duction company's desire to make their products more salable, they mayelaborate the topic and content of the teleconference to include a largertarget audience. Ask the company specific questions about subject matterand presenters. The extra effort will be well spent.

2. When marketing a teleconference, it is preferable to involve a co-sponsoring agency or organization. This involvement will provide abuilt-in audience and more support for a marketing effort.

3. This next step is optional but can increase the quality of the eventfor the audience. A live wraparound before or after the satellite produc-tion on the same or expanded topic areas gives the audience a sense ofhaving it brought home to their needs and allows them to increase theirfield of knowledge by deeper discussion than the usual one- or two-hourteleconference provides. The wraparound and the received teleconferencecan also be sent to other receiver sites via ITFS, if more space is needed,or can be taped and shown at other times.

There is another important issue, a financial one, in the decision toproduce and distribute video teleconferences. The initial Lust of uplinkcapability or rental is the only one the institution must absorb, thereneed be no future Lust, because grants, sponsorships, and corporate twin-ing contracts can ease the burden and actually ploy t'de substantial revenueif the college is successful in procuring endorsements. Just as with thecable network, the institution must find cosponsoring groups. it wouldbe less than prudent to produce a teleconference without a cosponsor anda guaranteed target audience. The competition from comincicial telecon-ference disuibuturs is tun great_ to produce teleconferencing merely w iththe hope that it will sell. There are other points to fem.:act to ensure asuccessful teleconference. (I) Video teleconferencing dues not sell itself.There should be a private audience designated to receive the production,such as a training session for corporation managers. Also, it is importantin marketing the teleconference not only to mail information but toestablish personal contacts within ca: i reception site. This is the bestway to procure business and guarantee return business. (2) Once theteleconference has been sold to a reception site, very specific urittencommunications must take place with the designated site coordinator.Many problems occur when a coordinator dues not understand the !Acmedures and communications systems.

In summary, then, video teleconferencing, ITFS, and cable networkare all available as means fur the community college not only to sent the

49

educational nucls of its community in the broadest geographical waybut also to enhance its revenues. Like commercial TV, however, educa-tional TV is a risk./ business. Because the %iewing public is used to theglitz and professionalism of commercial television, unless an institutionis willii,, to commit to high standards in technical productions, on-airtalent, professional staff, and marketing efforts, distance learning as asignificant revenue resource is not a %iable option. If the challenges aremet, however, distance learning can be one of the most exciting andprofitable endeavors an institution can make.

Jana B. Kooi is associate vice-president for external academicaffairs at Triton College, River Grove, Illinois.

tZ

Economic development z., tied in most states to the communitycollege's role in training and retraining of employees to meetindustry needs.

Economic Development,the Community College,and Technology Training

Steve Maradian

Economic Reality

Two -year colleges are often appealed to for economic developmentservices ranging from basic literacy plograms to high technology trainingin areas such as computer-assisted design (CAD), computer-integratedmanufacturing (CIM), and statistic process control (SPC). This recentand important trend among community colleges fine-tunes economicdeNciopment activities to Nery specific needs of local communities andthe state. State anc, local go%ernment agencies are increasingly interestedin joint economic development efforts with two -year colleges, particuLilywhen the linkage results in the creation of more jobs and impro%es thequality of life for the communities served.

Two-year colleges are called on because they are best prepared to pro-vide a full range of services that access technology. They ensure that localindustry possesses the technological know-how to de%elop the productsand services to improve their production and seri, ice capabilities, by train-ing employees in the use of those new technologies. Those economicdevelopment training programs ha%e been funded in many ways, includ

J. L Cataniaro and A. D. Arnold (eds.). Alternative Funding Sources.New Directions for Community Colleges. no. 68. San Francisco. Jossey-Bass. D'inier 1989.

L_Laff.7

52

ing state subsidy, local tax levies, and direct fees. Training services havemade an important contribution to economic recovery, but their potentialfor expansion in response to the training needs of business and industryis important at a time when state, federal, and local resources are hardpressed to support the new initiatives required by a technological society.

The critical issue is funding. "There are, certainly, strains and ques-tions arising from the growing collaboration. Community colleges'expanding ties with business and labor are requiring adjustments inprocedures and financing, such as putting together packages of trainingfunds from several government programs" (Fields, 1988, p. 30). Thisissue must be addressed constructively, recognizing the limits of publicresources.

In the long term, the most important action in which communityand technical colleges must become inched is the development of publicpolicy. There must be, in the true sense, public funding of education.That remains the best hope for sustaining the level of activity expectedof the two-year college. James Mc Kenney, associate director of the Keep-ing America Working Project at the American Association of Communityand Junior Colleges notes: "No state .. . has flatly rejected the idea ofusing tax funds to help pay for some of the instruction needed by indus-try, and I don't know of any state where there has been a big publicdebate over such use of tax funds" (Fields, 1988, p. 33). College presidentsmust become active at the local, state, and national levels to shape fund-ing policies that provide the resources for these very necessary services.

For the short term, given the reality of funding limitations, commu-nity college leaders have already begun to cultivate alternative fundingsources aggressively. New sources must be found if they are to continueto provide the level and range of educational and economic develop-ment activities their service districts expect. How they are found is fre-quently a reflection of the institution's creativity, resourcefulness, andaggressiveness.

Ambiguity of Definition

It is also important to consider what is meant by the term alternativefunding. Specifically, any source with potential that has not previouslybeen tapped might be considered alternative. In this way, what is stan-dard in one district or state may not be so considered in another. InMassachusetts, fox example, funding for educational programs offeredin the evening, off campus, or on weekends, for credit or noncredit, isexcluded from public funding. Such programs are required to be self-supporting. The prohibition against using state resources fen these activ-ities limits the institution's capacity to respond to the needs of businessand industry. Thus, in Massachusetts, funding fox such programs might

5 6

53

be considered alternative. Conversely, the state of Florida supports mostinstructional programs regardless of when the course is offered or whatits structure. The definition of alternative shifts from state to state, some-times even from locale to locale.

In Ohio, business and industry training and retraining are majorinitiatives articulated by the board of regents, the chancellor, and thegovernor. Nevertheless, and even though public subsidy to support theseefforts is virtually nonexistent, the two-year colleges in Ohio have beensignificantly instrumental in the state's recent economic turnaround.Industry is seeking well-trained technicians in particular, and the two-year college is a ready source of such talent. Without state subsidy, Ohioadministrators have become adept at tapping nontraditional fundingresources to support these activities.

Belmont Technical College, in southeastern Ohio, is located in anarea once dominated by steel, coal, and glass manufacturing. The collegehas helped rebuild a community devastated by high unemployment dueto the migration of industry, plant closings, and strained labor- manage-ment relations. Concentrated efforts have been directed at all aspects ofeconomic development, including the formation of an incubation cen-ter in concert with the county development agency, worker trainingand retraining programs, consulting services to industries, technologytransfer, and redevelopment and restoration efforts of abandoned struc-tures as part of the college's new mission.

Faced with the opportunity to expand its educational program inmining technology, along with a desire to redevelop abandoned land, thecollege sought and received funds from the state department of naturalresources and local township trustees to reclaim laud abandoned by for-mer coal-mining companies. The college was able to support the recla-mation costs involved in transforming twenty acres of unusable land intoa community recreational area.

In terms of educational value, the reclamation project served as alearning laboratory for students in the mining program. The funds gen-erated from the project supplemented and enhanced the state subsidyprovided by full-t:me equivalent student enrollments. An added benefit,unanticipated by the college, was the discover} within the reclamationarea of coal valued at approximately $310,000 (preextraction value),which was sold at a profit of $75,000.

Throughout the five-year life of this project, approximately $500,000was generated from "nontraditional" sources. In addition, the effort pro-vided valuable educational opportunities for students and served to pro-mote important econum:c and community development activities. Oneadditional benefit realized by the college has been the annual contribut-ing of "gifts" from local mining companies and professional coal-miningassociations.

t) i

54

The college's reclamation efforts were so successful that they haveexpanded into the area of preservation and restoration of historicallysignificant buildings. For that project, the college solicited financial sup-port from the National Trust for Historic Preservation to develop a -pres-ervation and restoration" technology degree program. Federal EconomicDevelopment Administration funds were also sought and will be use.1 to"leveragz" state instructional subsidies. Although the college did notanticipate entering real estate development as a business, the programserves many purposes. it spurs economic development, rebuilds the com-munity, safeguards cultural aspects of the community, and prepares stu-dents for exciting career opportunities.

Edison State Community College, in central Ohio, also used collegeproperty to generate revenues, but in a very different way from BelmontTechnical College. Edison took advantage of the fact that tracts of collegeland were not in use, capitalized on the opportunity, and rented vacantproperty to local farmers. Although the income is not significant interms of total budget dollars, it demonstrates that two-year colleges aretruly expansive in their search for r^ntraditional funding.

One important outcome of economic development is improvement ofthe quality of life of the community. Two-year colleges promote qualityof life by nurturing a skilled work force, turning despair in communitiesto hope and prosperity. Numerous Ohio colleges have been successful inattracting state department of development support for skill upgradingof the existing industrial work force. One example of a successful linkageis the college's contracting with a local steel manufacturing company toupgrade the skills of its work force. Funded again by state agencies,Belmont Technical College was able to develop a training operation forsome hundred employees in "high-tech" manufacturing processes. Theproject is similar to entrepreneurial efforts in community colleges acrossthe country and illustrates the community college's capabilities in theseareas.

The training effort expanded Belmont economic development effortsin the upgrading of skills and established a three way partnership agree-ment with the United Steelworkers of America, the college, and the steelmanufacturing company. Without this alternative support, the schoolwould have found it very difficult to fund the program. Instructionalsubsidies would simply have been inadequate. "Leveraging" of dollarsmatching one agency's funding with subsidy dollars along with incomefrom student fees put the venture in a sound footing. In addition, thebasis fora long -term relationship with a major manufacturer and a unionhas been developed, so that the next joint project may be easier.

Much attention has been directed in the literature to business-industrypartnerships that link community colleges with larger industries. Journalarticles highlight success stories such as Tyler Junior College's program

55

to save 1,400 Goodyear Tire manufacturing jobs, Delta College's trainingcenter at General Motors, Ohio's Thomas Edison programs, SinclairCommunity College's programs with General Motors, the KeepingAmerica Working Project partnership, and the College of Lake County'sprograms with the U.S. Department of Defense.

Belmont Technical College's efforts with workers recently displacedby plant shutdowns combined the college with local industry representa-tives and officials of the United Steelworkers' union, representing some240 workers who had lost their jobs. The college staff called togetherstate economic assistance teams representing the Job Training Partner-ship Act (JTPA), union officials, plant owners, and public officials todevelop a dislocated workers training program.

As a result of aggressive action, the college was included in theshutdown agreement between the union and company owners, whichincluded $750 in educational assistance for each eligible dislocated work-er. The college, with union support, leveraged JTPA Title III dollars,industry dollars, and state subsidy to provide a comprehensive assessmentand training program for workers who lacked the skills to compete in awork force. The funds combined to provide some S3,300 per person fortraining available over eighteen months. In this way, nontraditional dol-lars targeted to specialized needs supported the primary purpose of atwo-year college and at the same time expanded the use of those dollarsfor other college services.

Another Belmont College enterprise shows how external funding canbe used to meet institutional and student needs. As in other rural com-munity or technical colleges, Belmont students face many barriers toeducational. success. Child-care services are high on the list. The collegesought funds to expand its day care services and to provide "night care"services as well. Working with local welfare department -161 ials, thecollege gained eligibility for approximately 90 percent of the familiesutilizing day-care services. The welfare department thus "subsidizes" theLost of day-care services. Not only has the barrier been removed, but theadditional dollars are used by the college to enhance business and indus-try programs.

The college further identified a need for day care among eveningstudents who are also confronted by this barrier to access. Through aState Department of Education grant ,..ormally directed to secondaryschools), a unique "Nightwatch" program was made available to stu-dents. An added benefit is increased crirollmcnts during evening hours,with corresponding increased instructional subsidies that Lan be directedto nonrevenue activities in the busincss and industry services division.

What can be seen from this discussion is that community and techni-cal colleges, both large or small, are essential to economic development,regardless of the size of the community or whether it is rural, urban, or

56

suburban. The interim question of who pays the bills rerizains a campus-based one. Cultivating local resources, seeking priate dollars, developingand acquiring funds available through state, federal, and local resources(that historically have not been directed to higher education) are part ofthe answer. In the meantime, community college leaders must not relaxand wait for public policy to catch up with the demands. They must seeknontraditional funding opportunities to sustain economic developmentactivities begun throughout the last decade, demonstrating again theimportance of two-year colleges in American life.

Reference

Fields, C. "Community Colleges Discover They Are at the Right Place at theRight Time." Governing, February 1988, pp. 30-35.

Steve Maradian is president of Belmont Technical College,St. Clairsville, Ohio.

60

Adaptation, Darwin's concept for survival, is precisely what thischapter suggests: nonprofit community college undertaking for-profit ventures.

Entrepreneurship inthe Community College:Revenue Diversification

Richard W. Brightman

Then and Now

The heyday of community colleges in the 1960s and early 1970s,marked by almost unlimited resources for expansion, will not return.This is not to say that the need to serve more students with a greatervariety of courses Las been fully met. To the contrary, a larger percentageof high school graduates now goes to college than twenty years ago (61percent versus 40 percent), and the number of older students is alsoincreasing (34 percent of all college students are over twenty-five [Fried-rich, 1982]).

The Carnegie Council on Policy Issues in Higher Education (1980)lists community colleges as the least vulnerable to enrollment declinesamong institutions of higher education because "they enjoy strong sup-port and appeal to . . enlarging categories of students: minorities ...adults, and part-time students" (p. 58). Community colleges cont;nue toacid to their functions, particularly in nonvocational and nonacademicareas. The predicament, then, is not reduced public interest in collegiateeducation but rather reduced finances.

J. (.111.1111/a10 and A. D. Arnold (eds.). Alternattte funding Sources,New Directions for C.ommunits Colleges. no. 68 San Francisco) JosseyBass, Winter 1989

Li 1.

57

58

The first response of two-year colleges to the financial crisis has beenone of resistance. In the early 1980s in California, for example, heavylobbying and desperate press conferences, in an effort to sustain pro-grams, were routine. Maintenance was postponed, personnel laid off,expenditures for supplies and equipment reduced, and reserves spent, allwith the hope that improved economic circumstances and contrite law-makers would reverse the situation.

The dire predictions for community colleges have continued.Enrollment of traditional full-time college-age students is down, anddemographic studies predict that the size of the traditional college-agegroup (eighteen to twenty-four) will h; ve fallen about 25 percent bythe turn of the century (Carnegie Council on Policy Issues in HigherEducation, 1980). Colleges now concede that both public and privatesupport for higher education will likely decline in the years aheadas well.

Although some of the funding reductions have been offset by moreefficient operations, the preponderant practice now is retrenchment, cut-ting back or eliminating programs to balance distressed budgets. A studyconducted by the Southern Regional Education Board of twenty retrench-ing colleges observed this pattern (Mingle, 1981, p. 52):

A drop in freshman enrollments leads to expenditure cuts, resulting inphysical deterioration of the campus, cuts in counseling and in studentservices, personnel cuts, and sagging morale among faculty who remain.The attitudes of students also are affectcu as they witness the conflict anddeterioration of services. (In some institutions, faculty and staff haddirectly enlisted students as political allies in fighting staff reductions.)The results were declines in retention rates and, thus, another round ofretrenchment.

It is clear that reduced budgets have a dispiriting effect on communitycollege faculty and students. In the past, we may have taken perversesatisfaction in turning away students because we have been full to capac-ity. Now we fear that even though we admit them, they may turn awayfrom shabby surroundings and run-down equipment.

Coming to Terms with the Situation

There is little point in waiting for government to shore up finances.The federal administration is striving to shift responsibilities from thefederal government to stat,:, local, and private agencies and has suc-ceeded in reducing almost every federal student support activity. Socialsecurity benefits for dependent children have been phased out. Pellgrants have been reduced. Supplemental Educational Opportunity

59

Grants have been cut. These reductions represent more than half of allfederal outlays for higher education. Besides that, community colleges'participation in federal support for students has never been strong. in1979, a typical yea , two-year colleges received only 18 percent of allfederal spending for higher education. That was also only 7.4 percentof all sources of community college revenues in 1979 (Breneman andNelson, 1981).

Contrary to federal policy, there is no reason to believe that stategovernments will be able to pick up the tab. State government expendi-tures for higher education may appear to have increased steadily over theyears, but when adjusted for inflation, these appropriations have actuallydecreased.

At the same time that there have been concerns over declining enroll-ments and financial support, there have also been concerns for maintain-ing the quality of higher education. Mingle (1981, p. 7), in Challenges ofRetrenchment, summarizes these as follows:

Fears that increased competition for students results in "body count-ing" and "survival of the slickest"A need for a code of "fair practices" and for a strengthening of theaccreditation processThe weakening of academic standards and of rigor in such pro-grams as teacher education and the decline in general of merito-cratic values in higher educationThe decline in faculty compensation relative to that of otherprofessionals.

Here is the predicament. We must maintain the quality of our pro-grams and even improve it; we must open our doors to increasing num-bers who seek our services; and we must do so with reduced publicfinancial support.

Resistance as a viable policy has failed. Another alternative, to cutprograms, has already been tried, for example, in California in the mid1980s, a.ter the legislature expressed an unwillingness to continue fi-nancing vocational, recreational, and self-help courses. The next way toadapt is to search for new funding sources.

Coping with the predicament in any systematic way requires a com-prehensive approach to developing new sources of revenue for commu-nity colleges. One component of that approach is for colleges to go intobusiness. Community colleges have enormous resources, which have tra-ditionally been used almost exclusively for their publicly supported edu-cational and community service programs and otherwise be idle. Theseresources can earn rev..nues to support nonprofit activities. For-profitventures can be thought of as revenue diversification.

as tc,.;

60

Efforts to Widen Sources of Income

Diversification of revenue sources has been practiced by commercialand industrial enterprises for centuries. It serves the purpose of reducingthe risk to the organization of relying on one source for all or most of itsincome. Thus business organizations engage in both vertical and hori-zontal integration and expand into totally unrelated business ventures. Itwas not surprising to read that Philip Morris bought the Mission ViejoCompany, a real estate development firm, or that F. W. Woolworth, adime store chain, also operates shoe stores and men's clothing outlets.Should we then be surprised at the notion that public community col-leges use their assets, otherwise idle, to go into business?

Revenue diversification after all is not new to higher education. Spe-cific examples are easy to locate: Stanford earns millions of dollars peryear from its industrial park in Palo Alto; Skidmore College in NewYork manufactures heating fuel from drain oil, saving hundreds of thou-sands per year; the University of Wisconsin has operated a shoppingcenter and office facility for twenty-five years, Emory-Riddle AeronauticalUniversity repairs and rebuilds small aircraft and operates a travel agency;Grinnell College bought a commercial television station, managed itwell by hiring professional broadcasters, and sold it five years later for asubstantial profit (Barton, Stevens, and Massarsky, Ltd., 1982).

In recent years, a variety of nonprofit organizations have turned toprofit-making ventures to provide revenues to support their programs.The Denver Children's Museum earns over 90 percent of its annual bud-get through money-making ventures, the Metropolitan Museum of Artin New York grosses well over $25 million a year by selling art reproduc-tions; the Delancey Street Foundation, a halfway house for ex-addicts,ex-convicts, and ex-prostitutes, operates a restaurant on Union Street inSan Francisco, and Baltimore's Southeast Community Organization prof-its from a lease-back arrangement with retail stores (Williams, 1982b).

The growth of entrepreneurial spirit in nonprofit organizations is aresponse to reduced public support for social services and the failure ofprivate philanthropy to fill the void. For-profit ventures are risky andare not automatically successful, but, if investigated with care and witha willingness to hire business and financial expertise, they surely holdno less promise for community colleges than for other nonprofitorganizations.

For the purposes of community colleges, a diversification activity isdefined as a business venture, either developed or acquired, for which thecommunity college or college district is responsible as a result of itsownership for all or a controlling share of the venture. The purpose ofthe activity is to make a profit that can be used to help support educa-tional and other related activities.

6 ,

61

Being Forewarned

Fc:-profit activities can be operated by any nonprofit institution. Butbefore involving themselves in these activities, the college board of trus-tees and high-level administrators need to come to terms with frequentaccusations directed at for-profit ventures:

"It Must Be Illegal." Although no investigation has suggested thatit is illegal for community colleges, as nonprofit institutions, to earnmoney, the allegation is made. Colleges are commonly an arm of thestate and are more usually considered to be fund-spending than fund-earning institutions. Nevertheless, colleges do earn funds, and in a num-ber of ways. The Internal Revenue Service encourages nonprofit organi-zations to engage in profit making ventures (Hopkins, 1982).

"The State Will Take the Money Away." This is a political commentrather than an economic one. In most states the level of support for thecommunity colleges has been equally a political question. States willusually ignore any community college's alternative sources of revenue.

"It Competes with Local Business." This comment reflects concernthat community support for the college will be lost if the college entersthe marketplace in competition with local enterprise. A strong argumentcan be mounted that the local community will benef.t from the college'sinc easing independence from tax revenues.

"It Diverts Resources from the Primary Function of the College."This will be true if it is permitted. To be successful at both nonprofiteducational purposes and for-profit ventures, colleges must ensure thatthere is a clear distinction between them in the allocation of our re-sources. Just as it is a mistake to appoint a development off, er on a part-time basis and expect fund-raising success, it is a mistake to expect aharried dean to start a business venture in his or her spare time. Successwith this idea will take the full attention of those who are not involvedwith other affairs of the college.

"Who Gets the Profits?" The answer to this question must be deter-mined through the regular budget process. If the program is related tofood service, for example, the food smite faculty are granted the proceedsto maintain and improve their program. If the operation becomes extraor-dinarily profitable, they should expect the profits to be used to supportother programs as well.

"It's Contrary to Our Ideals." Educating our youth and other mem-bPrs of our community is such a valuable social service that the publicshould be more than willing to support it with taxes. Nevertheless, taxrevenues are declining. Nonprofit institutions that have been reluctant toenter profit-seeking operations are ha% .ng a change of heart. "The oldattitude of we won't dirty our hands like that' is breaking down, accord-ing to an official of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund. "A lot of people are

62

realizing that constant fund raising, and sometimes begging, aren't muchfun either" (Williams, 1982a).

Two Types of For-Profit Activities

The reality is that community colleges across the country are alreadyinto business ventures. In discussing these, it is important to distinguishbetween two types of for-profit activities. those that are related to thenonprofit purposes of the colleges and those that are not. If the for-profitactivities are unrelated to the nonprofit purposes, the profits are taxal. e,according to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). For example, if a collegeleases space in a local shopping center and starts a video arcade, heprofits from this venture are taxable unless there is a substantive rela-tionship between operating an arcade and the nonprofit purposes of thecollege. One must pay attention to the tax-exempt status that the collegeenjoys as a nutriment institution. Whether or not that status is jeopar-dized by for-profit ventures depends un how the ventures are organizedand the amount of revenue generated.

The literature suggests that as long as the profit-making activities areorganized separately, that is, are separate corporations with no overlap-ping directorates, and as long as the revenue from for-profit venturesdoes not exceed 35 percent :A the college's total income, there is no dan-ger that the IRS will revoke the college's tax-exempt status. Moreover,the degree to which the nonprofit organization participates in equityownership of the for-profit corporation should not exceed 80 percent(Williams, 1982a).

Sappose that a college invests three-quarters of the required capital, aprivate investor provides the remainder, and a corporation is formedwith a directorship consisting of per3ons who du not serve as members ofthe Bove' .ling board of the college. The corporation establishes a v ideoarcade in a shopping center, earns profits, and pays income tax t.n them.The after-tax profits are distributed to the owners (the college and theprivate investor) in the form of dividends. As long as the dividends dunot exceed 35 percent of the total college revenue:, its tax-exempt statusis not threatened. Dividends are not subject to further tax because of thecollege's tax-exempt status. The source of the funds for the college's 75percent share in the corporation is another question. California law, asinterpreted in the regulations of the various counties, for example, re-quires community colleges to spend their resources fur the purposes thatappear in their official budgets and, mute generally, fur educational andother nonprofit activities of the district. Budgeting funds fur a profit-making venture unrelated to the college's educational program may notbe contrary to either California statutes or county regulations, but maynevertheless raise legal questions that Would take a long time to resolve.An alternative way to make the investment is through the college's form-

t-.) )

dation. It, too, is a tax-exempt entity, but it is not presented from invest-ing and managing its funds as it sees fit, at least in California.

The situation is much less complex when the for-profit venture is sub-stantively related to the nonprofit purposes of the college. Assume that acollege decides to start a banquet and catering service, providing food foireceptions, weddings, community gatherings, and the like. The food isprepared in the college cafeteria when its valuable assets would otherwisestand idle. Most important, the food is prepared by students enrolled in thecollege's culinary arts program. In this situation, participation by studentsas a part of their educational program links this project to the nonprofitpurposes of the college. Unlike the arcade venture, which paid corporateincome tax, the banquet service would pay no taxes on its profits.

For-profit ventures, both related and unrelated to the nonprofit pur-poses of a community college, could be organized and operated under theauspices of an existing college foundation. This approach has the ad-vantage of utilizing a financial organization already available to mostcommunity colleges. The foundation, however, is nut without problems.it is also a .ionprofit organization subject to IRS regulations concerningprofit-making activities. These include, as discussed, the need for a sepa-rate organization for the profit-making operation, with no overlappingdirectorates, and the requirement that profits earned not exceed 35 percentof the foundation's total revenues. Most community college foundationsare fairly small, with modest revenues. A successful venture might easilyproduce profits that exceed 35 percent of the foundation's total revenues.

In the beginning, however, there is little risk. The college will mostlikely init:ate enterprises related to its regular nonprofit purposes byemploying assets already available on campus. Most significant, it willadopt generally accepted accounting practices to calculate its costs. Thisis an important feature of the for-profit venture. As with other publicagencies, public community colleges have no asset or overhead account-ing systems. As a result, the costs of programs do not take into accountthe depredation of buildings, equipment, and other fixed assets, nor dothey allow for reasonable allocations of employee benefits, utility andinsurance costs, custodial services, and general administrative overhead.In an operation such as a banquet service, those indirect costs, whenadded to such direct costs as supplies, labor, advertising, and delivery,reduce paper profits substantially. They do not, howeser, reduce cashrevenues attributable to the operation. Such revenues ale thus considereda direct contribution to the institution.

Structural Organization of the Venture

Sooner or later, however, if the venture is successful, the issue oforganization will bet 'me preeminent. At that point, the college will bewell advised to organize its profit-making venture separately.

64

In summary, there are three primary alternatives:1. Organize for-profit ventures unrelated to the college's nonprofit

purpose. Establish a separate corporate organization for the ventures.Capitalize the corporation with funds horn the college's foundation, withat least 20 percent of the capitalization from private investors.

2. Organize for-profit ventures related to the college's nonprofit pur-poses. Establish a separate corporate organization with financing hon.the college foundation and private investors, as in 1 above.

3. Organize for-profit ventures related to the colleges nonprofit purposes. Bs ause revenues from these ventures alt.. nontaxable, the venturesmay be operated direct!) by the college foundation. Limits un profits theIRS places on tax-exempt institutions and the constraint against over lap-ping directorates should be carefully observed.

Of these alternatives, I and 2 hold the most promise fur the long run.Alternative 3 works fine as long as the enterprise dues little more thanbreak even. In that situation, the foundation serves as no more thana receiving agent fir fees paid to the college for goods and sere icesprovided.

What Is Currently Happening

In an effort ascertain the degree to which California communitycolleges were engaged in fur-profit ventures as early as 1982, each districtwas sent a brief questionnaire. Of the seventy districts, thirty-six re-sponded. Thirteen described activities they were either operating ur plan-ni. to to orrate for a profit. It is safe to assume that the districts that didnot respo a are not engaged in revenue diversification ventures, eventhough they may be engaged in operations similar to those reported bythe responding institutions. The following paragraphs summarize thetypes of positive responses.

Catering Food Service to the Community. Most conitnunity collegeshave an elaborate loud-preparation facility. Adding some equipmern,perhaps, and scheduling operations at times when the facility is notpreparing food fur un campus consumption makes it possible, to take fulladvantage if valuable food preparation assets. Santa Barbara CommunityCollege, for example, caters food to airlines at the Santa Babara airport.

Retail Sales. In view of the heavy traffic on community college cam-puses, retail merchandising offers an exciting opportunity to generaterevenue. College bookstores typically sell mule than just books and schoolsupplies, and there is no reason why the idea cannot be expanded. TheAssociated Students of Orange Coast College, for example, have operateda fashion store on campus fur more than twenty-five years. For sometime, Compton College has been operating a hospital gift shop.

Leasing Facilities and Granting Concessions. One would suspect that

65

community colleges lease facilities and grant concessions to a great extent,although the responses to the questionnaire did not bear out that idea.Possibly these practices were not seen in the 1980s as profit-making inthe same sense as contract inst. uction or retail sales. Nevertheless, thepractice is probably widespread.

Conclusions

Successful revenue diversification for community colleges w I:1 takeadvantage of available physical assets that can be pressed into profit-making service. Kitchen equipment for a catering operation and a libraryfor a computerized information-gathering service are ready, examples.Successful ventures will also take advantage of opportunities and featurespeculiar to the institution. The College of the Siskiyous, for instance, isuniquely situated to sell log-wood homes and furniture and has a relatedinstructional program.

Organizing and implementing for-profit activities will require con-siderable discussion, legal advice, and consultation with experts in busi-ness organization, taxation, accounting, and market research. It will alsotake managerial and business talent, particularly in the field of market-ing. The appointment of a full-time business manager for revenue diver-sification activities is recommended. The college might have someone onstaff who could undertake that responsibilitya person who knows whatto do and how to do

Help is available. The Small Business Administration (SBA) and itsService Corps of Retired Executives (SCORE) in the SBA's Los Angelesoffice can provide a wealth of knowledge. Other sources of help andinformation include the American Federation of Small Business, Chi-cago, the Institute for New Enterprise Development, Belmont, Maine; theNational Business T -gue, Washington, D.C., and the National Councilfor Small Business Development, Milwaukee.

The college board of trustees should review information about reve-nue diversification and, if so disposed, should make a commitment for afull-scale investigation of the opportunities within the district's resources.The following steps could then be taken:

1. Review by the college's top administrative staff2. Establishment of a collegewide (or districtwide) steering committee

consisting of both administrators and faculty3. Identification of possible revenue diversification projects for further

investigation by the steering COMMitiCP4. Establishment of consulting teams for each activity, the teams

should include administrators, faculty, and advisers from the busi-ness community and should have expertise in the activity beinginvestigated

66

5. Selection of two or three for-profit ventures to implement as pilotprograms

6. Consultation with legal and tax experts for the purpose of es-tablishing the best organizational and operational plan for theventures

7. Start-up of the ventures8. Evaluation of the ventures after one year of operation, to discover

not so much how profitable they are as how well the diversificationprocedures work

9. Modification of procedures as needed. Continue by adding morefor-profit ventures as the opportunities arise.

Revenue diversification will not solve college financial problems. Ini-tial ventures are more likely to cover just costs and contribute a little tooverhead than to earn significant profits. But even that contribution maymake them worthwhile. Unlike the private business concern, which mustrisk consictc.:ale capita! to go into business, community colleges canutilize existing assets in the form of both physical facilities and person-nel, so that the risk can be minimized.

References

Barton, Stevens, and Masarsky, Ltd. "Higher Education Diversification Study.Unpublished manuscript, Barton, Stevens, and Massarsky, Ltd., Palo Alto,Calif., 1982.

Breneman, D. W, and Nelson, S. C. Financing Community Colleges, an EconomicPerspective. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1981.

Carnegie Council on Policy Lsues in Higher Education. Three Thousand Futures.The Next Twenty Years for Higher Education. San Francisco. Jossey-Bass, 1980.

Friedrich, 0. "Five Ways to Wisdom." Time, September 27,1982, pp. 66-72.Hopkins, B. "The Tax implications of Profit-Making Ventures." Grantsmanship

Center News, 1982,10 (46), 38-41.Mingle, J. R., and Associates. Challenges of Retrenchment. Strategies for Conso-

lidating Programs, Cutting Costs, and Reallocating Resources. San Francisco.Jossey-Bass, 1981.

Williams, R. M. "Two Ma Made It and One That Didn't." GrantsmanshipCenter News, 1982a, 10 (46), 26-31.

Williams, R. M. "Why Don't We Set Up a Profit-Making Subsidiary?" Grants-manship Center News, 1982b. 10 (45), 14-23.

Richard W. Brightman is director of educational services atCoast Community College District, Costa Mesa, California.

7

Commercial development of college land requires the deft handof the college's board of trustees. Schoolcraft College hasintegrated the public and private sectors compatibly.

A Case for CommercialDevelopment of CollegeProperty

Richard W. McDowell, W. Kenneth Lindner

Community college rettnue has traditionally been limited to suchsources as local property taxes, appropriations from state legislatures,tuition, and grants. Man} t.dleges have also formed foundations toatratt privatesector support in 'various forms, including gifts. Occa-sionally, colleges hate tried other, somewhat less traditional meansof generating retenues. One of these, the sale or leasing of collegeland, was attempted with significant success by Schuulcraft College inLivonia, Michigan.

Schoolcraft's twenty -fife -year history, like that of many other com-munity colleges in the country, is one of retenuts that hate not kept patewith institutional financial needs. Faced with the cost of modernisinginstructional equipment and maintaining aging buildings, Schuolcraftalso needed additional facilities to consolidate its student serticcs areasand to mote business sett ices from temporary quarters. In light of theseneeds, Schoolcraft chose to allocate a portion of the college's land forcommercial enterprise. This plan prutided retenues sufficient to pro% idethe college with a multimillion dollar endowment.

J, 1.. Catanzato and A. I), Mn 1d (eds.), Altemalwe Fundsng Sourtes.New I)irections for Communny Colleges. no 68. San Fr.inc tuo Jomty-Bass. Winter 1989. 67

68

The plan was accomplished with minimal risk to the institution andrepresents yet another option for revenue generation available to com-munity colleges.

Consideration of a New Concept

The commercial development of Schoolcraft College property wasfirst proposed by a ma;car airline that expressed interest in purchasing aportion of college land for a regional reservations center. Faced with thisproposal, trustees conducted an intensive review of the implications ofthe idea of land development. They worked through each of these ques-tions to determine whether or not to proceed:

I. Does the college own land that will not be needed in the futureto accommodate enrollment growth, evolution of programs, orexpanded college facilities?

2. Can the college legally use public land for private commercialenterprise?

3. To what degre. do trustees see their role as holders of land as apublic trust?

4_ What will commercial development do to the campus environment?5. Will the development project be successful?6. What advantages will the development project offer the college?7. How will anticipated revenues be utilized?Updating the campus master plan was the first order of business, to

determine whether any surplus land existed as well do the degree to whichit could be turned over frdi noncoikge use. Over several months, informa-tion was gathered aboui area demographics, prujecLed student enrollment,anticipated additions and deletions to the curriculum, and the need foradditional on- and if-campus facilities to accommodate these changes.When the trustees sat down to make their decision, they had a solid basisfrom which to project future needs.

The college then asked its legal counsel for an opinion about whetherdesignated college land could be sot or leased and if so under whatconditions. The attorney believed that if the college determined it hadexcess land, the land could be sold. If the land might be needed at somefuture time, however, then it would be better to develop it under a leaseagreement.

When the first two concerns had been resolved, the issue turned tothe effect sharing of land with a commercial enterprise would have unthe college environment. After hearing presentations from developers onproposed uses fir the property, the trustees came to some decisions.whatever the plan, the developer would have to assure the college of thedevelopment's potential success, enter into a contract that would guar-antee revenues to the college, and stipulate that if at any point the

69

project were to be abandoned, the land and all improvements would bereturned to the college.

Ultimately, Schoolcraft trustees adopted the philosophy that collegeland is a capital asset, which, if it is to be utilized in an unconventionalway, must generate significant revenue for site improvement or buildingexpansion. The income from the development would be endowed andthe interest earnings would be available to promote endeavors consistentwith the college mission.

Formulation of the Plan

It was determined through the planning process that the college hadseventeen acres of land located at the edge of the campus, adjacent to aninterstate highway exit. Mal land was not immediately needed to fulfillthe college's master plan, so trustees decided to make it available fordevelopment. The board began the public process by conducting a hear-ing to give citizens the opportunity to express concerns, if any, aboutproposed commercial development. The sparse attendance and lack ofany real issues assured trustees that there were no major objections fromthe community.

Nevertheless, as elected representatives of the college district, School-craft trustees saw the need to ensure the long-term interests of the in-stitution and decided not to sell college property. After considerablediscussion, it was agreed that the development project, if undertaken,should stipulate that the land would be leased rather than sold. Thatarrangement would allow for the option of returning the land and all itsimprovements to the college after a specified period of time.

To determine the relative benefits to the college of the lease arrange-ment, an income schedule was developed to indicate the annual andcumulative payments to the college, the interest income this moneywould earn if endowed, and the total balance in the endowment fund ifno appropriations were made. This information was important in de-ciding how large the fund should be and in developing a plan forexpenditures.

Formation of a Development Authority

The final order of business was the establishment of a developmentauthority to shield the college from liability Arising from the develop-ment and to permit income to be passed on to the college without taxconsequences. Created on the advice of the colleges legal counsel, thisnonprofit, tax-exempt, private co.puration, called the Schoolcraft Devel-opment Authority, was authorized under Michigan law. The collegecould be assured that lung-term control would be maintained in the

70

authority, because of the nine directors two were college trustees andthree were college administrators. The authority's initial responsibilityincluded selection of a developer, negotiating an option,developmentagreement, providing a survey of the property and a clear land title,approving plans for land use, providing for reciprocal easement agree-ments, and drawing up land leases for each phase of development.

Selection of a Developer

The trustees prepared a list of criteria that would minimize risk to thecollege in the selection of a developer:

Unqualified recommendation from a major regional bank, the col-lege attorney, and auditorLong-standing relationships vv ith major financial institutions andthe capacity to perform the obligation of a general partnershipDemonstrated financial strength and the ability and willingness tocommit its own resources to carry the project. through to actualityCapacity to finance, supervise, design, construct, and manage thepropertyEstablished fiduciary responsibility that can withstand the legaland ethical tests and act on behalf of the clientAbility to perform, get results, and experience with joint venturesand projects over S30 millionDemonstrated established management reputation, experience, andcapability of controlling and managing a long-term project. Also,willingness to permit the college to review the resume of the man-ager who would be assigned to the projectWillingness to provide preliminary concepts for a land-utilizationplan before a formal development relationship is established and,if selected, to present building renderings to the trustees for reviewbefore initiating any constructionNo competitive projects by the developer in the immediate geogra-phic area.

The guidelines having been established, proposals from prospectivelevelopers were reviewed. Because of the publicity the college had re-

ceived in the news media, twenty-nine companies requested additionalinformation from the college about the intended use for the property.Each company was sent a request for proposals. Of the original twenty-nine, seven companies submitted proposals that were reviewed by staff.Four of these proposals were recommended for review by the board oftrustees. The presentations were made, and thr ,ievelopers' concepts werediscussed. The developer who was selected on support for his proposeduse of land, the esthetics of the project, and the financial return to thecollege This plan called for the construction of two office buildings, a

71

hotel, and a restaurant and promised a greer'oeit area to buffer the collegefrom the project and provide proper esthetics.

Under the agreement, the developer accepted the obligation to plan,design, finance, construct, and manage the project. A $10 million letterof credit from a major lender was provided, and a timetable for startingand completing the project was guaranteed. In the agreement, four proj-ect development phases were identified, and options were established foreach phase. The agreement further specified that the developer was topay all real estate taxes and revenues to the college at the times and inthe amounts specified. The development of each parcel would be con-trolled by a land sublease. Furthermore, the project would conform to allstate and local codes and the lender would assume all obligations in caseof abandonment by the developer. The agreement also stipulated thatbuilding systems must be upgraded periodically to prevent functionalobsolescence and that the project could be sold or refinanced only withthe approval of the authority.

Financial Considerations

The following specific financial considerations were established. (1)the college leases seventeen acres of land to the Schoolcraft DevelopmentAuthority for a period of seventy-four years at a rate of $1 per year; (2) theauthority, under the terms of the option, development agreement, sub-leases each parcel to the developer as scheduled; and (3) the financialterms provide for annual lyments from the developer to the develop-ment authority on a quarterly basis and include the following.

2 percent of the land value of all undeveloped land (the landvalue is determined to be $150,000 per acre or $2.55 million for thetotal site)10 percent of the land value as each option is exercised0.75 percent of the adjusted gross income from the building leases(adjusted gross income allows for deduction of debt service only,the office leases are priced at a fixed value per square foot witheconomic adjustments every five years).

Benefits to College

Earnings from the project (shown in Table 1) ale of obvious benefitto the college. Schoolcraft College will have many opportunities forimprovement from the assurance of a major new income source over anextended period. As a result of this project, the college is contemplatingthe construction of a new building, to be accomplished cv ithout seekingadditional millagc or becoming dependent on the economic and politicalconsiderations usually associated with state funding. The financial self-

72

Table 1. Revenues from Land Development Project

InterestAnnual Cumulative Income from Balance in

Payments Payments Endowment EndowmentYear to College to College (8%) Fund

5 $380,025 $ 1,003,450 $ 53,353 $ 1,100,25010 333,148 2,709,482 244,424 3,632,86115 425,191 4,642,377 530,640 7,588,83120 542,663 7,109,296 998,568 14,023,338

25 692,590 10,257,778 1,746,582 24,271,454

sufficiency of the project creates pride and motivates the campus com-munity to find other equally nontraditional approaches to generatingincome.

In this project diverse elements came together at the right time. Thecollege is located in an area experiencing considerable commercial devel-opment, the project therefore enhances the value of the college's property.The college was able to identify prime land that was not needed imme-diately for college use. As a result, the college will experience a steadystream of income for many years. There may also be some synergisticrelationships with the companies that move into the office buildings andwith the hotel. The college may be able to find cooperative educationalexperiences and jobs for students with these companies. Such relation-ships are beneficial to the companies and help to promote the econcmicdevelopment of the area, to create new job opportunities, and to bringnew tax revenues.

Words of Caution

Experience is a wonderful teacher, and there are some lessons thatneed to be considered before a college decides to initiate land develop-ment projects.

1. The institution should obtain professional legal and economicdevelopment advice if the re ources ate unavailable on campus.

2. There should be a re,.iew of state statutes to indicate if there arerestrictions on the use of land holdings dedicated to higher education.

3. The college should be prepared to respond to the allegation thatthe developer, who is a partner with the college, has an unfair advantagein the competitive market because of the tax-cxempt stattb of the college.This assumption is not true, because the developed property is added tothe tax rolls and subject ,, real estate taxes, which are the developer'sresponsibility. The construction costs, the maintenance, and operationcosts are fully charged to the developer and are similar to any private

73

development project. The initial advantage to the developer is in nothaving to buy tht land, but that amount gets paid many fold over the lifeof the contract.

4 The college mad have to respond to complaints about the increasedtraffic and congestion from commercial development in the area. Anappropriate response is to describe the economic impact of the project,including the generation of new jobs, as well as tax dollars to supportlocal government and education.

5. The selection of the developer as a partner is very important.The long-term commitment between the college and the developer isanalogous to marriageboth partners need to be satisfied with thearrangements.

6. The timing of a development is important with respect to the eco-nomic climate in the area. Marketing studies are helpful in predictingthe need for commercial space. The developer will conduct the marketingresearch, since it is the developer's money and that of its investors that isat risk.

Community colleges frequently have limited revenue sources and cer-tainly lack the research facilities and related resources of large universi-ties. One asset, rarely developed, is land. Commercial development ofthat land can prove an important new revenue source.

Richard W. McDowell is president of Schoolcraft College,Livonia, Michigan.

W. Kenneth Lindner is former vice-president for businessservices at Schoolcraft College and president of the SchoolcraftDevelopment Authority.

t.,2 .1a ,

Higher education, especially at research universities, has longfelt the economic impact of grant funds. For the communitycollege, the performance contract may provide an equalopportunity for alternate funding.

Performance Contracting:Profits and Perils

Charles C. Spence, Jeffrey G. Oliver

Many community, junior, and tt Lhnical colleges throughout the countryhave for some time been experiencing static or declining enrollments.The reasons include lower birthrates, increased competition from privatetrade schools, low unemployment rates, and changing district demugraphics. The net effect is t-duced revenue in the face of escalating operatingcosts. Many institutions have reacted IA ith layoffs, reduction of programsand services, and general retrenchment to traditional "bread and butter"courses and programs.

Faced with a similar problem, Florida Community College at Jack-sonville (FCCJ) was able to reverse declining enrollments and turn aliability into an opportunity. That opportunity is performance contract-ing, which has allowed FCCJ to prosper both financially and program-matically, even to expand curriculum offerings and services. As the titleof this chapter implies, performance contracting involves risk-taking. Infact, a re% iew of performance contracts in California in 1986 revealed thatone in five lost money for the contractor (Thor, 1987).

The purpose here is to share insights FCCJ has gained over sev-eral years by operating performance contracts effectively. Those insightsare offered in hopes of reducing the risks to other community colleges.

J. 1. Catanzato and A. IX Arnold (eds.). Alternative Funding Sources.New Directions for Comm y Colleges. no. 68, San Francisco. Jossey-Bass. Winter 1989.

7 c.,''

75

76

Performance Contracts Versus Grants

Virtually all college administrators understand what a grant is. Un-fortunately, that knowledge can work against them if they attempt tooperate performance contracts as if they were grants. In fact, this mis-understanding can have, and has had, severe fiscal effects on colleges andeven on administrators' careers.

Grants do have one advantage over performance contracts, inasmuchas they cover a much wider range of interests (see Table 1). For example,performance contracts are not generally available for transfer educationor programs in the fine or performing arts. They are offered primarilyfor job training and employment, largely because of the influence of theJob Training Partnership Act (JTPA).

Availability

One aspect of performance contracting that makes it more attractiy -,than grants is the availability of funding. The JTPA is a primary source

Table 1. Differences Between Grants and Performance Contracts

Grants Performance Contracts

Budget

Objectives or goals

Detailed line item budgetrequired by fundingagency.

Frequently focus on pro-cess as well as product.

Example: "Three facultymembers will be updatedin high technology areasCIM, CAM, CAD" (but"updated" is not definedin terms of outcomes.

Payment Payment generally pro-vided at regular intervals.

Excess funds Returned to the fundingagency.

Line item budget, ifrequired by the fundingagency, does not becomepart of the contract.

Specific, quantifiableobjectives with evidenceof completion and timeframes identified.

Example: A student whocompletes thirty-twohours in the CAD pro-gram must be placed ina CAD-related job at$5.25/hour within sixtydays of completion ofcourse work.

Usually no advance pay-ment; payment only afterobjective is completed anddelivered.

Retained by the institu-tion for reinvestment inthe program.

7:3

77

of performance contracts, and nationally over twice as much funding isappropriated for the JTPA than for all of vocational education. In Flor-ida, for example, the JTPA spent over $60 million during fiscal year1987-88. At least $48 million of this funding was distributed directly tothe twenty-four local service delivery areas (SDAs), many of which arePrivate Industry Councils. The vast majority of JTPA funding for Floridais on a local performance contracting basis. In 1987-88, FCCJ's successrate for securing JTPA funding via performance contracts from the localSDA was 100 percent. The college succeeded because it recognized thesefacts operationally: (1) it is much easier to pursue a contract from a localagency that controls several million dollars than it is to compete na-tionally for the same amount of money, and (2) performance contractingmust be a high administrative priority to be successful.

Local performance contracting has become important to FCCJ'sfuture, and it has also pursued state and federal performance contractsand grants. In fact, in 1988 FCCJ operated over a hundred performancecontracts and grants, most of which were from state or federal agencies.The bottom line is this: time and resources allocated for additional fund-ing are limited. These resources are most effective when spent in responseto a request for proposal (RPF) from the local Prig ate Industry Councilthan from the much more uncertain federal source. If local RFPs do notoffer the opportunity needed to help the institution meet its goals, a stateor federal performance contract or grant can be sought.

Flexibility and Accountability

Within the parameters of a request for proposal, performance con-tracts are usually flexible, especially about details of services to be pro-vided. This flexibility is particularly apparent in budgeting. If the cost ofthe product (training) is acceptable to the funding agency, there are noconditions or stipulations on how the money may be spent. Once thecontract is signed, however, the product must be produced exactly aswritten and within the specified time frames. This is the accountabilityside. In reality, the contract amount in a performance contract is a fund-ing cap, rather than an award as in the case of a grant. If the institutiondoes not produce the product agreed on, all costs incurred in the projectbecome a liability for the institution.

In performance contracts, accountability is extremely high becausepayment is not made until the product is actually delivered. In a commu-nity college, the product often consists of a student placed in full-timeemployment for a minimum of thirty days on completion of a trainingp.ogram. Even if the institution the student, determines eligibil-ity, trains and counsels the student, pays the student's tuition, and pro-vides him or her with child-care services, the institution is paid only for

Ctrl

78

placement. If the student suddenly terminates employment after twentynine days to go to live with an aunt in Texas, the college receives nofunding and may in fact be penalized in other ways. Fur example, if thetraining-related placement rate drops below 75 percent, the college maynot be eligible for anodic' contract the following sear. In most states,including Florida, there is a 100 percent verification follow -up carriedout directly with the employe' on all placements by the state employmentagency. This procedure is a double check on the placement documenta-tion already submitted by the college, which contains the signatures ofthe student, a college representati,e, and the employer. Some employ,:rsobject to the led tape and dul.lication of effort, but most accept thedocumentation requirement as something they have to put up with whenworking with the government.

To be truly accountable, one facto' is needed. a clear line of authority.One person should be responsible for all performance contracts. Thatperson must thoroughly understand the principles of per funnance con-tracting and the funding agencies' irolities, procedures, and priorities.

The president of the college must understand that the dollarsadvanced by the institution to operate performance contacts are placedat risk. Unless the programs kLuntracts) are operated effectively and in atimely marine', the institution will lose money. Institutions are oftenadvised to operate a program as a separate business instead of a collegedepartment 01 unit. The freestanding business of performance cunttact-ing can yield creative programs and services and excess income fur re-investment.

Neither the title of the person administering the performance con-tracting department nor its location w ithin the institution is as importantas central control and top administrative support. At FCCJ, the directorof development and operations fur performance contracting reports toshe v ice-president. provost of he downtown campus, who answers directlyto the president.

Contract Operation

Performance contracts and giant programs are often written by, butlately staffed by, the most cleative employees in the college. Because thefunding commitment is shun term, established faculty and professionalsavoid "soft money" positions. This attitude is certainly understandable,but it presents a real barrier to the successful operation of performancecontracts. By their very nature, performance contracts are demanding,and they have strict time frames. No slack is allowed rut time lust becauseof slow processing of personnel applications, requisitions, bids, or con-tracts. There is no substitute for the experienced manager who knowswhich buttons to push to expedite these processes. To alleviate the "nub-

811

79

lem, FCCJ has created the position of contracts operations officer andfilled it with one of the most suelessful program managers of the college.When a new performance contract begins at FCCJ, that person automat-ically becomes the manager of the new project until the contact it signed,staff is hired and trained, facilities and offices are established, equipmenthas been purchased, and the program is operating smoothly. The con-tracts operations officer is also involved with the planning and submis-sion of new performance contracts, and therefore ensures 0-at objectivesare realistic. The position is funded out of several performance contractsand is not dependent on any par titular one, which ensures that the sta-bility and level of funding necessary fur such ,1 position arc maintained.

Some Whys and Wherefores

Like most community colleges in the nation, FCCJ lists promotingthe success of students among its mission objectives. Performance con-tracting enhances the college's ability to meet that goal. It seems reason-able to assume that most colleges could use performance euntracting tosupport their institutional objectives, because it allows the institution toprovide high-quality, high-cost services to the poorest and least employa-ble members of the community. Over the last several years, FCCJ hasattracted $2.5 million to support special programs for persons with dis-abilities, the elderly, displaced humemakeis, high school dropouts, thelong-term unemployed, and the cm bmically disadvantaged.

These programs hav, had a dramatic impact un hundreds of lives.One example is Donny, who graduated from FCCJ's Computer Pro-grammer Training for Disabled Students project. Donny is a bright manwith severe cerebral palsy. lie uses a wheelchair, and his speech is difficultto understand. After fifteen years of services from various state agencies,Donny had acquired two bachelor of science degrees (at a cost of over$20,000 in public monies) and still had not been on a job interview.FCCJ and its business advisory committee changed that. Not only didDonn) get a job interview, he was hired by Prudential Insurance Com-pany at a starting salary of over $20,000 a year. After neatly two years,Donn) had been promoted and was well un his way to earning $30,000 ayear. Funding, partially provided by a JTPA Title III performance con-tract, enabled Donny to go to work and live independently,.

Although much attention has been paid to performance contractsacquired from JTPA and the Private Industry Council, it also should benoted that FCCJ has provided services to the Department of Defer),(Navy), Department of Corrections, Florida Department of Health andRehabilitative Services, and Florida Department of Education throughvarious performance contracts. In some cases, the college has pro% Wedservices to agencies with special needs rather than to special needs pupil-

80

lations. For example, FCCJ was awarded a Department of Defense (DOD)contract to produce the DANTES (Defense Activity for Non TraditionalEducation Support) catalogue for Education and Resource Centers. Thispublication is an exhaustive catalogue of educational materials, supplies,and equipment that would help military personnel set up learning centerson any 1" S. military installation in the world, including ships at sea.Lessons learned in producing two successful DANTES catalogues led toFCCJ's being awarded the National Home Study Council Guide contract.This guide enabled Navy, personnel to obtain credit for courses throughextensive examination and independent study, programs offered world-wide. Navy personnel have earned credentials ranging from high schooldiplomas to graduate degrees. As well as generating nearly $2 million inadditional enrollments, these contracts have directly paid $267,000 intuition and $140.000 in books and equipment and netted the college asurplus of $163,000 after all direct expenses.

Keys to Developing Proposals

The request for proposal usually spells out the eligibility criteria andoutcomes required by the funding agency. This leaves the school that isawarded the contract a wide latitude to develop service delivery tech-niques and program configurations. cnerally RFPs will request docu-mentation of community need of the programs and services to be offered.It is essential for the performance contracting department to have directaccess to the college's institutional research staff and related outsideagencies, such as the state job service, so ti ese needs can be properlydocumented.

Proposals developed for performance contracts should not be embel-lished (as in grant applications), because the proposal may become partof the contract. "Wiggle loom" should be in the proposal wherever pos-sible, however. For example, if the proposal is to train word processorsand the training takes a maximum of 300 hours, the college should notstate that the students will receive 300 hours of training. If that statementbecomes part of the contract, any student not receiving 300 documentedhours of training will be disallowed for payment. Observe this rule ofthumb. always be prepared to document every thing you commit to in theproposal, because you will be audited and monitored fur precise programcompliance.

Contractors should be particularly cautious about optimistic timeframes. Adequate time to start up programs should be provided. Adver-tising for and hiring staff, ordering equipment, establishing offices, andrecruiting students often take more time than the inexperienced contrac-tor projects.

81

Contract Monitoring

The process described above produces the need for a contract com-pliance officer who will be responsible for collecting data, monitoring,reporting, and overall contract compliance.

Monitoring and follow-up are especially critical in performance con-tracting, because without proper reporting the contractor will not bepaid. The contract compliance officer or contract manager must de%elopprocedures with the business department to ensure that performance isreported to the funding agency, on the proper forms, and within thedesignated time frames. Feedback from the finance department mustbe re%ioved regularly to make sure proper payment has been made forthe actkities reported. The finance department may receke a check fromthe funding agency with no explanation of its purpose. Coordinationbetween the contract manager and finance department is essential toestablish a clear audit trail and to interpret transactions.

The contract compliance officer or program manager must also re% iewthe financial status of the program regularly to make timely decisionsabout staffing. With contracts, unlike grants, the only way to cut losses ifproposed standards of performance are no: being achie%ed is to cut ex-penses, usually staff. There can be no tenure obligation with performancecontracts.

Caveats: Anatomy of a Loser

Careful analysis of the performance contracts operated by FCCJ thathave lost money indicates se%eral points that desme further elaboration.If the reader follows the suggestions made earlier in this chapter, most ofthese problems will ne%er arise, but the importance of clarity at thispoint outweighs the danger of repetition.

The four major problems FCCJ has experienced in performance con-tracting are (I) failing to understand student mohation, (2) insufficientplanning, (3) fragmented administrathe responsibility, and (4) lack ofoperational experience with performance contracting.

Student motivation sound, like a simple thing to deal ith until oneconsiders all the issues, such as disincenti%es to work. Members of thespecial needs populations that training and employment programs aredesigned to sere are often difficult to mothate to persist in working.Unemploy ment or %eteran's benefits, workers' compensation. ,ocial secu-rity, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, welfare, subsidised housing, and amyriad of other agency benefits may be difficult, e%en fur a mothatedperson, to gi%e up in order to go to work. Project planning must includenot only the best interests and priorities of the college, the funding agency,

82

and potential employers, but also the specific characteristics aid condi-tions of the target population. The long-term unemployed, dropouts,displaced homemakers, economically disadvantaged persons and thosewith disabilities ail have unique problems that can be disincentives toemployment and must be addressed.

In Florida, for example, research indicates that the average recipientof Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) in 1987 ha&'make $6.05 an hour working to equal the welfare benefits. Working forfast-food chains at well below that rate will not attract AFDC recipients.More to the point, a training program for word processing operatorsstarr ng at $5.00 an hour in 1987 would probably not succeed if it hadaimed at AFDC recipients.

Insufficient planning may occur in many cases because reliable datado not exist. Recognizing this common problem, the performance con-tracting department, as a part. of the strategic planning process at FCCJin 1987, requested funding to collect relevant data. Unless special atten-tion is given to resear.h, performance contracts will be lost.

Fragmented responsibility, as described earlier, can also lead to thedownfall of a project. At FCCJ, the director of development and opera-tions for performance contracting is responsible, as the title implies, forthe development, implementation, operation, and follow-up of all per-formance contracts regardless of the type of training or the target pop-ulation. Centralizing authority eliminates ambiguity of control andevaluation. At FCCJ, performance contracts, like all grants, used to bemanaged by the most close:y affiliated administrator. Theoretically, itmakes sense for a performance contract to train displaced homemakers inword processing to be sLpervised by the dean of business programs. Thedean of business, however, without many hours of training and constantrefreshers, will be unlikely to manage a performance contract effectively.The performance contract will become a large and time-consuming prob-lem, one quite foreign to that person's responsibility.

A classic example of responsibility's falling through the cracks is aperformance contract that trained students for a year and placed them inhigh-paying computer programmer jobs averaging around $20,000 a yea'.The contract was properly performed, the placements, however, weremade two days after the contract expired, resulting in a loss to FCCJ ofmore than $10,000.

The last major pitfall is the lack of understanding of how perfor-mance contracts operate. As discussed throughout this chapter, perfor-mance contracts do not allow time for the normal .earning curve most ofus need. Funding agencies are not forgiving. The contract is usuallyspecific. Eithl you perform or you do not. The JTPA is built on thebusiness model. At least 51 percent of the policymakers must by lawcome from the private sector. It is therefore unrealistic for educators to

83

expect any thing but a straightforward business approach to the manage-ment of these contracts.

In March 1989, the final regulations were published in the FederalRegister, which changed the process for negotiating contracts and theway profits from program income can be utilized.

Reference

Thor, L. M. "Performance Contracting. Successfully Managing Risk." In W. WWilms and K. W. Moore (eds.), Marketing Strategies for Changing Times. NessDirections for Community Colleges, no. 60. San Francisco. Jossey -Bass, 1937.

Charles C. Spence is president of Florida Junior College,Jacksonville.

Jeffrey G. Oliver is assistant dean for employment and trainingprograms at Florida Junior College, Jacksonville.

APPENDIX 1A Guide to Key Resources

Alumni Giving

Jennifer Kerns (1986) and her organization, the Junior and Community Col-lege Institute (1986), have produced two excellent articles on alumni fund raising.The institutes paper deals with the potential for alumni giving and systemati-cally with the "it won't work" myths that are prevalent today. Kerns covers awide range of programmatic options available for institutions that choose todevelop alumni as a resource. Rock (1981) describes a case study of an alumniprogram that was widely regarded as a model in the early 1980s.

Junior and Community College Institute. Two-Year College Alumni. An UntappedResource. Washington, D.C.. Junior and Community College Institute, 1986.162 pp. (ED 218 457)

Kerns, J. R. Two-Year College Alumni Programs . .to the 1990.s. Washington, D.C..Junior and Community College Institute, 1986. (ED 277 435)

Kopecek, R. J. The AlumniAn Untapped Reservoir of Support. Danvers, Mass..National Council on Community Services and Continuing Education, 1980.17 pp. (ED 195 317)

Kopecek, R. J., and Kubik, S. M. "Opportunities for Alumni Relations." In P. S.Bryant and J. A. Johnson (eds.), Advancing the Two-Year College. New Directionsfor Institutional Advancement, no. 15. San Francisco; Jossey -Bass, 1982.

McCracken, J. E., and others. Community. Junior College Alumni. Initiative, Influ-ence, and 1.-,pact. San Francisco. American Association of Community andJunior Colleges, 1980. 11 pp. (ED 190 171)

Rock, T. L. "An Alumni Program That Brings Results." In J. E. Bennett (ed.),Building Voluntary Support for Two-Year Colleges. Washington, D.C.. Councilfor the Advancement and Support of Education, 1979.

Slabaugh, D. E. "Serving Diverse Alumni." In J. E. Bennett (ed.), Building Vol-untary Support for the Two-Year College. Washington, D.C.. Council for theAdvancement and S ippon of Education, 1979.

Stoddard, R. L. "Alumni and Fund Raising in the Raral Community College."In W H. Sharron, Jr. (ed.), The Community College Foundation. is,'ashington,D.C.: National Council for Resource Development, 1982.

Case Studies of Success

Angel and Gares (1981) present data accumulated in a nationwide survey thatdetail the characteristics of successful fund-raising programs at nine communitycolleges. Graham (1983) and Weidenthal (1982) offer institutional case studiesthat explain specific programs and levf 1. of resource commitment.

Angel, D., and Cares, D. "Profile of Nine Community Colleges with SuccessfulFoundations." Community and Junior College Journel, 1981, 52, 7-8.

Bock, D. E., and Sullins, R. W. "The Search for Alt-aative Funding. Commu-nity Colleges and Private Fund Raising." Community College Review, 198", 15,13-20.

Graham, E R.1/alring Foundations Work. Richmuria. Virginia State Board I., trCommunity Colleges, 1983. 9 pp. (ED 255 254)

85

8'

86

Higbee, J. M., and Stoddard, R. L. "Paving the Way te. Prosperity." Communityand Junior College Journal, 1981, 52 (2), 21-23.

Lake, D. B. "Founding a Foundation. A Mini Case Study." Community and Jun-ior College Journal, 1981, 52, 21-23.

Olivanti, R. A. "Founding a College Foundation. A Mini Case Study." Commu-nity Service Catalyst, 1983, 13, 14-16.

Tidewater Community College Educational Foundation. Guide Lies Manual forFund Raising and Donations. Portsmouth, Va.. Tidewater Community CollegeEducational Foundation, 1983. 104 pp. (ED 243 551)

Webb, R. D., and Jackson, R. J. "Teaming Up for Resource Development. Com-munity and Junior College Journal. 1979, 50, 40-41.

Weidenthal, M. B. "Beating the Ode.., in Ohio." Community and Junior CollegeJournal, 1982, 53, 44-47.

Corporate Giving

Kendrick (1979) describes how a case for private giving can be made by dem-onstrating to corporations that community eulleges save eurpolations time andmoney. Pokrass (1986, 1988) details specific ways in which community collegescan assess and cultivate corporate giving projects.

Ballard, W. J. "It's in the Community. Community Colleges Can Win Cor-porate Support." CASE Currents, 1931, 10, 42-43.

Green, J. For Foothill College: Corporate Partnerships Are Win-Win Situa-tions." AGR Reports, 1985, 17, 30-32.

Kendrick, D. A. "Foundations and Corporations. National Resources for YourCollege." In J. E. Bennett (ed.), Building Voluntary Support for the Two-YearCollege. Washington, D.C.. Council for the Advancement and Support of Edu-cation, 1979.

Milligan, F. G. "Corporate SolicitationSUNY Style. A rwo-Year Urban Cam-pus' Approach to Corporate Giving." Paper presented at the State University ofNew York's Conference "A Perspective on Corporate Giving," Corning, N.Y.,Nov. 9, 1982. 13 pp. (ED 225 625)

Moore, G. E. "Corporate and Foundation Support fur Public Institutions." InM. J. Worth (ed.), Public College and University Development. Fund Raising atSlate Universities, State Colleges and Community Colleges. Washington, D.C..Council for the Advancement and Support of Education, 1985.

Pokrass, R. J. "A Study of Corporate Giving Behavior Toward Two-Year Col-leges." Unpublished paper, Aug. 1986.

Pokrass, R. J. "Corporate Giving to Two Year Colleges." Currents, Jan. 1988,pp. 38-40.

Establishing a Foundation

Sharron (1978, 1982a, 1982b) and Woodbury 11973, 1979, 1980) give the basicsof building founda.ions at eummunity eolltges. Woodbuty is excellent at pest:m-ing specific steps and the chronology of those actions. Shanon lb best on build-ing the board of directors, answering the problematic question why givc to apublic community eollege, aid the identification of specific fund-wising plogiamobjectives.

Johnson, R. P. "The Community College Foundation and the Internal RevenueService. Establishing and Maintaining Exempt Orgamiation Status.' In W. H.

87

Sharron, Jr. (ed.), The Community College Foundation. Washington, D.C.. Na-tional Council on Resource Development, 1982.

Nusz, P. J. Development of Guidelines for Establishment and Operation of a Cali-fornia Community College Foundation. Fort Lauderdale, Fla.. Nova University,1986. 75 pp. (ED 273 315)

Robertson, A. J. "The Role of the Community College Foundation." In W. H.Sharron, Jr. (ed.), The Community College Foundation. Washington, D.C.. Na-tional Council for Resource Development, 1982.

1

Robison, S. "The Development of the Two-Year College Foundation and Tech-niques for Success." In W H. Sharron, Jr. (ed.), The Community College Foun-dation. Washington, D.C.. National Council for Resource Development, 19K.

Sharron, W. H., Jr. The Development and Organization of the Community CollegeFoundation. Resource Paper no. 18. Washington, D.C.. National Council forResource Development, 1978.

Sharron, W. H., Jr. (ed.). The Community College Foundation. Washington, D.C..National Council for Resource Development, 1982a.

Sharron, W. H., Jr. "Planning and Implementing the Foundation." In The Com-munity College Foundation. Washington, D.C.. National Council for ResourceDevelopment, 1982b.

Silvera, A. L. "The Design and Utilization of Non-Profit Foundations Affiliatedwith California Community Colleges." Doctoral dissertation, University ofSouthern California, 1976.

Sims, L. M. "The College-Related Foundation as a Viable Concept for ResourceDevelopment in Alabama." Doctoral dissertation, University of Alabama, 1973.

Wattenbarger, J. L. "The Case for the Community College Foundation." InW. H. Sharron, Jr. (ed.), The Community College Foundation. Washington, D.C..National Council for Resource Development, 1982.

Woodbury, K. B., Jr. "Community College Foundation." Community and JuniorCollege Journal, 1973, 43, 16- 17, 48.

Woodbury, K. B., Jr. "How to Establish a College Foundation." In BuildingVoluntary Support for the Two-Year College. Washington, D.C.. Council for theAdvancement and Support of Education, 1979.

Woodbury, K. B., Jr. "Establishing a Foundation." CASE Currents, 1980, 6, 18-21.

Executive Director's Role

Gross (1982) outlines the technical, human, and conceptual skills necessary toan effective executive director. Garlock and McKee (1986) present an interestingtest for determining where an executive places himself or her ", on the contin-uum of needs. Mays's (1985) dissertation quantifies the must prevalent character-istics of development officers.

Garlock, J., and McKee, F. (1986). Values and the Development Offuc. Wa,.hingtun,D.C.: National Council for Resource Development, 1986.

Gross, E. K. "The Role of the Executive Director." In W. H. Sharron, Jr. (ed.),The Community College Foundation. Washington, D.C.. National Cut.ncil onResource Development, 1982.

Mays, S. B. "TL.. Caaracteristics, Functions, Behaviors and Effecti-..iless of Devel-opment Officers in American Public Community Co:le6es." Unpublished doc-toral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic and State University, 1985.

Mays, S. A., and Vogler, D. E. "The Linkage Between C.,mmunity Services andCollege Development." Community Services Catalyst, 1985, 15, 10-13.

9 5

7.11=O88

Rowh, M. Leadership for the Development Fur.aton m the Two-Year College. Green-ville, S.C.: Greenville Technical College, 1987. (ED 278 459)

Webb, R. D., and Jackson, R. J. "Resource Development and Lake Land Col-lege." Community College Review, 1978, 6, 34-36.

Nonfinancial Roles of the Foundation

Henry's (forthcoming) dissertation describes the importance of the variousmarketing roles of the foundation. Keener (1982) shows that the foundation'srole in institutional planning, community improvement, and faculty enrichmentgoes beyond fund raising.

Blanshard, P., Jr. "Establishing Foundation Aids Community College's Service."Fund Raising Management, 1978, 7, 40-43, 57.

Henry, E. "The Relative %alue and Importance of Perceived Benefits of ActiveFoundations of Public Community Colleges in the United States." Unpublisheddoctoral disseration, University of North Texas, forthcoming.

Keener, B. J. "Tae Foundation's Role in Resource Development." In W H. Shar-ron, Jr. (ed.), The Community College Foundation. Washington, D.C.. NationalCouncil for Resource Development, 1982.

Mays, S. A., and Vogler, D. E. "The Linkage Between Community Services andCollege Development." Community Services Catalyst, 1985, 15, 10-13.

Slabaugh, D. E. "How a College Foundation Can Boost Your Development Ef-fort." In J. E. Bennett (ed.), Building Voluntary Support for the Two-Year College.Washington, D.C.. Council for the Advancement and Support of Education,1979.

President's Role

Fisher's (1982) rules for presidential involvement guide the president vt ho hasnot yet become immersed in fund raising. Robertson (1979) gives the perspectivefrom the president's chair. Schulze's (forthcoming) dissertation proves that presi-dential involvement often translates into success in fund raising.

Fisher, J. L. The Two Year College President and Institutional Advancement."In P. S. Bryant and J. A. Johnson (eds.), Advancing the Two-Year College. NewDirections for Institutional Advancement, no. 15. San Fiancisco. Jossey-Bass,1982.

Robertson, A. J. "A Development Primer for Community Colleges." In J. E.Bennett (ed.), Buddmg Voluntary Support for the Two-Year College. Washington,D.C.: Council for the Advancement. and Support of Education, 1979.

Schulze, C. "The Role of the Community College President in Successful FundRaising." Unpublished documal dissertation, Teachers College, Columbia Uni-versity, forthcoming.

Sims, H. D. "The President as Money Manager." Commumty and Junior CollegeJournal, 1978, 48, 20-24.

Public Colleges and Private Giving

Stetson (1984) presents a valuable historical perspective on private giving tocommunity colleges, complemented by Ryan (1987), vv ho debunks the popularmyths of the unacceptability of private fund wising at community colleges. Polk(1979) forthrightly presents the cast for private giving to community colleges.

40.01111111r

89

Bennett, J. E. (ed.). Building Volunteer Support for the Two-Year College; How-toInformation on Fund Raising, Community Relations, News. Information and Gov-ernment Relations. Washington, D.C.. Council for the Advancement and Sup-port of Education, 1979.

Bremer, F. H., and Elkins, F. S. "Private Financial Support of Junior Colleges."Junior College Journal, 1965, 36, 16-19.

Edison, R. "Community College Foundations. Advantages and Disadvantages."Selected Papers for the Northern Illinois University Community College Confer-ences, 1967-68. DeKalb, DeKalb Community College Services, 1968.

Gragg, W. L., and Hessenflow, D. "Is There a Foundation in Your Future?"Community College Frontiers, 1979, 7, 31-32.

Kopecek, R. J. "Aa Idea Whose Tjait Is Come: Not-for-Profit Foundations forCommunity Colleges." Community College Review, 1983, 10, 12-17.

Kuhn, E J. "Definition and Functions of the Community College Foundation."Selected Papers from the Northern Illinois University Community College Confer-ence, 1967-68. DeKalb, Ill.: DeKalb Community College Services, 1968.

Polk, G H. "Why Public Colleges Need Private Funds." In J. E. Bennett (ed.),Building Voluntary Support for the Two-Year College. Washington, D.C.. Councilfor the Advancement and Support of Education, 1979.

Ryan, G. J. "Guidelines for Effective Prospect Development.- Paper presented atthe 18th annual convention of the Associat.,m of Community College Trustees,Orlando, Fla., Oct. 1987.

Sims, H. D. "Private Funding Through Public Support." Community CollegeJournal, 1976, 47, 30-31.

Stetson, N. E. The Development of a Histoncal Perspective on Private FinanchuSupport for Public Two-Year Colleges. Fort Lauderdale, Fla.. Nova University,1984. 28 pp. (ED 253 287)

Wattenbarger, J. L. The Role of the Professional Educator as the College Develop-ment Officer. Washington, D.C.. National Council for Resource Development,1975. 11 pp. (ED 203 919)

Wattenbarger, J. L. "Grantsmanship and the Community Junior College." Pea-body Journal of Education, 1976, 53, 166-170.

Worth, M. J. (ed.). Public Colleges and University Development. Fund Raising atState Universities, State Colleges, and Community Colleges. Washington, D.C..Council for the Advancement and Support of Education, 1935.

Revenue Enhancement 'Role

Bailey (1986) reports on the significant increase in aggressive fund raising bycommunity colleges. Palmer (1984) reviews the recent literature dealing withprivate financial development at community colleges.

Bailey, A. L. "Their Budgets Cut, Two-Year Colleges Turn to Aggressive FundRaising." Chronicle of Higher Education, 1986, 33, 57, 60.

Bock, D. E., and Sullins, W. R. "The Search for Alternative Funding. Commu-r.ty Colleges and Private Fund Raising." Community College Review, 1987, 15,13-20.

Brightman, R. W. "Revenue Diversification. A New Source of Funds for Com-munity Colleges." Unpublished manuscript, 1982. 24 pp. kED 221 251)

Degerstedt, L. M. "Non-Profit Foundations Formed by Public Community Col-leges. Profile of Their Use for External Funding." Doctoral dissertation,Brigham Young University, 1979.

90

Grail? a, S., and Anderson, D. "Sources of Financing for Community Colleges."Community College Review, 1985, 13, 50-56.

Hunt, S. New Sources of Revenue: An Idea Baok. Washington, D.C.. Coune forthe Advancement and Support of Education, 1984.

Luck, M. F. "Educational FoundationsAlternative Development Strategies.Insurance for a Solvent Community College System." Paper presented at theannual convention of the American Associati-m of Community and JuniorColleges, Denver, Colo., 1977.

Luck, M. F. "Foundations and Fund Raising in Public Community Colleges."Fund Raising Management, 1976, 7, 12-17.

Luck, M. F., and Tolle, D. J. Community College Development. Alternative Fund-Raising Strategies. Indianapolis, Ind.: Rand R. Newkirk, 1978.

Luskin, B. J., and Warren, I. K. "Strategies for Generating New Financial Re-sources." In D. Campbell (ed.), Strengthening Financial Management. New Direc-tions for Community Colleges, no. 50. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1985.

Ott ley, A. "Funding Strategies for Community Colleges." Paper presented at theAdvanced Institutional Development Program Two-Year College Consortium,Central YMCA Community College, Chicago, 1978.

Palmer, J. "Alternative Funding for Community Colleges. An ERIC Review."Community Services Catalyst, 1984, 14, 23-25.

Robison, S. "The Development e1 the Two-Year College Foundation and Tech-niques for Success." In W. H. Sharron, Jr. (ed.), The Commund) College Foun-dation. Washington, D.C.. National Council for Resource Development, 1982.

Stoudt, F. D. "The Untapped Source of Revenue." In J. Lombardi (ed.), Meetingthe Financial Crisis. New Directions for Community Colleges, no. 2. San Fran-cisco: Jossey-Bass, 1973.

Special Funding Programs

Behrendt (1984), Burke (1981), and Kief ler (1984) each discuss special programsthat wczi: funded throL.gh private giving at community colleges.

Behrendt, R. L. "Honors Programs and Private Funding. How One CommunityCollege Succeeded." Paper presented at the annual convention of the AmericanAssociation of Community and Junior Colleges, Washington, D.C., April 1984.15 pp. (ED 244 682)

Burke, T "Using Innovative Fund Raising to Create a Campus." Communityand Junior College Journal 1981, 52, 12-15.

Kiefler, J. "Foundation Faculty Fellowships Find Real Woild." Community andJunior College Journal, 1984, 54, 33-34.

Criteria for Success

Duffy (1979, 1980, 1982) is the acknowledged expert in characteristics of suecessful formulations. That work has recently been complemented by Glandon(1987), Hollingsworth (1983a, 1983b), and Johnson (1986). Ryan and Smith (1987)researched characteristics of success present in the top ten fund lathing commu-nity colleges.

Duffy, E. F. "Evaluative Criteria for Community College Foundation." Doctoraldissertation, University of Florida, 1979.

Duffy, E. F. Characteristics and Conditions of a Succe.ssful Community College Foun-

91

dation. Washington, D.C.. National Council for Resource Development, 1980.13 pp. (ED 203 918)

Duffy, E. F. "Characteristics and Conditions of a Successful Community CollegeFoundation." In W. H. Sharron, Jr. (ed.), The Community College Foundation.Washington, D.C.: National Council on Resource Development, 1982.

Evans, N. D. "Diagnosing a Foundation: Ways to Put New Life into Your Foun-dation." Community, Technical and Junior College Journal, 1986, 52, 27-30.

Glandon, B. L. "Critical Components of Successful Two Year College Founda-tions." Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Brigham Young University, 1987.

Hellweg, S. A. "Requisites for an Effective College Grants Development Opera-tion." Community College Review, 1980, 8 (2), 5-12.

Hollingsworth, P. "An Investigation of Characteristics of Successful CommunityCollege Foundations." Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Pepperdine Univer-sity, 1983a.

Hollingsworth, P. "An Investigation of Characteristics of Successful CommunityCollege Foundati' " Graduate eminar paper, Pepperdine University, 1983b.25 pp. (ED 233 7! d)

Johnson, J. J. "A Profile of Selected High- and Low- Performin; Non-ProfitFoundations in Public Community, Technical and Junior Colleges in theUnited States." Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Vt:ginia Polytechnic Instituteand State University, 1986.

Luck, M. E "The Characteristics of Foundations and Fund Raising in PublicComprehensive Two-Year Colleges." Doctoral dissertation, University of South-ern Illinois, 1974.

Luck, M. F. "Model Analyses of Community College Foundation, New Era."Fund Raising Management, 1977, 9, 22-29.

McNamara, D. L. "The Roles of Institutional Personnel Connected win. it Ef-fective Two-Year College Private Fund Raising Program." Unpublished de,c. iraldissertation, Oklahoma State University, 1988.

Ryan, G. J., and Smith, N. J. "Characteristics of Success in Community CollegeFund Raising." Paper presented at the 67th annual convention of the AmericanAssociation of Community and Junior Colleges, Dallas, Tex., Apr. 1987.

Smith, N. J. "Organizational Models of Successful Advancement Programs."Paper presented at the Annual uniference on Advancing Two -Year Institutions,Council for the Advar cement and Support of Education, Alexandria, Va.,December 9-11, 1986 J2 pp. (ED 278 435)

Strategies for Fund Raising

Walters (1987) describes all the forms of fund raising commonly mai by com-munity colleges. McNamara's (forthcoming) dissertation includes ratings of effec-tiveness of each fund raising method by successful community colleges. Beckes(1982) and Benda and Edwards (1986) present the possibilities of sophisticatedplanned giving opportunities.

Beckes, I. K. "Gifts and Bequests for the Two-Veal College Foundation." In W H.Sharron, Jr. (ed.), The Community College Foundation. Washington, D.C.. Na-tional Counril for Resource Development, 1982.

Bender, L, and Daniel, D. "Rethinking Funding Strategies." Community Techni-cal and Junior Col!..ge Journal, 1986, 57, 22-25.

Conrad, L., Davis. B., Duffy, E., and Whitehead, J. "What Can CommunityColleges Do to Increase Private Giving?" Community, Technical and JuniorCollege Journal, 1986, 57 (2), 34-37.

t)

92

Danbury, C. "Strategy for Fund Raising When You Are the New Kid on theBlock." Community and Junior College Journal, 1981, 52, 10-11.

Daniel, D. E. Future Trends for Resource Development. Research Report no. 35.Washington, D.C.: National Council for Resource Development, 1985.

Davidson, M. M., and Wise, S. R. "Fund Raising: The Public Two-Year College."In P. S. Bryant and J. A. Johnson (eds.), Advancing the Two-Year College. NewDirections for Institutional Advancement, no. 15. San Francisco. Jossey-Bass,1982.

Degerstedt, L. M. "The Strategies and Perceptions of Community Colleges andthe Foundation. A National Perspective." In W. H. Sharrc.o, Jr. (ed.), The Com-munity College Foundation. Washington, D.C.. National Council on ResourceDevelopment, 1982.

Luck, M. F. "Foundations and Fund Raising in Public Community Colleges."Fund Raising Management, 1976, 7, 12-17.

Luck, M. F. "Educational FoundationsAlternative Development Strategies.Insurance for a Solvent Community College System." Paper pre ,ented at theannual convention of the American Association of Community and JuniorColleges, Denver, Colo., April 1977.

Luck, M. F., and Tolle, D. J. Community College Development. Alternative Fund-Raising Strategies. Indianapolis, Ind.: Rand R. Newkirk, 1978.

McCain, J. C. Resource Development Programs in Two-Year Colleges. A NationalSurvey. Washington, D.C.. National Council on Resource Development, 1975.

McNamara, D. L. "The Effective and, or Successful Characteristics of a Two-YearCollege Private Fund Raising Program." Unpublished doctoral dissertation,Oklahoma State University, forthcoming.

Nicksick, T., Jr. "The Special Purpose Foundation. Capital Fund." In W. H.Sharron, Jr. (ed.), The Community College Foundation. Washington, D.C.. Na-tional Council for Resource Development, 1982.

Ryan, G. J. ''Guidelines for Effective Prospect Development." Paper presented atthe 18th annual convention of the Association of Community College Trustees,Orlando, Fla., Oct. 1987.

Smith, N. J. "Gifts of Time, Talent ... and Money." Community and JuniorCollege Journal, 1981, 52, 21-23.

Walters, L. Dollars Equal the Margin of Excellence. Decatur, Ga.. Southern Asso-ciation of Community and Junior Colleges, 1987. 6 pp. (ED 281 600)

Trustees and Foundation Boards

Crowson's (1985) dissertation is the most recent study of are rule of the volun-teer board in fund raising. Sader (1986) amplifies Crowson's work through astudy of the involvement of elected trustees in fund raising

Bryant, D. W. "Organization of Community College Foundation Boards." Com-munity Junior College Quarterly of Research and Practice, 1988, 12, 65-71.

Crowson, J. "Boards of Directors of Community College Foundations. Char.c-teristics, Roles, and Success." Unpublished doctoral dissertation, UniversityMississippi, 1985.

Edwards, J. E., and Bender, L. W Women and Community College Foundatium.Status, Myths and Insights. Tallahassee. Tallahassee Institute fur Studies inHigher Education, Florida State University, 1983. 50 pp. (ED 229 095)

Sader, C. H. The Role of Elected Trustees of Public Institutions in Successful Devel-opment Programs. Chicago. North Ccntra: Association of Colleges and Schools,1986. 7 pp. (ED 266 841)

93

Policies of Major Philanthropies in the United States

The follov,h% is a list of 190 corporations and foundations, their key contactpeople, their addresses, and their policies regarding community college giving.

It is important to note that a "yes" does not mean the institution will acceptproposals from all 1,200 community colleges. Most companies and foundationsgive grants within limited geographical areas. Many companies and founda-tions give only for specified purposes. Very careful research into the giving historyand priorities of each institution should precede the submission of any proposal.

Equally important, a "no" does not mean that a community college shouldavoid an institution if the two appear to have interests in common.

Name!Address

AcceptsCommunity

Contact! CollegeTitlelPhorze Proposals

Aetna life & Casualty Co.151 Farmington AvenueHartford, CT 06156

Ahmanson Foundation92! Wilshire BoulevardBev,rly Hills, CA 90210

Allied Signal, Inc.Box 2245RMorristown, NJ 07960

Amerada Hess Corp.1185 Avenue of the AmericasNew York, NY 10036

American Express Co.American Express

FoundationAmerican Express PlanWorld Financial CenterNew Ycrk, NY 10004

American InformationTechnology Corp.

Ameritech Foundation30 S. Wacker DriveChicago, IL 60606

American Stores Co.Acme Markets, Inc.124 N. 15th StreetPhiladelphia, PA 19101

Sanford Cloud, Jr. YesVice-President and Executive

Director203/273.3340

Lee WalcottVice-President213/278.0770

Gail McKinneyManager201/455.5876

Christine CangelosiSecretary, Contribution

Committee212/997.8500

Mary Beth SalernoVice-President and Director212/640.5660

Michael KuhlinExecutive Director312/750.5000

Bob NeslundPresident215/568.3000

Yes

Yes

No

Yu;

No

No

American Telephone andTelegraph Co.

AT&T Foundation550 Madison Avenue,

Room 2717New York, NY 1002

Amoco Corp.Amoco Foundation200 E. Randolph DriveChicago, IL 60601

Andersen Foundationc/o Andersen Corporate287 Central Ave.Bayport, MN 55003

Anheuser Busch Co., Inc.Anheuser-Busch Charitable

TrustOne Busch PlaceSt. Louis, MO 63118

Ashland Oil, Inc.Ashland Oil FoundationP.O. Box 391Ashland, KY 41114

ARCO Foundation515 S. Flower StreetLos Angeles, CA 90071

BankAmerica Corp.BankAmerica FoundationBox 37000, Dept. 3246San Francisco, CA 94137

Bat Hanadiv Foundationc/a Carter, Ledyard &

Milburn2 Wall StreetNew York, NY 10005

Beatrice (BCI Holdings)E-I I FoundationTwo N. LaSalle StreetChicago, IL 60602

Bell Atlantic Corp.1310 N. Courthouse RoadArlington, VA 22201

Orsz

Anne AlexanderVice-President, Education212/605.6680

Robert ArganbrightExecutive Director312/856.6306

Earl C. SwansonVice-President612/439.5150

Nancy CalcaterraContributors Administration314/577.2454

Judy B. ThomasPresident(.06/329.4525

Eugene R. WilsonPresident213/486.3342

Caroline BoitanoVice-President, Senior

Program Officer415/953.0927

Jerome CaulfieldAttorney

Mariita ConleyExecutive Director312/558.3758

Ruth CaineDirector, Corporate

Contributions703/974.8814

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

Bell South Corp.Bell South Foundations1155 Peach Tree Street, NEAtlanta, GA 30367

Benedum Foundation1400 Benedum-Trees

BuildingPittsburgh, PA 15222

Charles K. BlandinFoundation

10 Pokegama Avenue, N.Grand Rapids, MN 55744

The Boeing CompanyP.O. Box 3707M/S 18-83Seattle, WA 98111

BP America (Standard Oil)200 Public Square 35-ACeveland, OH 44114

Lynde and Harry BradleyFoundation

777 E. Wisconsin AvenueMilwaukee, WI 53202

The Brown FoundationP.O. Box 13646Houston, TX 77219

Burlington Northern, Inc.Burlington Northern

Foundation999 Third AvenueSeattle 'VA 98109

Fritz B. Burns Foundation4001 W. Alameda AvenueBurbank, CA 91505

The Bush FoundationEast 900 First National Bank

BuildingSt. Paul, MN 55101

Callaway Foundation209 Broome StreetP.O. Box 790LaGrange. GA 30241

Leslie GraitcerExecutive Director404/420-889S

Beverly R. WaltersDirector, Grants Program412/288-0360

Paul M. OlsonPresident218/326-0523

Joe A. Taller, DirectorCarver Gayton, ManagerEducational Relations and

Training206/655-6679

Lance C. BuhlManager, Corporate

Contributions216/586-8625

Michael S. JoyceExecutive Director414/291-9915

Katherine B. DobelmanExecutive Director713/523-6867

Donald K. NorthPresident206/467-'3895

Joseph E. RawlinsonPresident818/840-8802

Humphrey DoermannPresident612/227-0891

J. T GreshamGeneral Manager404/884-7348

9,-,

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

95

96

Morris & Gwendolyn CafritzFoundation

1825 K Street, N.W.Washington, DC 20006

Carnegie Corp. of New York437 Madison AvenueNew York, NY 10022

Amon G. Carter Foundation1212 Interfirst Bank BuildingP.O. Box 1036Ft. Worth, TX 76101

Anne E. Casey Foundation31 Brookside DriveGreenwich, CT 06830

Caterpillar, Inc.Caterpillar Foundation100 N.E. Adams StreetPeoria, IL 61629

Chase Manhattan Corp.Chase Manhattan

Foundation44 Wall StreetNew York, NY 10081

Chevron USA, Inc.P.O. Box 7753San Francisco, CA 94120

Chrysler Corp.Chrysler Corp. FundP.O. Box 1919Detroit, MI 48288

CIGNA CorporationCIGNA FoundationOne Logan SquarePhiladelphia, PA 19103

Citicorp USA200 S. Wacker DriveChicago, IL 60606

Edna McConnell ClarkFoundation

250 Park AvenueNew York, NY 10017

Eugene E. HinesAdministrative Assistant202/862-6800

Dorothy KnappSecretary212/3714200

Bob J. CrowExecutive Director817/332-2783

Martin SchwartzExecutive Directorr203/661-2773

Edward W. SiebertManager, Corporate Support

Programs309/675-5030

David FordDirector, Philanthropic

Activities212/676-5080

J. W. Rhodes, Jr.Manager, Contributions415/894-5464

Lynn A. FeldhouseAdministrator313/956-5194

Jeffrey P. LindtnerExecutive Director215/523-5255

Elizabeth HowlandVice-President312/993-3000

Peter D. BellPresident212/986-7050

No

Yes

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

The Coastal CorporationCoastal TowerNine Greenway PlazaHouston, TX 77046

The Coca Cola CompanyCoca Cola FoundationP.O. Drawer 1734Atlanta, GA 30301

Commonwealth FundOne E. 75th StreetNew York, NY 10021-2692

CSXP.O. Box C-32222Richmond, VA 23219

Charles A. Dana Foundation150 E. 52nd StreetNew York, NY 10022

The Danforth Foundation231 S. Bemiston AvenueSt. Louis, MO 63105

Dayton Hudson Corp.Dayton Hudson Foundation777 Nicol let MallMinneapolis, MN 55402

Arthur S. DeMossFoundation

St. Davids CenterSt. Davids, PA 19087

Digital EquipmentCorporation

1 1 1 Powdermill RoadMSO/K1

Maynard, MA 01754

Dow Chemical USADow Chemical Co.,

FoundationP.O. Box 1751Midland, MI 48674

Duke Endowment200 S. Tryon StreetCharlotte, NC 28202

Tiuman ArnoldVice-President,

Administrative Services713/877-1400

Margaret J. CoxVice-President, Executive

Director, Foundation404/676-2568

Cynthia WoodcockAssistant Vice-President,

Program Finance andManagement

212/535-0400

Raymond P. SzaboAssistant Vice-President,

Corporate Services804/782-1439

M. BaldwinProgram Officer212/223-4040

Gene L. SchwilckPresident314/862-6200

Cynthia MayedaManaging Director612/370-6555

Mrs. Arthur DeMossChief Executive Officer215/2545500

Lee RichardsonManager, Education617/493-2221

Cherie A. HutterProgram Manager517/636-1162

John F. DayExecutive Director704/376.0291

No

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

fro

No

97

kis

E. I. Dupont DeNemoursDupont Company9067 Dupont BuildingWilmington, DE 19898

Eastman Kodak CompanyCharitable Trust343 State StreetRochester, NY 14650

Exxon EducationFoundation

180 Park AvenueP.O. Box 101Florham Park, NJ 07932

Sherman FairchildFoundation

71 Arch StreetGreenwich, CT 06830

Federal National MortgageAssociation

3900 Wisconsin Avenue, N.W.Washington, DC 20016

Federated Department StoresFederated Department Stores

Foundation7 W. Seventh StreetCincinnati, OH 45202

Fleming Companies, Inc.6301 Waterford BoulevardBox 26647Oklahoma City, OK 73126

The Ford Foundation320 E. 43rd StreetNew York, NY 10017

Ford Motor CompanyFord Motor Co. FundThe American RoadDearborn, MI 48121

Gannett FoundationLincoln TowerRochester, NY 14604

GAR Foundation50 S. Main StreetAkron, OH 44309

John T. LundExecutive Director,

Committee on EducationAid

302/774-5025

Stanley C. WrightDirector, Corporate


Arnold R. ShoreExecutive Director201/765-3001

Patricia A. LydanVice-President203/661-9360

Harriet heyVice-President, Community

Relations202/537-7000

Thomas G. CodySenior Vice-President513/579-7068

Cheryl HodakDirector, Corporate

Communications405/840-7200

Barron M. TennySecretary212/573-5000

Leo J. Brennan, Jr.Executive Director,

Foundation313/845-8711

Eugene C. DorseyPresident716/262-3315

Lisle M. BuckinghamTrustee216/376-5300

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

General Dynamics Corp.Material Service Corp.222 N. LaSalle StreetChicago, IL 60601

General Electric Co.General Electric Foundation3135 Eastern TurnpikeFairfield, CT 06431

General Motors Corp.General Motors Foundation3044 W. Grand BoulevardDetroit, MI 48202

Georgia-Pacific Co.Georgia Pacific Foundation133 Peachtree Street, N.E.Atlanta, GA 30303

The Getty Grant Program401 Wilshir-- BoulevardSanta Monica, CA 90401

Horace W. GoldsmithFoundation

c/o Paskus, Gordon, Hyman45 Rockefeller PlazaNew York, NY 10111

Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.Goodyear Tire & Rubber

Co. Fund1144 E. Market StreetAkron, OH 44316

The Great Atlantic & PacificTea Co., Inc.

2 Paragon DriveMontvale, NJ 07645

GTE Corp.GTE FoundationOne Stamford ForumStamford, CT 06904

George Gund FoundationOne Erieview PlazaCleveland, OH 44114

Hall Family FoundationsCharitable InvestmentsP.O. Box 580Kansas City, MO 64141

Louis LevyAdministrative Vice-President312/372-3600

Paul M. OstergardPresident203/373-3216

Ralph FrederickDirector, Placement am

College Relations313/556-4260

Wayne TamblynTreasurer404/521-5228

Gwen I. WaldenProgram Assistant213/393-4244

Rolm R. SlaughterChief Executive212/206-4113

Patricia A. KemphAssistant Secretary,


William Vitulli201/573-9700

Jorge JacksonDirector, Corporate Social

Responsibility203/965-3620

Henry C. DollActing Director216/241-3114

Margaret H. PenceProgram Affairs816/274-5615

1O

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

99

100

John A. HartfordFoundation

55 E. 59th StreetNew York, NY 10022

William Randolph HearstFoundation

888 Seventh AvenueNew York, NY 10106

Howard Heinz Endowment301 Fifth AvenuePittsburgh, PA 15222

Herrick Foundation2500 Comerica BuildingDetroit, MI 48226

William and Flora HewlettFoundation

525 Middlefield RoadMenlo Park, CA 94025

Hewlett-Packard Company3000 Hanover StreetPalo Alto, CA 94304

Conrad N. HiltonFoundation

10100 Santa MonicaBoulevard

Los Angeles, CA 90067

HoneywellHoneywell Fol IdationHoneywell PlazaMinneapolis, MN 55408

Houston Endowment, Inc.P.O. Box 52338Houston, TX 77052

IBM Corporation500 Columbus AvenueThornwood, NY 10594

The James Irwin FoundationOne Market PlazaStevart Street TowerSan Francisco, CA 94104

ITI Corporation320 Park AvenueNew York, NY 10022

102

Steven C. EyreExecutive Director212/832-7788

Robert M. Frehse, Jr.Executive Director212/586-5404

Alfred W Wishart, Jr.Executive Director412/391-5122

Kenneth G. HerrickPresident313/963-6420

Roger W. HeynsPresident415/329-1070

Rodzrick CarlsonDirector of Corporate Grants415/857-3053

Donald H. HubbsPresident213/556-4694

M. Patricia HovenDirector, Foundation612/870.6821

J. H. CreekmorePresident713/223-4043

Dr. John C. PorterDirector, Uriversity Relations914/742-5800

Liz A. VegaDirector, Grants Program415/777-2244

Joseph SantangeloDirector, Public Affairs212/752-6000

No

No

Yes

Yes

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

Robert Wood JohnsonFoundation

P.O. Box 2316Princeton, NJ 08543

Johnson & Johnson Co.Johnson & Johnson

Family of CompaniesContribution Foundation

One Johnson & JohnsonPlaza

New Brunswick, NJ 08543

W. Alton Jones Foundation433 Park StreetCharlottesville, VA 22901

Joyce Foundation135 S. LaSalle StreetChicago, IL 60603

The Henry J. Kaiser FamilyFoundation

2400 Sand Hill RoadMenlo Park, CA 94025

W. K. Kellogg Foundation400 North AvenueBattle Creek, MI 49017

Peter Kiewit FoundationWoodmen TowerFarnam at SeventeenthOmaha, NE 68102

F. M. Kirby Foundation17 De Hart StreetMorristown, NJ 07960

K-Mart Corp.Public Affairs3100 W. Big Beaver RoadTroy, MI 48084

Knight FoundationOne Cascade PlazaAkron, OH 44308

Kraft Inc.Kraft FoundationKraft CourtGlenview, IL 60025

Edward H. RobbinsProposal Manager609/452-8701

Herbert T. NelsonVice-President201/524-6747

Richard D. JohnsonDirector804/295-2134

Craig KennedyPresident312/782-2464

Barbara H. KehrerVice-Presider!415/854-9400

Norman A. BrownPresident616/968-1611

Lyn Wallin ZiegenbeinExecutive Director402/344-7890

Fred M. Kirby IIPresident201/538.4800

James ChrillaVice-President/Treasurer313/643-1000

Creed C. BlackPresident216/253-9301

Ronald ComanAdministrative Director312/998-7032

0

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

101

102

Kresge FoundationP.O. Box 31513215 W Big Beaver RoadTioy, MI 48007

Kroger Co.1014 Vine StreetCincinnati, OH 45201

Lilly Endowment2801 N. Meridian StreetP.O. Box 88068Indianapolis, IN 46208

Loews Corp.Loews Foundation666 Fifth AvenueNew York, NY 10103

Longwood Foundation1004 Wilmington Trust

CenterWilmington, DE 19801

Henry Luce Foundation111 NV. 50th StreetNew York, NY 10026

Lucky Stores, Inc.6300 Clark AvenueDublin, CA 94568

J.E. & L.E. MabeeFoundation

3000 Mid-Continent TowerTulsa, OK 74103

John & Catherine MacArthurFoundation

140 S. Dearborn StreetChicago, IL 60603

Robert R. McCormickCharitable Trust

435 N. Michigan AvenueChicago, IL 60611

McCune Foundation1104 Commonwealth

Building316 Fourth AvenuePittsburgh, PA 15222

Alfred H. Taylor, Jr.President313/643-9630

James D. McIntireVice-President/Secretary513/762-1149

James T. MorrisPresident317/924-5471

C. G. Sposato, Jr.Trustee212/545-2000

Endsley P. FairmanExecutive Secretary302/654-2477

Robert E. ArmstrongExecutive Director212/489-7700

Janice VanceSecretary, Contribution

Program415/833-6000

Guy R. MabeeDirector918/584.4286

James M. FurmanExecutive Vice-President312/726-8000

Claude A. SmithExecutive Vice-President312/222-3512

Farland I. CarlsonExecutive Director412/644-8779

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

No

.."

McDonnell Douglas Corp.McDonnell Douglas

FoundationP.O. Box 516St. Louis, MO 63166

The McKnight Foundation410 Peavey BuildingMinneapolis, MN 55402

Manufacturers HanoverCorp.

Manufacturers HanoverFoundation

270 Park AvenueNew York, NY 10017

Meadows FoundationWilson Historic Block2922 Swiss AvenueDallas, TX 75204

Andrew W. MellonFoundation

140 E. 62nd StreetNew York, NY 10021

Richard King MellonFoundation

525 William Penn PlacePittsburgh, PA 15219

Merrill Lynch & Co.Merrill Lynch & Co.

FoundationOne Liberty Plaza16E. BroadwayNew York, NY 10080

Fred Meyer Charitable Trust1515 S.W. Fifth Aveni.ePortland, OR 97201

Minnesota Mining &Manufacturing Foundation

Building 521-11-01 3MCenter

St. Paul, MN 55144

Mobil Oil Corp.Mobil Foundation, Inc.150 E. 42nd StreetNew York, NY 10017

Walter DiggsCorporate Secretary,

Charitable Affairs314/232-8464

Russell V. EwaldExecutive Vice-President612/333-4220

Matthew TrachtenbergAgent-Foundation212/286-7118

Sally R. LancasterExecutive Vic--President214/826.9431

J. Kellum Smith, Jr.Vice-President212/838-8400

George H. TaberVice-President412/392-2800

Westina MatthewsSecretary, Foundation212/236-4319

Charles S. RooksExecutive Director503/228.5512

Eugene W. SteeleManager, Contributions

Program612/736.3781

Richard G. MundSecretary, Executive Director212/883.2174

1 0 ;)

No

No

No

Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

103

104

Monsanto Co.Monsanto Fund800 N. Lindbergh BoulevardSt. Louis, MO 63167

Moody Foundation704 Moody National Bank

BuildingGalveston, TX 77550

Morgan Guaranty Trust Co.of New York

Morgan Guaranty Trust Co.Charitable Fund

23 Wall StreetNew York, NY 10015

Charles Stewart MottFoundation

1200 Mott FoundationBuilding

Flint, ivII 48502

M. J. Murdock CharitableTrust

703 BroadwayVancouver, WA 98660

Mabel Pew Myrin TrustThree ParkwayPhiladelphia, PA 19102

Samuel Roberts NobleFoundation

P.O. Box 2180Ardmore, OK 73402

Northwest Area FoundationW. 975 First National Bank

BuildingSt. Paul, MN 55101

Nynex, Inc.SOO Westchester AvenueWhite Plains, NY 10604

Occidental PetroleumOccidental Petroleum

Charitable Foundation,Inc.

10889 Wilshire BoulevardLos Angeles, CA 90024

Dr. John L. MasomPresident314/694-4596

Roberta RuoccoVice-President212/483.2058

Peter M. MooreGrants Officer409/763-5333

Frank GilsdorfVice-President313/238.5651

Sam C. SmithExecutive Director206/694.3415

Fred H. Billups, Jr.Executive Director215/568-3330

John F. SnodgrassPresident405/223-5810

Terry Tinson SaarioPresident612/224-9635

Patricia Fogarty914/683-1096

Evelyn S. WongAssistant Secretary, Treasurer213/879-1700

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

.1

105

F. W. Olin Foundation Lawrence W. Milas No805 Third Avenue PresidentNew York, NY 10022 212/832-0508

Pacific Gas & Electric Co. Patricia Prado No77 Beale Street Contributions ProgramsSan Francisco, CA 94106 415/973-4951

Pacific Telesis Group Mary E. Leslie YesPacific Telesis Foundation Executive Director,130 Kearny Sum., Room Education

3309 415/394-3683San Francisco, CA 94108

David & Lucille Packard Colburn S. Wilbur YesFoundation Executive Director

300 Second Street 415/948-7658Los Altos, CA 94022

William Penn Foundation Dr. Bernard C. Watson Yes1630 Locust Street PresidentPhiladelphia, PA 19103 215/732-5114

J. C. Penney Co. Robin Morrison YesP.O. Box 659000 Manager, CorporateDallas, TX 75265 Contributions

214/591-1966

PepsiCo-Inc. Jacqueline R. MilanPepsiCo Foundation Manager, Corporate700 Anderson Hill Road ContributionsPurchase, NY 10577 914/253-3908

Yes

J. Howard Pew Freedom Fred H. Billups, Jr. YesTrust Executive Director

Three Parkway 215/568-3330Philadelphia, PA 19102

J. N. Pew, Jr. Charitable Fred H. Billups, Jr. YesTrust Executive Director

Three Parkway 215/568-3330Philadelphia, PA 19102

Pew Memorial Trust Fred H. Billups, Jr. YesThree Parkway Executive DirectorPhiladelphia, PA 19102 215/568-3330

Phillips Petroleum Cos. Annette T. D'Annunizo Yes120 Park Avenue Secretary, Corporate St.pportNew York, NY 10017 Program

212/880-3366

106

El Pomar FoundationP.O. Box 158Colorado Springs, CO 80901

The Procter & Gamble Co.Procter & Gamble FundP.O. Box 599Cincinnati, OH 45202

Public Welfare Foundation2600 Virginia Avenue, N.W.Washington, DC 20037

Raytheon Co.Raytheon Charitable

Foundation141 Spring StreetLexington, MA 02173

Kate B. Reynolds CharitableTrust

Eight W Third StreetWinston.Salem, NC 27101

H. Smith RichardsonCharitable Trust

P.O. Box 20124Greensboro, NC 27420

RJR Nabisco, Inc.P.O. Box 2959Winston-Salem, NC 27150

Rockefeller Brothers Fund1290 Avenue of the AmericasNew York, NY 10104

Rockefeller Foundation1133 Avenue of the AmericasNew York, NY 10036"'Rockwell International Corp.

-1.11 intim Itional Carp.Tryst

6 Grant StreetPittsburgh, PA 15219

Safeway Stores, Inc.Fourth and Jackson StreetsOakland, CA 94660

William J. HyblPresident303/633.7733

Bernard J. NolanVice-President, Secretary513/562.2201

Charles Glenn IhrigExecutive Director202/965.1800

Janet C. TaylorCorporate Contributions

Manager617/862.6600

W Vance FryeExecutive Senetaly919/723-1456

Dorothy W HurleyAdministrative Vice-President919/379.8600

John BaconDirector, Collimate


Benjamin R. Shute, Jr.Secretary212/373.4200

Lynda MullenSecretary212/869.8500

J. J. ChristinSecretary412, 565.5803

Felicia M. delCampoManager, Public Affairs415/598-3267

1 ' '

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Santa Fe Southern PacificCorp.

Santa Fe Southern PacificFoundation

224 Michigan AvenueChicago, IL 60604

Sara Lee Corp.Sara Lee Foundation3 First National PlazaChicago, IL 60602

Sarah Scaife FoundationP.O. Box 268Pittsburgh, PA 15230

Sears, Roebuck Co.Sears- Foebuck FoundationDept. S.'03 BSC51-02Chicago, IL 60684

Norton Simon ArtFoundation

411 W. Colorado BoulevardPasadena, CA 91105

Norton Simon Foundation411 W. Colorado BoulevardPasadena, CA 91105

The Skillman Foundation333 W. Fort StreetDetroit, MI 48226

Alfred P. Sloan Foundation630 Fifth AvenueNew York, NY 10111

The Southern Co.P.O. Box 1151Pensacola, FL 32520

The Southland Corp.Southland Foundation5215 N. O'Connor BoulevardIrving, TX 75039

Southwestern Bell Corp.Southwestern Bell

FoundationOne Bell CenterSt. Louis, MO 63101

R. L. HoldenExecutive Director,

Foundation312/786.6204

Gretchen Miller-Reim,1Manager, Corporate


Richard M. LarryPresident412/392-2900

Paula A. BanksVice-President, Executive

Director312/875-8337

Walter W. TimoshukVice-President818/449-6840

Walter W. TimoshukVice-President818/449-6840

Kari SchlachtenhaufenProgram Officer313/961-8853

Albert ReesPresident212/582-0450

Janette SkaggsSecretary, Gulf Power Co.904/444-5111

J. Michael LewisSecretary, Foundation214/556.0500

Charles 0. De ReimerExecutive Director,


1 0

No

No

Yes

Yes

Maybe

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

107

108

Spencer Foundation875 N. Michigan AvenueChicago, IL 60611

Starr Foundation70 Pine StreetNew York, NY 10270

The Stratford FoundationOne Federal StreetBoston, MA 02211

Sun Co.100 Matsonford RoadRadnor, PA 19087

Super Value StoresP.O. Box 530Minneapolis, MN 55440

Surdna Foundation250 Park AvenueNew York, NY 10177

Anne B. & Charles B. TandyFoundation

1577 Inter First Tower801 Cherry StreetFort Worth. TX 76102

Tenneco, Inc.Box 2511Houston, TX 76102

Texaco, Inc.Texaco Philanthropic

Foundation2000 Westchester AvenueWhite Plains, NY 10650

T.L.L. Temple Foundation109Temple BoulevardLufkin, TX 75901

Travelers Corp.The Travelers Cos.

Foundation, Inc.One Tower SquareHartford, CT 06183

Union Carbide Corp.39 Old Ridgebury RoadDanbury, CT 06817

Marion M. Faldetce-President,/337-7000

Ta Chun HsuPresident212/770.6882

Peter A. WilsonDirector617/292-3885

Dolores A. KellenbenzAdministrator, Social

Investment215/293.6555

John SeltzerChairman612/828-4000

M. Lindsley HomrighausenAdministrator for Grants212/697-0630

Thomas F. BeechExecutive Vice-President817/877-3344

Jo Ann SwinneyDirector, Community Affairs713/757-3930

Maria Mike-MayerSecretary, Foundation914/253.4150

Wald R. BurkeExecutive Secretary409/639.5197

Ernest L. OsbornePresident203/277-4079

Clyde GreenertDirector, Contributions203/794-2000

re

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

No

No

Union Pacific Corp.Union Pacific Foundation345 Park AvenueNew York, NY 10154

United Technologies Corp.One Financial PlazaHartford, CT 06101

UnocalUnocal Foundation1201 W. 5th StreetLos Angeles, CA 90017

US West, Inc.7800 E. Orchard RoadInglewood, CA 9011

USX Corp.USX Foundation600 Grant StreetPittsburgh, PA 15230

DeWitt Wallace Fund1270 Avenue of the AmericasNew York, NY 10020

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.Wal-Mart Foundation702 S.W. Eighth StreetBentonville, AK 72716

William K. WarrenFoundation

P.O. Box 470372Tulsa, OK 74147

Robert A. Welch Foundation4605 Post Oak PlaceHouston, TX 77027

Westinghouse Electric Corp.Westinghouse Educational

FoundationWestinghouse BuildingGateway CenterPittsburgh, PA 15222

Whitaker Foundation875 Poplar Church RoadCamp Hill, PA 17011

Heather HollowellManager212/418-7926

Richard ColeManager, Corporation


R. P. Van ZandtVice-President213/977-6172

Judy Servoff, Vice-PresidentJane J. Prancan, DirectorCorrorate Community

Relations303/793-6500

William A. Gregory, Jr.Manager, Foundation412/433-5237

Arlene ShulerDeputy Director212/489-1540

James Von GrempDirector, Foundation501/273-4000

W. R. LissauPresident918/492-8100

Norbert DittrichExecutive Manager713/961-9884

Cecile SpringerPresident412/642-6035

Miles J. Gibbons, Jr.Executive Director717/763.1391

I . 1

No

Yes

No

No

No

Yes

No

No

No

No

No

109

110

Joseph B. WhiteheadFoundation

1400 Peachtree Center Tower230 Peach Tree Street, N.W.Atlanta, GA 30303

Lettie Pate WhiteheadFoundation

1400 Peachtree Center Tower230 Peach Tree Street, N.W.Atlanta, GA 30303

Wiengart Foundation1200 Wilshire BoulevardLos Angeles, CA 90017

Amherst iVilder Foundation919 L.efond AvenueSt. Paul, MN 55104

Winn-Dixie StoresWinn-Dixie Stores

FoundationBox BJacksonville, FL 32203

Wortham Foundation2777 Allen ParkwayHouston, TX 77019

Xerox Corp.Xerox FoundationP.O. Box 1600Stamford, CT 06904

Boisfeuillet Jones, "residentCharles FL Mc Tier,

Vice-President404/522-6755

Boisfeuillet Jones, PresidentCharles H. Mc Tier, Vice-

President404/522-6755

Charles W JacobsonPresident213/482-4343

I.eonard H. WakeningPresident612/642-4000

John Parker JonesPresident, Foundation904/783-5000

Allen H. Carnal'President713/526-8849

Robert H. Gudger, Vice-President, Foundation

Higher Education andCommunity Affairs

Yes

No

No

No

No

Yes

APPENDIX 2Companies that Match to Junior or Community Colleges

The following is a list of corporations thatjunior a' community colleges:

/CF Industries, Inc.AMP IncorporatedARA Sep. 'ces, Inc.AT&TAbbott LaboratoriesThe Abell Foundation, Inc.Adams Harkness & Hill, Inc.The Aerospace CorporationAetna Life & CasualtyAid Association for LutheransAir Products & Chemicals, Inc.AKTioa Associates, Inc.Akzo America, Inc.Albany International CorporationAlberton's, Inc.Alco Standard CorporationAlexander & Baldwin, Inc.Allegheny Ludlum Steel

CorporationAllendale Mutual Insurance

CompanyAllied-Signal Inc.Allstate Insurance CompaniesAlpha Industries, Inc.Aluminum Company of AmericaAMAX, Inc.Amcast Industrial CorporationAmerada Hess CorporationAmerican Airhaes, Inc.American Broadcasting Companies,

Inc.American Brands, Inc.American Cyanamid CompanyAmerican Electric Power Company,

Inc.American Express CompanyAmerican General CorporationAmerican Home Products

CorporationAmerican International Group, Inc.American Motors CorporationAmerican Medical International, Inc.American Mutual Insurance

CompaniesAmerican National Bank & Trust

Company of Chicago

match gifts of their employees to

American Optical CorporationAmerican Sterilizer CompanyAmerican Standard, Inc.American Stock ExchangeAmerican States InsuranceAmerican United Life Insurance

CompanyAmeritech Servic s, Inc.AmeriTrust --.)any National

AssociationAmfac, Inc.Amoco CorporationAmstar CorporationArthur Andersen & CompanyThe AndersonsAnheuser-Busch Companies, Inc.Appleton Papers, Inc.Arkwright-Boston Manufacturers

Mutual Insurance CompanyArmco, Inc.Arrow-Hart, Inc.Ashland Oil, Inc.Associated Box CorporationAssociated Dry Goods CorporationGuy F. Atkinson Comp: of

CaliforniaAtlantic Richfield CompanyAutomatic Data Processing, Inc.AVCO CorporationBASF CorporationThe BOC Group, Inc.Badische CorporationM. S. Bailey & Son, BankersBall CorporationBaltimore BancorpBancroft-Whitney CompanyBank of BostonThe Bank of California, N.A.Bank of New England, N.A.The Bank of New YorkBank SouthBankers Life and CasualtyBankers Trust CompanyBarclays American CorporationC. R. Bard, Inc.Barnes Group, Inc.

111

112

Barnett Banks of Florida, Inc.Barry Wright CorporationThe Barton-Gillet CompanyBATUS Inc.Baxter Travenol Labs, Inc.Bay Banks Inc.Beatrice Companies, Inc.Bechtel Power CorporationA.G. Becker Paribas, Inc.Becton Dickinson and CompanyBeech Aircraft CorporationBell Communications Research, Inc.Bell Sc Howell CompanyBell of Pennsylvania & Diamond

State Telephone CompanyBellSouth CorporationBeloit CorporationBenis Company, Inc.The Bergen Record CorporationBest Products CompanyBigelow-Sanford, Inc.Bill Communications, Inc.Bird Companies Charitable

Foundation, Inc.H & R Block, Inc.Blount, Inc.Blue Bell, Inc.The Boeing CompanyBoise Cascade CorporationBorg-Warner CorporationThe Boston Globe Newspaper

CompanyBowater Inc.The Bowery Savings BankBowes.'Hanlon Advertising, Inc.Brake ley, John Price Jones Inc.Bernd Brecher and Associates, Inc.Bristol-Myers CompanyBrockway Glass Company, Inc.Brown-Forman CorporationJohn Brown Inc.Brunswick CorporationBuckbee Mears CompanyBuell Industries, Inc.Buffalo Color CorporationBunge CorporationBurlington Industries, Inc.Burlington Northern Inc.Leo Burnett Company, Inc.Burroughs Wellcome Company

Business Men's Assurance Companyof America

Butler Manufacturing CompanyCPC International Inc.Cabot CorporationCabot's StainsCa lex Manufacturing Company, Inc.Callanan Indt _ries Inc.Campbell Soup CompanyCapital Cities/ABC, Inc.Car3lina Power Sc Light CompanyCaro:ina Telephone & Telegraph

CompanyCarpenter Technology CorporationCarson Pirie Scott & CompanyCarter Hawley Hale Stores, Inc.Carter-Wallace, Inc.Castle and Cooke, Inc.Celanese CorporationCentel CorporationCenterre Bank, N.A.Central Illinois Light CompanyCentral Vermont Public Service

CorporationCentury Companies of AmericaCertainTeed CorporationChamberlain Manufacturing

CorporationChampion International

CorporationThe Chase Manhattan CorporationChemical BankChemtech Industries, Inc.Chesapeake CorporationChesapeake and Potomac Telephone

CompaniesChesebrough-Pond's, Inc.Chessie System RailroadsChevron CorporationChicago Pneumatic Tool CompanyChigaco Title & Trust CompanyChicago Tribune CompanyChrysler CorporationChubb Life Insurance Company of

AmericaChubb & Son Inc.Church Mutual Insurance CompanyCIBA-Geigy CorporationCIGNA CorporationCincinnati Bell, Inc.

Citicorp/CitibankThe Citizens and Southern Georgia

CorporationCitizens Fidelity Bank & Trust

CompanyThe Cleveland-Cliffs Iron CompanyCleveland Electric Illuminating

CompanyThe Clorox CompanyThe Coleman Company, Inc.Colgate-Palmolive CompanyCollins & Aikman CorporationColonial Bankcorp, Inc.Colonial Penn Group, IncColumbia Gas system, Inc.The Columbus Mutual Life

Insurance CompanyCombustion Engineering, Inc.Comerica IncCommerical Union Insurance

CompaniesCommonwealth Energy System, Inc.Commonwealth Insurance CompanyCommunications Satellite

CorporationConnecticut Savings BankConnecticut Bank & Trust CompanyConnecticut Mutual Life Insurance

CompanyConnecticut Natural Gas

CorporationConoco, Inc.Consolidated Papers. Inc.Consolidated F'.:son Company of

New York, .nc.Consolidation Coal CompanyThe Continental CorporationContinental Telecom Inc.Continental Can Company, Inc.Co-Op Banking Group CompaniesCooper IndustriesCooper Tire & Rubber CompanyThe Copley Press, Inc.Corning Glass WorksCowles Media CompanyCrane CompanyCray Research, Inc.Criton TechnologiesCrompton & Knowles

CorporationCross & Trecker Corporation

113

Crum & Forster, Inc.Cummins Engine Company, Inc.Dain Bosworth Inc.Dana CorporationThe Danforth FoundationDEKALB CorporationDelta Air Lines, Inc.Delta U.S. CorporationDeluxe Check Printers, Inc.Dennison Manufacturing CompanyDetroit Edison CompanyA.WG. Dewar Inc.The Dexter CorporationDiamond Crystal Salt CompanyDiamond Shamrock CorporationDifco LaboratoriesDigital Equipment CorporationDillingham CorporationDominion Resources, Inc.Donaldson Company Inc.Donaldson, Lufkin & JenretteR. R. Donnelley & Sons CompanyThe Dow Chemical CompanyDow Corning CorporationDow Jones & Company, Inc.Dry Dock Savings BankDuke Power CompanyThe Dun 8c Bradstreet CorporationDurham CorporationDuty Free Shoppers Group Ltd.EG&G, Inc.Eastern Gas and Fuel AssociatesEaton CorporationEconomics Laboratory, Inc.Educators Mutual Life Insurance

CompanyEgan Machinery CompanyElf Aquitaine, Inc.Emerson Electric CompanyEmery Air Freight CorporationEmhart CorporationEnglehard CorporationEngineered Systems & Development

CorporationEnron CorporationENSERCH CorporationEnsign-Bickford FoundationEnvirotech CorporationEquibankThe Equitable Life Assurance

Society of the U.S.

114

Equitable Life Insurance Companyof Iowa

Ethicon, Inc.Ethyl CorporationEuropean American BankEx-Cell-0 CorporationExxon Education FoundationFMC CorporationFacet Enterprises, Inc.Factory Mutual Engineering &

Research/Service BureauFairchild Industries, Inc.Farm Credit Banks of SpringfieldFederal-Mogul CorporationFederal National Mortgage

AssociationFederated Department Stores, Inc.Ferro CorporationFiduciary Trust Company (Boston)The Field CorporationThe Firestone Tire & Rubber

CompanyFirstBankcorp, Inc.First Bank System, Inc.The First Boston CorporationFirst Chicago Corporation/The First

National Bank of ChicagoFirst Hawaiian, Inc.First Interstate Bank of CaliforniaFirst Kentucky National

CorporationFirst Maryland BancorpFirst Mississippi CorporationFirst National Bank of PennsylvaniaFirst National Bank of Bartleslille,

OklahomaThe First National Bank of AtlantaFirst Union CorporationFirst Valley Bank (First Valley

Corporation)Fleet National BankFluor CorporationFord Motor CompanyThe Foxboro CompanyFreeport-McMoRan, Inc.Fruehauf CorporationH. B. Fuller CompanyFunderburke & Associates, Inc.GATX CorporationGTE CorporationE. & J. Gallo WineryGannett Foundation

l i.4. ... k,

Gary-Williams Oil Producer,ThePiton Foundation

Gast Manufacturing CorporationThe Gates CorporationGenCorp Inc.General Accident Insurance

Company of AmericaGenera Cable CompanyGenera Cinema CorporationGenera Defense CorporationGenera Dynamics CorporationGenera Electric CompanyGenera Foods CorporationGenera Housewares CorporationGenera Mills, Inc.Genera Signal CorporationGenRad FoundationGilbane Building CompanyGilman Paper CompanyP. H. Glatfelter CompanyGlaxo, Inc.Goldman, Sachs & CompanyGoldomeThe BF Goodrich CompanyGould, Inc.Goulds Pumps, Inc.W. R. Grace & CompanyW. W. Grainger, Inc.GrandMet USA, Inc.The Graphic Printing Company

Inc.Great Lakes Carbon CorporationGreat Northern Nekoosa

CorporationGregory Poole Equipment CompanyGrinnell Mutual Reinsurance

CompanyGrumman CorporationThe Guardian Life Insurance

Company of AmericaGulf & Western Inc.Hackney Industries Inc.Halliburton CompanyHallmark Cards, Inc.Hamilton BankHampton & Harper, Inc.M. A. Hanna CompanyHarper & Row Publishers, Inc.Harris BankHarris CorporationHarsco CorporationHartford National Corporation

The Hartford Steam BoilerInspection and InsuranceCompany

H. J. Heinz CompanyHercules Inc.Hershey Entertainment & Resort

CompanyHershey Foods CorporationHewitt AssociatesThe Higbee CompanyHigher Education PublicationsHoffman-LaRoche Inc.Holiday CorporationHolmes & Narver, Inc.Homestake Mining CompanyGeo. A. Hormel & CompanyHospital Corporation of AmericaHoughton Mifflin CompanyHousehold International, Inc.Harvey Hubbell, Inc.J. M. Huber CorporationHuck Manufacturing CompanyHuffy CorporationHughes Aircraft CompanyE. F. Hutton & Company, Inc.The Hydraulic CompanyIC Industries, Inc.ICI Americas Inc.IDS Financial Services Inc.ITT CorporationIU InternationalIllinois BellIllinois Tool Works Inc.Indiana Bell Telephone Company,

Inc.Industrial Indemnity CompanyIndustrial Risk InsurersIngersoll-Rand CompanyInstron CorporationIntegon CorporationIntel CorporationIntelligent Controls, Inc.The Interlake CorporationInternational Flavors and Fragrances

Inc.International Multi mods

CorporationInternational Paper CompanyInternational Minerals & Chemical

CorporationInternational Business Machines

Corporation

115

Iowa Resource Inc.Itek CorporationJSJ CorporationJack Eckerd CorporationJames River CorporationJamesbury CorporationJefferies & Company, Inc.Jefferson-Pilot Communications

CompanyJefferson-Pilot CorporationJewel Companies, Inc.John Hancock Mutual Life

Insurance CompanyA. Johnson & Company, Inc.Johnson Controls, Inc.Johnson & HigginsJohnson & JohnsonS. C. Johnson & Son, Inc.Jones Group, Inc.Jostens, Inc.K Mart CorporationKansas City Southern Industries,

Inc.Keebler CompanyKeefe, Bruyette & Woods, Inc.Kellogg CompanyThe M. W. Kellogg CompanyKellogg GroupThe Kerite CompanyKerr-McGee CorporationKidder, Peabody & Company, Inc.Kingsbury Machine Tool

CorporationKip linger Washington EditorsKnight-Ridder Newspapers, Inc.H. Kornstamm & Company, Inc.Koppers Company, Inc.Kraft, Inc.Lanier Business Products, Inc., A

Harris CompanyLaSalle National BankThe Law Company, Inc.The Lawyers Co-operative

Publishing CompanyLehigh Portland Cement CompanyLever Brothers CompanyLevi Strauss & CompanyThe Liberty CorporationEli Lilly and CompanyLincoln National CorporationThomas J. Lipton, Inc.Little, Brown and Company

11'

116

Loews CorporationLone Star Industries, Inc.Lotus Development CorporationThe Louisiana Land and

Exploration CompanyLubrizol CorporationLucky Stores, Inc.Ludlow CorporationLukens Inc.Lummus Crest, Inc.Lutheran BrotherhoodMCA Inc.MSI InsuranceM & T Chemicals IncorporatedMTS Systems CorporationJohn D. and Catherine T

MacArthur FoundationMack Trucks, Inc.R. H. Macy & Company, Inc.Maguire Oil CompanyManufacturers Hanover CorporationManufacturers National CorporationMarathon Oil CompanyMaremont CorporationThe Marine CorporationMarine Midland Bank, N.A.Maritz Inc.Mark Controls CorporationMarsh & McLennan Companies. Inc.Martin Marietta CorporationMassachusetts Mutual Life Insurance

CompanyMast Drug CompanyMattel, Inc.The May Department Stores

CompanyMcCormick & Company, Inc.McDonald's CorporationMcDonnell Douglas CorporationMcGraw-Hill, Inc.McKesson CorporationMc Quay, Inc.The Mead CorporationMebane Packaging CorporationMechanics BankMedtronic, Inc.Mellon Bank CorporationMerck & Company, Inc.Meredith CorporationMerit Oil CorporationMeritor Financial GroupMerrill Lynch & Company, Inc.

Metropolitan Life InsuranceCompany

Mettler Instrument CorporationMichigan Bell Telephone Company

Mut.al AssuranceCompany

The Midland Mutual Life InsuranceCompany

Midland-Ross CorporationMidatlantic Banks Inc.Miehle-Goss-Dexter Inc.Milliken & CompanyMillipore CorporationMilton Bradley CompanyMinnesota Mining & Manufacturing

Company, Inc.Minnesota Mutual Life Insurance

CompanyThe Mitre CorporationMobil Oil CorporationMohasco CorporationMonarch Capital CompanyMonsanto CompanyThe Montana Power CompanyMontgomery Ward & Company,

Inc.Monumental CorporationMONY Financial ServicesMOOG IncorporatedMoore Financial Group, Inc.Moore McCormack Resources, Inc.Morgan Construction CompanyMorgan Guaranty Trust Company

of New YorkMorgan Stanley & Company,

IncorporatedMorrison-Knudsen Company, Inc.Morse Shoe, Inc.Motorola Inc.Charles Stewart Mott FoundationMurphy Oil USA, Inc.Mutual of AmericaMutual Benefit LifeMutual of OmahaNACCO Industries, Inc.NCNB CorporationNCR CorporationNL Industries, Inc.NRC, Inc.Nabisco Brands, Inc.Nalco Chemical CompanyNational City Corporation

Nationa Can CorporationNationa Distillers and Chemical

CorporationNationa Gypsum CompanyNationa Life Insurance CompanyNationa Medical Enterprises, Inc.Nationa Steel CorporationNationa Westminster Bank USANationwide Mutual Insurance

CompanyNepera, Inc.The New England Education Loan

Marketing CorporationNew England Business Service, Inc.New England Electric System

CompaniesNew England TelephoneNew Jersey Bell Telephone CompanyNew Jersey Natural Gas CompanyThe New York Bank for SavingsNew York Life Insurance CompanyNew York TelephoneThe New York Times CompanyThe New Yorker Magazine Inc.Newsweek, Inc.The Samuel Roberts Nobel

Foundation, Inc.Nordson CorporationNorfolk Southern CorporationNorth American Philips CorporationNortheast UtilitiesNorthern Illinois GasNorthern States Power CompanyThe Northern Trust CompanyNorthern Telecom, Inc.Northwest Airlines, Inc.Northwest Industries, Inc.Northwestern National Life

Insurance CompanyNorthwestern Bell CorporationNorthwestern Mutual Life Insurance

CompanyNorton CompanyW. W. Norton & Company, Inc.Northwest CorporationNoxell CorporationJohn Nuveen & Company

IncorporatedNYNEX CorporationOccidental Oil & Gas CompanyOccidental Petroleum CorporationOhio Bell Telephone Company

117

Ohio Fdison CompanyThe Ohio National Life Insurance

CompanyOklahoma Gas and Electric

CompanyOld Stone BankOlin CorporationOneida Ltd.Oregon Portland Cement CompanyOwens-Corning Fiberglass

CorporationOwens-Illinois, Inc.Oxford Industries, Inc.PHH Group, Inc.PPG Industries, Inc.PQ CorporationPaccar, Inc.Pacific Lighting CorporationPacific Mutual Life Insurance

CompanyPacific Northwest Bell Telephone

CompanyPacific Resources, Inc.Panhandle Eastern CorporationParker-Hannifin CorporationThe Paul Revere CompaniesPear le Health Services, Inc.Pechiney CorporationPenn Central Telecommunications

CompanyThe Penn Central Corporationj. C. Penney Company, Inc.Pennsylvania Power & Light

CompanyPennwalt CorporationPennzoil CompanyPeople's BankThe People's Gas Light and Coke

CompanyPepsi Co.-Inc.PET IncorporatedPfizer, Inc.Phelps Dodge CorporationPhiladelphia National BankPhilip Morris Companies, Inc.Phillips Petroleum CompanyPhoenix Mutual Life Insurance

CompanyPiedmont Aviation, Inc.The Pillsbury CompanyThe Pioneer Group, Inc.Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc.

irsi...I 1 to

118

Piper, Jaffray & Hopwood Inc.Pitney Bowes, Inc.Pittsburgh National BankPittway CorporationPlante & Moran, CPA'sPlayboy Enterprises, Inc.Pneumo Abex CorporationPogo Producing CompanyPolaroid CorporationPope & Talbot, Inc.Potlatch CorporationPreformed Line Products CompanyPremark International, Inc.Price Brothers CompanyT. Rowe Price Associates, Inc.Primerica CorporationThe Principal Financial GroupThe Prospect Hill FoundationProtection Mutual Insurance

CompanyProvident Life and Accident

Insurance CompanyProvident Mutual Life Insurance

CompanyProvident National BankThe Prudential Insurance Company

of AmericaPublic Service Company of

ColoradoPublic Service Electric and Gas

CompanyPuget Sound Power & Light

CompanyQuaker Chemical Corr ,/The Quaker Oats CompanyQuaker State Oil Refining

CorporationR.J.R. Nabisco, Inc.RKO General, Inc.Rainier BancorporationArthur D. Raybin Associates, Inc.Raytheon CompanyReader's Digest Association, Inc.Reading & Bates CorporationReliance Electric CompanyReliance Insurance CompaniesRepublic National Bank of New

YorkResearchCottrell, Inc.The Research Institute of America,

Inc.Revlon, Inc.

I rt r,A .,211

Rexnord Inc.Reynolds Metals CompanyRichardson-Vicks, Inc.Riviana Foods Inc.Rockefeller Family &: Associates7.he Rockefeller Brothels Fund, Inc.The Rockefeller GroupRockwell International CorporationRohn and Haas CompanyRolling Thunder, Inc.ROLM CorporationRolscreen CompanyRorer Group Inc.Rospatch CorporationRoss, Johnston & Kersting, Inc.Royal InsuranceRubbermaid IncorporatedRUST International CorporationRyco Division, Reilly-Whiteman,

Inc.SDS Biotech CorporationSKF Industries, Inc.SNETSPS Technologies, Inc.Safeco Insurance CompanySaga CorporationThe St. Paul CompaniesSalomon Inc.Sanders Associates, Inc.Sandoz, Inc.Santa Fe Southern Pacific

CorporationSara Lee CorporationSchering-Plough CorporationSchlegel CorporationCharles Schwab &: Company Inc.The Scott & Fetzer CompanyScott Paper CompanySeaboard System RailroadJoseph E. Seagram & Sons, Inc.Sealed Power CorporationSealright Company, Inc.G. D. Searle & CompanySeattle Trust & Savings BankSecurityConnecticut Life Insurance

CompanySecurity Pacific CorporationSecurity Van Lines, Inc.Shell Oil CompanySheller-Globe CorporationShenandoah Life Insurance

Company

The Sherwin-Williams CompanySiemens Capital CorporationSiemens Energy & Automation, Inc.Sifco Industries, Inc.Simpson Investment CompanySkinner CorporationSmithKline Beckman CorporationSociety Bank, National AssociationSonat Inc.Sony Corporation of AmericaSoo Line Railroad CompanySouth Carolina National

CorporationSouth Central Bell Telephone

CompanySouthern BellSouthern Life Insurance CompanyThe Southland CorporationSouth-Western Publishing CompanySovran Financial CorporationSpring Arbor Distribution CompanySprings Industries, Inc.Squibb CorporationThe Stackpole CorporationStanadyne, Inc.Standard Insurance CompanyThe Standard Oil CompanyThe Standard Products CompanyStanhome, Inc.The Stanley WorksState Mutual Life Assurance

Company of AmericaState Street Bank and Trust

CompanyStauffer Chemical CompanyStearnes Catalytic World

CorporationSteiger Tractor, Inc.Sterling Drug, Inc.J. P. Stevens & Company, Inc.Stone & Webster, Inc.The Stop and Shop Companies, Inc.Subaru of America, Inc.Sun Company, Inc.Sun Life Assurance Company of

CanadaThe Superior Oil CompanySwiss American Securities, Inc.Syntex CorporationTRW Inc.Tambrands, Inc.Tandy Corporation

119

Technimetrics, Inc.Tektronix, Inc.Tennant CompanyTenneco Inc.Tesoro Petroleum CorporationTexas Commerce BankHouston

FoundationTexas Eastern CorporationTexas Gas Transmission

CorporationTexas Instruments Inc.Textron Inc.Thomas & Betts CorporationJ. Waiter Thompson CompanyTICORTime Inc.The Times Journal CompanyTimes MirrorTimes Publishing Company and

Congressional Quarterly, Inc.The Toro CompanyThe Torrington CompanyTotal Petroleum (North America)

Ltd.Towers, Perrin, Forster & CrosbyTownsend & Bottum, Inc.Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc.Trailer Train CompanyThe Trane CompanyTransamerica CorporationTransco Energy CompanyThe Travelers CorporationTravelers Express Company, Inc.Tremco Inc.Trinova CorporationTriskelion Ltd.Trust Company Bank, AtlantaThe Turner CorporationUS West, Inc.UG1 CorporationUNUM Life Insurance CompanyUS AirUSG CorporationUnion BankUnion Camp CorporationUnion Ele,.ric CompanyUnion Mutual Fire Insurance

CompanyUnion Pacific CorporationUnion Trust CompanyUnited Bank of Denver, N. A.United Engineers & Constructors, Inc.

12:

120

United Cas Pipe LineUnited Jersey BanksUnited Mutual Savings BankUnited Parcel ServiceUnited States Trust Company of

New YorkUnited States Tobacco CompanyUnited States Leasing International,

Inc.United Technologies CorporationUnited Telephone Company of

Indiana, Inc.United Telephone Company of

FloridaUnited Telecommunications, Inc.United Telephone Company of OhioUnited Virginia BankUnocal CorporationThe Upjohn CompanyUrban Investment and Development

CompanyUSLIFE CorporationUtah International Inc.Valero Energy CorporationVarian Associates, Inc.Vulcan Materials CompanyThe Wachovia Corporation!

Wachovia Bank & Trust Company,N.A.

Warnaco

12

Warner-Lambert CompanyWashington National Insurance

CompanyThe Washington Fost CompanyWaste Management, Inc.Watkins-Johnson CompanyWausau Insurance CompaniesC. J. Webb, Inc.Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.West Point-Pepperell Foundation,

Inc.Western Publishing Company, Inc.Westvaco CorporationWhirlpool CorporationWhittaker CorporationJohn Wiley & Sons, Inc.Willamette Industries, Inc.Williams & Company, Inc.Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc.The Wiremold CompanyWisconsin Bell Inc.Wisconsin Electric Power CompanyWolverine World Wide, inc.Wyman-Gordon CompanyTh. Yankee Companies, Inc.Yarway CorporationArt"-'r YoungYoung & Rubicam Inc.Zapata CorporationZurn Industries, Inc.

Index

A

Aid to Families with Dependent Chil-dren (AFDC), 82

Alternative funding: search for, 1-2;variation of, 52-56. See also Reve-nue diversification; Revenue gener-ation; Revenue source

Alumni, 2; relations with, 30-32; re-sources on, 85; as source of funds,29-30; as volunteers, 32-33

American Federation of Small Busi-ness, 65

American Nurses' Association, 4L 43Angel, D., 2, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15Arnold, A. D., 3Aslanian, C. B., 37, 44

B

Baker, G. A., III, 23, 27Barton, Stevens, and Massarsky, Ltd.,

60, 66Belmont Technical College, 53-54, 55Betz, E, 37, 44Blank, A. S., 25Blocker, C. E., 37, 44Breneman, D. W., 59, 66Brightman, R. W, 3, 57, 66

C

Cable television, 3, 46-47California, 58, 59, for-profit ventures

in, 64-65; performance contractingin, 75; tax-exempt status in, 62-63.See also Proposition 13

Carnegie Council on Policy Issues inHigher Education, 57, 58, 66

Catanzaro, J. L., 3Chand, S., 3Child care, 55Citrus College, 12-13Clayton, P. C., 25, 26Commercial development of land,

67-68; benefits from, 71-72; cau-

tions on, 72-73; concept considera-tion in, 68-69; developer selectionfor, 70-71; development authorityfor, 69-70; financial considerationsin, 71; plan formulation for, 69

Community college foundation(s), 2,7; active 12; assets of, 10-11; estab-lishment of, 11; history of, 8-9;resources on, 86-88, 92; revitaliza-tion example of, 12-13; success of,:1-12, 15-20. See also Foundations

Community colleges. commercialland development by, 67-73; con-tract training at, 37-44; for-profitactivities of, 61-65; revenue diversi-fication of, 60, 65-66; revenue situ-ation of, 57-59

Companies. See CorporationsCompton College, 64Computer-assisted design (CAD), 51Computer-integrated manufacturing

(CAM), 51Continuing education, cosponsor-

ships model for, 41-44Continuing Education Center for

Health Professionals (CECHP),41-44; and Instructional TelevisionFixed Service, 47

Contract model, 39-41Contract training, 2-3; contract

model for, 39-40; cosponsorshipsmodel for, 41-44; EDI as, 38-39

Corporations: giving policies of, 86,93-110; with matching policy,111-120

Cosponsorships model, 41-41Council for the Advancement and

Support of Education (CASE), 15Crowson, J., 10, 13-14Curry, B. A., 3, 37, 44

D

DANTES (Defense Activity for Non-Traditional Education Support) cat-alogue, 80

1 2 ,

121

1 122

Degerstedt, L. M., 8, 14Delta College, 55Distance learning, 45-46; cable net-

work for, 46-47; Instructional Tele-vision Fixed Service for, 47; satellitevideo teleconferencing for, 47-49

Duffy, E. E, 11, 14

E

Economic development, 51-56Edison State Community College, 54Emory-Riddle Aeronautical Univer-

sity, 60Employee Development Institute

(EDI), 38-39; and cable television,46-47

Endowed Teaching Chair Program,2; and distinguished professorsconcept, 21-22; as motivator forcontributors, 26-27; plan and orga-nization of, 24-26; and Teaching/Learning Project, 23-24

F

Federal Economic Development Ad-ministration, 54

Fields, C., 52, 56Fine, M., 25Florida, alternative funding in, 53Florida Academic Improvement Trust

Fund (FAITF), 21, 22Florida Community College at Jack-

sonville (FCCJ), performance con-tracting at, 75, 77, 78, 79-80, 81-83

For-profit activities, 3; criticisms of,61-62; examples of, 64-65; organi-zation of, 63-64; types of, 62-63

Foundations, 2; policies of, 93-110.See also Community college foun-dation(s)

Friedrich, 0., 57, 66Friends, alumni as, 29-33Fund raising: resources on, 88-90, 91,

92; successful, 1,40

G

G.I. Bill of 1944, 37Gares, D., 2, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15General Motors, 55

Gill, D., 25Glandon, B. L., 12, 14Goodyear Tire, 55Government; and economic develop-

ment, 3, 51-55; performance con-tracting for, 79-80; reduced ex-penditures by, 1, 58-59

Graham, F. R., 11, 14Grants: Pell, 58; versus performance

contracts, 76Grinnell College, 60

H

Hall, J., 16Heintzelman, K., 3Heller, S., 23, 27Herrmann, S. E., 2, 21, 27Higher Education Act of 1965, 9, 22Hollingsworth, P., 11, 12, 14Hopkins, B., 61, 66

I

Institute for New Enterprise Develop-ment, 65

Instructional Tele% ision Fixed Sen ice(ITFS), 3, 47

Internal Revenue Service, 9, 61; andnonprofit status, 62, 63, 64

J

Jackson, C., 3Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA),

55, 76-77, 82

K

Katsinas, S. G., 2, 21, 27Keener, B. J., 22, 27Keeping America Working Project, 55Kooi, J. B., 3, 45, 49

L

Lake County, College of, 55Lakeland College Foundation, 7Land. See Commercial development

of landLestina, R., 3, 37, 44Lindner, W. K., 3, 67, 73

Long Beach City College, 8Luck, M. F., 8, 10, 14

M

McCabe, R. H., 25, 26McDowell, R. W., 3, 67, 73Mc Kenney, J., 52Maradian, S., 3, 51, 56Massachusetts, alternative funding in,

52-53Media delivery systems, 3. See also

Cable television; Instructional Tele-vision Fixed Service (ITFS); Satel-lite video teleconferencing

Miami-Dade Community College, 7;Endowed Teaching Chair of, 21-27

Miami-Dade Community CollegeFoundation, 22-23, 25

Mid-Metro Regional Development,Incorporated, 38

Midland College Foundation, 7Midway Junior College, 8Mingle, J. R., 58, 59, 66Model: contract, 39-40; cosponsor-

ships, 4i-44; distance learning,45-49

N

National Business League, 65National Council for Resource Devel-

opment, 15National Council for Small Business

Development, 65National Home Study Council

Guide, 80National Trust for Historic Preserva-

tion, 54Naylor, H. H., 33Nelson, S. C., 59, 66Nusz, P. J., 8, 14

0

Ohio, alternative funding in, 53-55Oliver, J. G., 3, 75, 83Orange Coast College, 64

P

Pairick Henry Community CollegeFoundation, 7

123

Pell grants, 58Performance contracts, 76; availabil-

ity of, 76-77; developing proposalsfor, 80; at FCCJ, 79-80; flexibilityand accountability of, 77-78; moni-toring, 81; operation of, 78-Th,problems with, 81-83; versusgrants, 76

Plummer, R. H., 37, 44Pokrass, R. J., 2, 29, 33Powers, D. R., 37, 44Powers, M. F., 37, 44Presidents Blue Ribbon Committee,

26Private Industry Council, 77, 79Private sector, solicitation from,

15-20. See also CorporationsProfit. See For-profit activitiesProposition 13 (California), 12, 13

R

Rasmussen, P., 12, 13, 14Reilley, T. A., 11, 14Retrenchment, 58Revenue diversification, 60, 65-66;

for-profit activities for, 61-65Revenue generation: contract model

for, 39-40; cosponsorship modelfor, 41-44; distance learning modelfor, 45-49

Revenue source, commercial develop-ment of land as, 67-73. See alsoAlternative funding; Revenue di-versification; Revenue generation

Richardson, R. C. Jr., 37, 44Robison, S., 8, 12, 14Roueche, J. E., 23, 27Rowland, A. W., 29, 33Ryan, G. J., 2, 3, 15, 16, 20

S

Santa Barbara Community College,64

Santa Barbara Community CollegeFoundation, 7

Satellite video teleconferencing, 47-49Schoolcraft College, commercial de-

velopment of land by, 3, 67-73Schoolcraft Development Authority,

69, 71

12:_

124

Service Corps of Retired Executives(SCORE), 65

Sharron, W H., Jr., II, 12, 14, 15Sinclair Community College, 55Siskiyous, College of the, 65Skidmore College, 60Small Business Administration

(SBA), 65Smith, N., 16Smith, N. J., 15, 17, 18, 20Social security benefits, 58Southern Regional Education Board,

58Spair, D., 3Spence, C. C., 3, 75, 83Stanford, 60Statistic process control (SPC), 51Success: of fourdations, 11-12; in

fund raising, 15-20; resources on,85-86, 90-91

Supplemental Educational Opportu-nity Grants, 58-59

T

Taxes, 9, 62-63Teaching, and fund raising, 2. See

also Endowed Teaching ChairProgram

Teaching/Learning Project, 23-24Teaching / Learning Project 1986-87

Summary Report, 24, 27

12C

Technology, media, 45-49Technology training, 51-55Teleconferencing, 3. See also Satellite

video teleconferencingThomas Edison programs, 55Thor, L. M., 75, 83Tolle, D. J., 10, 14Traylor, H. J., 2, 21, 27Triton College: contract training at,

38-40; cosponsorships model at,41-44; distance learning at, 45-49

Tyler Junior College, 54-55

U

U.S. Department of Defense, 55, 79-80United Steelworkers of America, 54,

55

V

Video teleconferencing. See Satellitevideo teleconferencing

W

Walters, L., II, 14Wattenbarger, J. L., 11, 14, 22, 27Williams, R. M., 60, 62, 66Willing Founders Program, 25-26Wilson, M., 33Wisconsin, University of, 60Wolfson, L, III, 25

127

SIAMIN1.16,11.0...:17..7::".10.4.67.011M01:0C1/1.111.1

1......6.400 re. .40.0e0 <4..to. 1

'..77.7.7

1100. int00 SAA 00,044, .1

000.0. no0.,

100,0 Ot0 n0' 140.4.. 000 flA 1.0 1.004 10C,

/.000. P100.0 ,00,901, P0.0.0 0....0001

* r=.:_ii

X,r,1/44,42.

From the Editors' Notes

In large and small institutions across the country, the newmandate has been to identify and tap new sources of funds.This volume of New Directions for Community Collegespresents a series of descriptive chapters on the mostsuccessful alternative funding ventures. Its purpose isto indicate where and how new ventures have aidedtwo-year colleges and to provide a sense of how otherinstitutions might follow in this pursuit.

JOSSEY-BASS

ERIC Clearinghouse forJunior Colleges

M4M11.4014/MII4GMIK4OKII4i.FC-RI014401CIMMII414,14.

t'ivi,:dvaviihnKRALMNI:tilVIKKKoNYIA.WO.WW/41,1:Veblee4.7.12

document resume ed 320 651 jc 900 385 author ...development, the community college, and technology...

Documents