Chapter 1: Introduction
Since the late 1950s, the presence of black students and faculty has increased on predominantly white campuses as well as at historically black colleges and universities (Allen, Epp, & Haniff, 1991). The dramatic increase of black students on white campuses has occurred with many attendant problems, as exemplified by the interracial adjustment problems occurring in the early 1990s on the campus at Stanford University. Some black and white educators maintain that the historically black colleges and universities’ mission has been accomplished by providing higher education for blacks who by law and/or custom were barred from attending white private and public colleges and universities prior to 1954. They question the continued existence of historically black colleges and universities on grounds that they provide a two-tiered higher education system within an integrated society, which is counterproductive financially, philosophically, and pedagogically. On the other hand, historically black and college university advocates contend that racial segregation still persists and that historically black colleges and universities continue to perform functions unavailable on white campuses that are necessary for black youth (Brown, 1980). These proponents point out that historically black colleges and universities, unlike other colleges, are united in a mission to meet the educational and emotional needs of black students as well as the needs of the black community — that is, the preparation of black youth for leadership roles and professional services in the black community. The issue evolving from these two positions has been exacerbated by the ongoing ugly and provocative racial incidents on white campuses since the late 1970s.
In the years ahead, historically black colleges and universities will face donors and prospects who are different from those of the past, requiring new ways of communicating, organizing, and thinking about relationships. These individuals will be of diverse backgrounds and experiences and will hold different attitudes toward higher education and their own institutions than did alumni in the past. This change will require new programs and initiatives to keep higher education among their top priorities for philanthropy (Bowles, Decosta, ; Tollett, 1971).
Fund raisers in other types of charitable organizations were earlier than those in higher education to recognize the shifting realities of demographic change and adopt the sophisticated techniques of marketing to address their constituencies. Higher education fund raising has enjoyed a somewhat “protected” environment in decades past. Few other types of organizations have addressed constituencies that were relatively homogenous, affluent, and “captive,” having spent four or more years of their lives physically present at the institution—in a sense, an intensive and prolonged opportunity for “cultivation” that other types of organizations could only envy.
Higher education development officers can learn much from their colleagues in other types of charitable organizations who have developed effective programs and initiatives for addressing their more diverse constituencies. There is likely to be more commonality in fund-raising practice in the years ahead, as higher education adopts more of the techniques of the broader not-for-profit sector while, at the same time, a growing number of not-for-profit organizations adopt “university-style” fund-raising models and refine their own pursuit of major gifts. This is not to suggest that charity auctions will soon become a main stay of university fund raising, nor will that local food banks be launching billion-dollar campaigns. But, the adoption of more similar techniques is already occurring in some fundraising specialties, fostered, for example, by the growth of professional organizations like the Association of Professional Researchers for Advancement (APRA) and the National Committee on Planned Giving (NCPG), which include professionals from a variety of institutional and organizational types (Rosso, 1991).
For higher education development officers, this “professional convergence” offers the promise of increased effectiveness in confronting the changing realities of their work. But, it also carries the risk that a growing identity with the “fund-raising profession” will exacerbate their historic isolation from their academic colleagues on the campus and further complicate their relationships with colleagues in other disciplines of institutional advancement. The trend toward incentive-based compensation of development officers provides an illustration. The practice has been common in other types of not-for-profit organizations for a long time and has been adopted by historically black colleges and universities increasingly over the past decade. It reflects not only the professional convergence mentioned above, but also a movement toward a business culture quite different from the traditional values of academe.
This paper examines the effectiveness of fundraising and capital campaigning programs for Historically Black Colleges and Universities with very limited resources. The Historically Black Colleges and Universities considered in the study are colleges and universities that have less than 2,000 students currently (or the most up to date data at hand) enrolled. The paper aims to create a comprehensive examination of different facets affecting the effectiveness of fundraising and capital campaigning in selected Historically Black Colleges and Universities. In order to create a holistic view of the study, the paper aims to provide a Historical Overview of the Historically Black College and Universities, particularly with small private colleges and universities serving 2000 students or less. In addition, there will be a presentation on the current fund-raising and capital campaigning programs and initiatives for higher Education, Fund Raising and Capital Campaigning programs and initiatives for Historically Black College and Universities with particular focus on the factors affecting fund raising for these schools to include Capital Campaigns and lastly, Literature pertaining to Annual Funds, Phone-based telethons, Planned Giving programs, Gifts in Kind, Endowments, directed towards fund raising and capital campaigning for Historically Black College and Universities or higher education. In choosing the literature, the study would acquire journal entries from relevant publications and journals. In terms of the date of publication of these studies, this paper would only acquire studies made from 1950 up to present time. Setting a limit to the dates aims to present very relevant and up to date information to the readers where we will base the information.
After presenting relevant literature to create a solid basis for the study, the paper would then present the methodology of the study, particularly the research methodology and the description of the research design. The results of the study will be presented following the presentation of the methodology after which the resulting assertions and findings will be included under the conclusion portion of the study.
Chapter 2: Review of Related Literature
This section of the study presents four topics pertinent to creating a solid foundation for research on our topic – an examination of effective fundraising and capital campaigning for small private historically black colleges and universities with very limited resources. The four topics presented in the succeeding text will revolve around providing a historical overview of Historically black colleges and universities with particular emphasis on small private Historically black colleges and universities serving 2000 students or less, fund raising and capital campaigning programs and initiatives for higher education, fund raising and capital campaigning programs and initiatives for Historically black colleges and universities with particular focus on the factors affecting fund raising for these schools to include capital campaigning, and literature pertaining to annual funds, Phone-based telethons, planned giving programs, gifts in kind, endowments directed towards fund raising and capital campaigning for Historically black colleges and universities or for higher education. The first part of the review of related literature would deal on the historical overview of historically black colleges and universities with a particular emphasis on the small private educational institutions serving 2000 students or less.
Within the area of black higher education, private and public historically black colleges and universities have had a long and rich history (Bowles, Decosta, ; Tollett, 1971). During the past 150 years, they have served hundreds of thousands of men and women who otherwise might never have received the chance for higher education. A considerable portion of historically black college and university graduates have gone on to become achievers and community leaders while some have even been blessed to have gained national recognition and stature (Blackwell, 1981). To present historically black colleges and universities systematically, the study presents the profiles and background of these educational institutions using two categories: the Atlanta University Center and the other historically black colleges and universities still currently providing services to students. The study would first provide a comprehensive presentation on the Atlanta University Center due to its uniqueness as the major educational center for both black students and faculty in the US.
The Atlanta University Center is a relatively small not-for-profit organization and is arguably the oldest and largest consortium of black private higher education institutions in the world. Its network of six campuses; the Clark Atlanta University, the Interdenominational Theological Center (serving 2,500 students), Morehouse College (serving more than 2,500 students [NAFEO 1991]), Morehouse School of Medicine, Morris Brown College, and Spelman College create a very solid opportunity for holistic and continuous education – undergraduate, graduate, and professional education opportunities for all (Atlanta University Center, 1987). The consortium has the dual responsibility of promoting certain coordinated operations and administering center wide programs for all six institutions. This consortium began in 1929 with the signing of a binding agreement known as the “contract of affiliation” between the presidents of Atlanta University, Morehouse College, and Spelman College. In 1972, the member institutions resource shared and coordinated with each other in order to address the growing budget, number of enrollees and expansions of corporeal plants. The AUC was fashioned because of this initiative of cooperation. In order to further improve on the services of the AUC, it initiated several two-way ventures that constituted several ventures that can be classified as fund raising or capital campaigning or creating an alternative means of acquiring the needed tools and equipments without the need for money (American Council on Education, 1987).
Clark Atlanta University was incorporated on July 1, 1988, as a pre-dominantly African-American, private, urban, coeducational institution offering undergraduate, graduate, and professional degrees. Clark Atlanta University is one of only two historically black private comprehensive universities in the nation that awards degrees from the bachelor’s degree through the doctorate. The university is comprised of the School of Arts and Sciences and the professional Schools of Business Administration, Education, Library and Information Studies, and Social Work. Clark Atlanta University inherited the historical missions and achievements of its two parent institutions: Atlanta University and Clark College (Brazziel, & Brazziel, 1987).
The Interdenominational Theological Center (ITC) is one of the first institutions of its kind, bringing together the students, faculties, and assets of four independent seminaries, which represent as many denominations, into a two-way, ecumenical, professional graduate school of religious studies. ITC was chartered in 1958 through the mutual efforts of six denominations represented by four schools of theology: (1) the Morehouse School of Faith and theological studies, founded by the Baptist church in 1867; (2) the Gammon Theological Seminary, founded by the United Methodist church in 1869 as a department of faith and theological studies at Clark College; (3) the Turner Theological Seminary, founded by the African Methodist church in 1885 as a department of Morris Brown College; and (4) the Phillips School of Theology, founded in 1944 by the Christian Methodist church. Two additional seminaries joined the center at later dates: The Johnson C. Smith Seminary, Inc., founded by the Presbyterian Church in 1867 as a department of the Bible Institute in Charlotte, North Carolina, joined during the 1969-1970 school year; and the Charles H. Moson Theological Seminary, a Church of God in Christ, joined in 1970 (“Time almanac 2001”, 2000).
The ITC’s primary mission is to provide quality theological education for the predominantly black Christian churches. To this end, its curriculum is directed toward the preparation of persons for pastoral and other ministries in black churches. Its ecumenical environment is enhanced through its multinational, multiethnic, and multiracial faculty and student body. Three hundred and ten students were registered for the 1989-1990 academic year. Five degree programs are offered: master of divinity, Master of Arts in Christian education, Master of Arts in church music, doctor of ministry, and doctor of sacred theology. The latter two degrees are offered in cooperation with the Atlanta Theological Association. The ITC is fully recognized by the Association of Theological Schools and by SACS (American Association of State Colleges and Universities,1989).
Morehouse College is a predominantly independent, black, four-year, undergraduate, Liberal Arts College for men located on a forty-plus-acre campus within the Atlanta University Center. Founded to prepare blacks for teaching and the ministry, Morehouse began in 1867 as the Augusta Institute, in the basement of Augusta’s Springfield Baptist Church. After several name and place changes, the president, Dr. John Hope, renamed the institution, now located in Atlanta, Morehouse College in 1913 in honor of Henry Lyman Morehouse (then the secretary of the American Baptist Home Mission Society). Morehouse, a charter UNCF member, was recognized by the SACS in 1957. Morehouse, as of the 1989-1990 academic year, had an enrollment of approximately 2,500 students from thirty-seven states, the District of Columbia, and fifteen foreign countries. As the nation’s only historically black all-male college, Morehouse assumes as its primary mission the education of qualified and committed African-American leaders (Blackwell, 1981). Generally speaking, Morehouse College graduates are expected to go on to graduate or professional schools. The “Morehouse man” allegedly embodies all that is good, noble, and strong in the African-American educated male. Each student must select a major field in which he takes between twenty-four and thirty-three semester hours. He must earn a grade of “C” or higher in all required courses and electives submitted to a department to satisfy the requirement for a major. Majors are offered in the following areas: Division of Social Science; Division of the Humanities; Division of Mathematics, Natural Sciences, and Physical Science; Division of Education; and Cognitive Electives. Though recruitment efforts are generally geared toward middle-class blacks, remedial course work is required on the basis of entry placement scores (Morehouse Catalog 1989- 1990). Morehouse is one of the three black colleges and four Georgia colleges with a chapter of Phi Beta Kappa. As of 1990, it had an enrollment of more than 2,600 students (Barthelemy, 1984).
Very briefly, particular interest is given towards Morris Brown College, Spellman College, and Morehouse School of Medicine, as their student population is under 2,000.
Morris Brown College is a predominantly black, private, coeducational, four-year, degree-granting institution with a faculty and staff of 175 and a student body of over 1,300 students from thirty-four states and twenty foreign countries. Located on a tract of land adjacent to Clark Atlanta University, it was founded in 1881 by the African Methodist Episcopal (A.M.E.) church for the Christian education of Negro boys and girls in Atlanta. Its college department was established in 1898 (Allen, 1991). The charter of incorporation in 1913 for the then Morris Brown University provided that the church-linked board of trustees should run the school and elect officers, teachers, and all other employees. The executive board continues today. The mission of the college is to educate students in a Christian environment, thus enabling them to become fully functional persons in society. Special emphasis is placed on education for service in the black community (American Association of State Colleges and Universities, 1989).
Spelman College dates from 1881 when two Boston women, members of the Women’s American Baptist Mission Society of New England, started a school for black women in the basement of the Friendship Baptist Church in Atlanta. The school, initially called the Atlanta Baptist Female Seminary, moved in 1883 to its present site. Now the campus consists of more than thirty-two acres adjacent to Clark Atlanta University. In 1884, the institution was named Spelman Seminary, after Mrs. John D. (Laura Spelman) Rockefeller, in recognition of the financial support of the Rockefeller family. In 1901, the first college degrees were granted to two women, and, in early 1924, the name was officially changed to Spelman College. By the time of its affiliation in 1929 with Morehouse College and Atlanta University, Spelman was a center of cultural and intellectual activity, offering theater, music, art, and visiting lecturers. Spelman College is the nation’s oldest undergraduate liberal arts college for black women and renowned for its academic excellence and the leadership and achievements of its students and alumnae (Collison, 1990).
The curriculum leads to two types of degrees: Bachelor of Arts and Bachelor of Science (for those who major in biology, biochemistry, chemistry, computer science, health science, physics, mathematics, and physical education). Its academic divisions are humanities, fine arts, social science, and natural science. One hundred twenty-four credit hours are required for graduation. A required major consists of not more than forty-two semester hours. A minimum GPA of 2.0 is required for graduation, along with a minimum of a “C” average in the major. Special programs include a dual degree major program in engineering and Afro-American studies. The educational program is designed to give students a comprehensive liberal arts background, as well as preparing them for leadership in their professional and personal lives. Though the student body has grown to 1,782, on behalf of forty-six states, the District of Columbia, and thirteen foreign countries, Spelman attempts to retain the advantages of a small liberal arts college, while sharing the diverse resources of a large coeducational university complex (Blackwell, 1981). The application list for admission is long. Since 1987, Spelman’s freshman classes have had the highest average SAT scores of entering students at any historically black college and university. In 1988, Spelman was included in U.S. News and World Report’s annual listing of the nation’s best historically black colleges and universities. It has 134 full-time faculty members and individualized instruction in small classes, with a balanced budget of over USD20 million.
Morehouse School of Medicine was founded in 1975 as a medical program within Morehouse College. It was recognized as a two-year program in 1978 by the Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME). In July 1979, the school received authorization to begin planning for expansion to a four-year, degree-granting institution. In April 1985, the LCME granted the school full accreditation to award the M.D. degree. In July 1982, the school’s first permanent facility, the Basic Medical Sciences Building, was dedicated on the school’s 6.3-acre campus adjacent to Morehouse College. Morehouse School of Medicine is a national resource which was established to meet the need for more primary care physicians to serve inner city and rural areas where most minorities and poor people live. The school has the special mission of recruiting, enrolling, and training physicians who are sensitive to human needs, yet highly skilled in medicine. Morehouse School of Medicine is dedicated also to providing an academic environment in which students can pursue careers as biomedical scientists and medical educators. Eighty percent of its 150 students are female, the highest proportion of female students of any medical school in the country (Atlanta University Center, 1987).
In this section we present profiles of other historically black colleges and universities that are not part of the AUC with current data available and have a student population of 2,000 or less. In addition, these colleges have had previous experience with some form of funding in order to support, maintain and expand their services to the students:
Barber-Scotia College, located in Concord, North Carolina, was founded in 1867 as Scotia Seminary, a preparatory school for young Negro women. The college is an recognized, SACS four-year, liberal arts institution, historically related and affiliated with the United Presbyterian church in the United States. The college enrolls 500 students.
Benedict College, located in Columbia, South Carolina, is a private, church-related, fully recognized, coed, SACS four-year college. Since 1973, this college has had the largest enrollment of South Carolina residents of all twenty private four-year colleges in the state. Enrolling nearly 1,500 students, it has ranked third in total enrollment among private colleges in the state (Ayers, 1992).
Bennett College, located in Greensboro, North Carolina, is a four-year liberal arts college for women. The college is a member of the United Negro College Fund. It offers bachelor of arts, Bachelor of Science, and Bachelor of Arts and sciences in interdisciplinary studies degrees to 600 students (Browning, & Williams, 1978).
Claflin College, located in Orangeburg, South Carolina, was founded by two Methodist laymen and offered its first instruction at the post-secondary level in 1869. This four-year, private, liberal arts college offers majors to approximately 850 students in art, biology, business administration, chemistry, education, English, health and physical education, mathematics, music education, faith and theological studies and philosophy, and social sciences. Claflin’s mission is to prepare students for achieving a better life, not just for making a living (Baker, 1989).
The next part of the study would present a number of effective fund raising and capital campaign programs and initiatives for higher education. In addition, its utilization in the programs and initiatives of historically black colleges and universities will also be presented.
The first kind of fund raising strategy most effective and is well known is the annual fund. In black private and public colleges, one of the most effective and efficient annual fund programs is the United Negro College Fund (UNCF). In the early 1940s, black private colleges faced a financial crisis (Branson, 1987). Sources of support were depleted because of the Great Depression and World War II. This prompted the creation of a program that would be effective in the present times and the same time collect the much needed finances to support the ailing educational institutions. The resulting UNCF conducted its first annual campaign in 1944 with 27 participating historically black colleges and universities. An astonishing USD765,000 was collected in its first annual fund campaign. This accumulated sum was three times larger than that raised by the individual colleges in separate fund raising programs in the years before the UNCF. The operation of the UNCF is located in New York City. A president of each college has the responsibility to spend thirty days a school year in creating and implementing locally based fund-raising campaigns.
Another source of fund-raising programs and campaigns is the National Alumni council that was fashioned in 1946. This marked the collaborative efforts of all the different private historically black colleges and universities in joining together in order to raise funds for their colleges. In following the footsteps of their predecessors, the current students of the historically black colleges and universities fashioned the National Pre-Alumni Council of the UNCF in 1958 and fashioned fund raising activities for their schools while still studying (Bullock, 1970).
The alumni office exists for two primary reasons—to provide diverse and quality programming for alumni, and to provide opportunities for alumni to engage in a lifetime of service to their alma mater (Patouillet, 2001). Alumni relations programs are inclusive, including all alumni who wish to participate in some manner, whether related to fund raising or of benefit to the institution in other ways. Every graduate can help in some way. Alumni may become donors, student recruiters, and providers of jobs for fellow graduates, promoters of legislative programs, advisors, governing board directors, guest lecturers and adjunct professors, and institutional advocates. Through their involvement in such roles, alumni are encouraged to maintain a lifelong relationship with their alma mater.
In terms of funding and endowment funds, Historically black colleges and universities through their lobbying efforts has received considerable amount of funding from local and international agencies, local and federal governments, and even from philanthropists.
It has always been a challenge for historically black colleges and universities to run their educational institutions. At times they have problems in securing sufficient funding to run their educational institutions and provide effective educational tools and services for the families and students they serve. State funding, which has never been sufficient, is usually complemented by student tuition, grants, corporate and individual donations, and fund-raising activities often fashioned by the students themselves.
On the other hand, federal funding has been some assistance to historically black colleges and universities. Funding instituted during the time of President Clinton’s Administration has initially driven millions of dollars to historically black colleges and universities; although, in a number of occasions the allotted funds for the projects has been diverted to other projects of administrators such as “Equity Centers,” “Athletic Advisement,” program accreditation for priority programs, and international programs. With the fact that a large number of the student population is grouped in the first and second year levels, the Historically black colleges and universities could use the funds in helping those students reach junior and senior levels by creating effective promotional programs, tutoring services, faculty development centers, and dormitories that allow students to learn and stay within campus premises for free or for a very minimal fee. This has been seen to improve student learning (Blumenstyle, 1989).
In order to augment the budget deficit, historically black colleges and universities have fundraising endeavors to increase their foundation funds and continue to financially support not only their educational institutions, but at times the students that go into their schools as well (Branson, 1987). Although they do not receive the amount of donations of most Historically White Colleges and Universities, the historically black colleges and universities was able to increase their foundation endowments and raise it to millions of dollars. In order to create and implement one of the largest endowment programs among the private Historically black colleges and universities, a fundraising campaign that resulted in approximately one hundred million dollars was fashioned for Historically black colleges and universities such as Hampton, Tuskegee, and Fisk now being able to relish a very large endowment fund for that has been used for years. Having more than USD 50 million in its endowment fund, Florida A & M has the largest endowment package for historically black colleges and universities. In addition, as the alumna of these historically black colleges and universities continues to organize themselves long after they have left their schools continue making sizable donations, such as one-hundred thousand to one million dollars, to their schools. In addition to the steady influx of funding, being able to have a very solid financial management system ensures that endowments are increased considerably and is sustained (Rosso, 1991). The endowments can fund additional student scholarships, faculty endowments, matching grants, advisement centers, and academic programs, in addition to travel by the administrators of historically black colleges and universities. The endowment matching formula is based on funding the university receives. In view of the fact that HWCUs have greater endowments, they receive greater matching dollars for their endowed chairs that are held by outstanding leaders, to raise the academic bar on their campuses. Most Historically black colleges and universities have at least one endowed chair (Alba, 1989).
Currently, there are a lot of existing methods in order to sustain students while studying in historically black colleges and universities. Pell Grants, grants-in-aid, veteran benefits, and Student Assistant working jobs, and school or company scholarships, Social Security benefits given towards dependents, and loans by educational institutions to the federal government are means currently being employed in order to finance a college education for many historically black college and university students (Branson, 1987). A considerable number of educational institutions have 70 to 85 percent of their students using some form of financial aid. Problems have been legend in the distribution of these funds to the students. On the odd occasions do students ever discuss matters about historically black colleges and universities without ever raising the idea of the Financial Aid Office. In the other side of the fence, school employees that criticize the historically black colleges and universities financial systems and protocols are often forced to leave or are considerably demoted. Lastly, financial funding programs and financing systems fashioned by historically black colleges and universities is often hounded by employees being suspected of embezzlement or misappropriation of funds acquired using fund-raising activities. This often leaves the historically black colleges and universities with ineffective, undermanned systems and processes that decrease the overall effectiveness of the historically black colleges and universities (Browning, & Williams, 1978). One particular foundation that is given attention to but is only identified in order to further screen the chosen universities to be evaluated. The reason for this is the study would only focus on organizations that, aside from having a student population of less than 2,000, do not depend, in one form or the other, on the Kresge Foundation.
The Kresge Foundation is a foundation based in the United States with philanthropic ideals on building stronger Not-for-profit organizations, initially within America but now has expanded to cater to some countries in the world. This organization was founded and initially managed by the founder of Kmart known as Sebastian Kresge. Currently, the international organization is pegged close to USD3.5 billion and most if not all of their financial capacity goes to fueling the ideals of building a stronger network of Not-for-profit organizations, catalyzing their improvement, providing the necessary aid in coordinating with their key partners and challenging them with grants that leverage greater support. The Foundation now has focused its attention on creating a proactive means of capital campaigns as a critical means for Not-for-profit growth.
The second program of the foundation is the Green Building Initiative which was launched last 2003 that was aimed to further increase the overall awareness of sustainable or eco-friendly building practices within the community of Not-for-profits and persuade these people to consider be eco-friendly when building. Upfront planning and an integrated design process are necessary to achieve the full benefits of a green building. The Initiative mentioned above caters to educational resources and provides special grants to help Not-for-profits during this critical stage of planning and development.
The next part of the study focuses on fund-raising theory and research. Past assessments of theory and research on fund raising have been uniformly dismal, even critics sympathetic to the field described fundraising research as sporadic, fragmented, redundant, and disappointing. Reviewers primarily found one-shot, administrative studies that were limited to a single institution and concentrated on alumni giving. Theory building was largely nonexistent.
Most of the studies were conducted for doctoral dissertations by part-time students who were working full time as fund raisers and earning degrees in education, usually higher education administration. Little of the work was produced by full-time scholars. Research on fund raising did not hold much interest for the higher education professorate, and many of the students did not publish their studies once they had completed their degrees.
Significantly, the push for more and better research on fund raising has come from practitioners and their associations. In 1985, the Council for Advancement and Support of Education (CASE) sponsored the Colloquium on Professionalism in Institutional Advancement, also named Greenbrier II, after the 1958 conference that established the institutional advancement structure. The major topic of discussion was the need for a scientific knowledge base. Research was designated a top priority, and a call was issued for increased efforts to stimulate and disseminate research on advancement, including fund raising. The colloquium’s report urged studies in three hierarchical categories: (1) theory-building studies, which produce general principles about the function; (2) introspective studies, which provide knowledge about the occupation and its practitioners; and (3) administrative studies, which help a specific organization solve a problem.
Recent progress is noteworthy, although much remains to be done. Focusing first on dissemination of research, in 1999, CASE launched a scholarly journal, the CASE International Journal of Educational Advancement. Another refereed journal, Not-for-profit Management & Leadership, was started in 1990 by the Mandel Center for Not-for-profit Organizations at Case Western Reserve University and the Centre for Voluntary Organization at the London School of Economics and Political Science. They joined the much older Not-for-profit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, which is sponsored by the Association for Research on Not-for-profit Organizations and Voluntary Action (ARNOVA). The fourth U.S. journal relevant to studies on fund raising is Voluntas, sponsored by the International Society for Third-Sector Research, which was founded in 1992. Discipline-specific journals, such as The Review of Higher Education and Journal of Public Relations Research, represent additional outlets for studies related to educational fund raising and advancement.
The “birth” of three new journals in the last decade provides strong evidence that research and theory building have increased substantially in the fields of philanthropy, Not-for-profit management, and fund raising. As a point of clarification, philanthropy (defined by Robert Payton as voluntary action for the public good, including voluntary giving, voluntary service, and voluntary association) is the larger research domain. It encompasses Not-for-profit management, of which fund raising is a part. Although certainly related, the domains are not synonymous. For example, philanthropy concentrates on giving from the perspective of donors, while fund raising concentrates on managing donor relationships from the perspective of receiving organizations. Different perspectives result in different problems, and as philosophers of science explain, research domains are defined by the problems selected for study.
Regular reading of the journals just named reveals that, although overall productivity has increased, fund raising has not received its “fair share” of attention. Proportionately, articles dealing with fund-raising problems still are few. A 1993 study found that only 3percent of the 472 articles published in Not-for-profit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly during its first 20 years (1972–1992) dealt with “fund/resource raising.” Even this low proportion was inflated because philanthropy and fund raising were combined. It must be stressed that there is no scholarly journal exclusively devoted to fund-raising. Monitoring of journals also indicates that more faculties in traditional disciplines and fields are conducting research on fund raising; however, their number still is minuscule. Established fields have demonstrated that the interests and attention of full-time faculty are essential to building a scientific body of knowledge.
There has been a surge in the establishment of academic centers for the study and teaching of philanthropy and Not-for-profit management. Some 36 such centers are now spread across the country. Almost all contain a component on fund raising, although a review of their courses and publications shows that fund raising is not a priority subject (an exception is the Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University in Indianapolis).
Similarly, there has been rapid growth of graduate education in Not-for-profit management, but fund raising has been given short shrift. In 1990, just 17 historically black colleges and universities offered a graduate degree with a concentration in the management of Not-for-profit organizations; by 2000, the number had more than quintupled to 97. Yet fund raising has not been fully integrated into the programs because it is deficient in theoretical knowledge backed by research, which (reflecting a Catch-22 situation) makes it suspect to academics. As an illustration, many of the Not-for-profit management programs do not require fund-raising courses, offering them instead as electives. The vast majority of fund-raising courses today are taught by practitioner-adjuncts rather than by full-time educators (Worth, 1993).
In 1991, a milestone was reached in advancing knowledge on fund raising. Three books published that year converged to establish fund raising as a management function and a legitimate subject of theory and research. They, and others that followed, such as Worth’s 1993 book, assumed a critical voice essential to scientific study. After much research and experiences coming those that conduct themselves in the art of fund raising, presented in the succeeding articles are some of the fundraising programs that are currently in use by most organizations, particularly for this research’s case, used by historically black colleges and universities.
The first fund-raising program is the annual giving program. Annual giving is the foundation of every successful fund-raising program and an important source of revenue for many institutions. In recent years, many traditional annual giving techniques have remained effective, while myriad new programs and initiatives have been introduced. Phone-based telethons and direct mail have been and will continue to be important tools in fund-raising efforts. People are still at the heart of every solicitation strategy. At the same time, it is possible to look into this new century knowing much more about the data behind fundraising programs and how to analyze efforts. The maturity of the annual fund within the overall development effort is a significant factor in continued growth. The increased access to demographic information has pushed fund raisers to define the characteristics of certain cohorts of alumni and donors and appeal to the behavior of twenty-year-olds in a different tone than fifty-year-olds (Durham, & Smith, 2001).
A gift category that has begun to receive its own degree of special attention in recent years is that of principal gifts. Major gifts are of a large dollar amount, however that may be defined by any particular institution. Principal gifts are also usually defined in terms of their amount and are among the largest gifts an institution will receive. Some institutions may define principal gifts as gifts of USD5 million, USD10 million, or even more, depending on the scope of their fund-raising campaign or program. But principal gifts differ from major gifts not solely in terms of amount. They are important to consider in their own right for a more fundamental reason. These are the rare gifts in the life of an institution in which the institution’s values become so exemplified in the benefactor’s act of generosity that the gift itself serves to sharpen, refine, and, in a meaningful sense, rededicate the entirety of the institution to its deepest core values (Sargeant, & Kaähler, 1999).
It is no surprise, then, that the principal gift benefactor can often become a celebrated figure accorded a status alongside that of the institution’s founders. What draws the focus of public attention is not necessarily the gift amount, however, but rather the way in which the act of publicly making the gift unites the deepest values of both benefactor and institution at a moment of great importance for both.
Most of the growth in foundation giving has been from the independent and family foundations, including the new health foundations, formed from nonprofit healthcare conversions.
Independent foundations usually are fashioned by one individual, often by bequest. They are also called non-operating foundations because they do not run their own programs (Kelly, 2001). Sometimes groups of people, usually family members, form a foundation while the donors are still alive. Such foundations are known as family foundations since the assets come from one family and family members are often involved in managing them. Many larger foundations were once run by family, but are now run by professional staff members. Independent foundations are the primary type with which higher education works.
Family foundations are one of the fastest growing categories. The highly touted intergenerational transfer of wealth from the WWII generation to the baby boomers has begun and is having an impact. In addition, many of the entertainers and entrepreneurs who have made their wealth in the last 20 years are establishing foundations that are closely aligned with their personal interests, including Doris Duke, Barbra Streisand, Steven Spielberg, Michael Milken, David Geffen, and Ted Turner. Among grant makers in the late 1990s, the Foundation Center identified 20,500 family foundations. 4 Between 1980 and 1989, more than 3,000 foundations with assets of USD1 million or more were fashioned. More than 3,300 foundations were established in 1999 alone. For comparison, only 600 foundations were fashioned before 1940. The Council on Foundations notes that most family funds donate locally. Today it is estimated that family members advise two-thirds of private foundations (Kelly, 2001).
Most new foundations have not targeted higher education as a priority, or if they have, their giving to higher education is local, or to the donor or his or her family members’ alma mater(s). The donor or his or her designated executive runs many of these foundations, and the foundation’s programmatic interests are tightly connected to their personal interests or the impact they can have globally (Durham, & Smith, 2001).
Some colleges are developing relationships with these smaller foundations, but again there has to be a tight fit between the donor’s interests and the college’s existing programs or strengths. A question for development officers to contemplate in the next decade is how to identify and cultivate more of these family foundations.
Community foundations are autonomous, tax-exempt, nonprofit, publicly supported philanthropic institutions composed of permanent funds established by many donors for the long-term benefit of a defined geographic area (Kelly, 2001).
Operating foundations support their own programs and rarely make outside grants. Examples include the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and the Getty Trust (Kelly, 1998).
Corporate foundations are formed through donations of the parent corporation to its own specific foundation, such as the AT&T Foundation (Kelly, 1991). Such foundations are sometimes the exclusive giving arm of the company; in other cases the corporate foundation exists alongside direct giving programs administered within the company itself.
Chapter 3: Methodology
The research’s primary goal is to develop and examine the identified research topic utilizing the case study as a major methodological tool in social science inquiry and –both as a supplement to the natural science model and as a distinctive means of providing valid analysis of our study on effective fundraising for historically black colleges and universities.
At one time the case study was a taken-for-granted mode of carrying out research. In addition to this, in recent decades it has been pushed aside, or at least sharply downgraded, in studies within society (as well as in other social sciences). Thus the case study method receives only limited attention in current textbooks on social research (Babbie 1989). Both qualitative and quantitative researchers tend to shun the basic issues involved in the use of the case study method in social inquiry. Yet exceptions to this generalization can be cited. Perhaps the major monograph addressing the case approach in recent years is that by Ragin (1987), and the subject receives attention in the edited book by Kohn (1989). Still, our approach differs from that of other social scientists who deal with this problem area.
Although our analysis is by no means inclusive, the research nonetheless addresses the salient aspects of the use of the case study in social research. In this section the research does not only delineate fundamental methodological issues but also outline the manner in which these can be resolved. This portion of the study emphasizes on the use, rather than the construction, of case studies (though the two merge in actual research practice). The central assertion of this section of the study is that the case study not only serves as a strategic supplement to the analysis of effective fundraising for historically black colleges and universities but is an essential feature of sociological inquiry in its own right.
This section of the paper presents the research design that was used in the study and the procedure for collection of the targeted information. The method for data analysis will also be presented, along with the methodological limitations of the research design.
The researchers that conducted this study decided that in order to gain more insight into effective fund raising activities that will be conducted for black historically black colleges and universities, a qualitative approach shall be utilized for the exploration of the study’s assertions. Researchers who decide to utilize qualitative methods take on a subjectivist approach (Cohen & Manion, 1994), suggesting that facts cannot be effectively comprehended by looking at them exclusively and quantitatively alone; the data gathered must be placed in context. It is critical that problems be considered as components of a complicated fabric or relationships, and such components may not be taken in isolation (Easterby-Smith et al, 1996) with the hopes of being able to extrapolate the necessary information.
The present research utilizes a qualitative approach to examine the problem by means of case studies that focuses on the effectiveness of identified fund raising programs and initiatives as they are applied by Historically black colleges and universities in order for these educational institutions to acquire the necessary funds for their operations and for the use of the students in their tuition and fees. A case study is defined as a means for carrying out research which entails empirical study of a specific phenomenon within the natural setting in which it occurs, utilizing various sources of proof in order to validated or null the asserted hypothesis. The use of a case study lends itself to effectively addressing such qualitative questions of why and how. On a side note, supporting data that would support these assertions based on qualitative analysis may be yielded through survey methodologies and observational methods (Braddock, 1974).
In addition to the advantages mentioned above, the case study approach was used for the purposes of the current study because it offers several advantages. The researchers used the case study method because it was clearly set out at the start of the research that the researchers wanted to cover contextual conditions – believing that these contextual conditions might be highly related or proportional to the phenomenon of study. Other advantages of the qualitative case study are the discovery of hidden forms of behavior, the exploration of causal mechanisms linking phenomena, the revelation of a critical case, and the explanation of variations. The case study approach also provides a way of studying human events and actions while being in their natural surroundings (Babbie, 2003). On the other hand, because phenomenon and context are not always distinguishable in real-life situations, a whole set of other technical characteristics such as logic of design, data collection techniques and data analysis approach have been applied in the study.
The general characteristics of the case studies could be interpreted following two dimensions: the number of units of analysis and the number of cases. Based on the number of units of analysis a case study can be holistic (single unit of analysis) or embedded (multiple unit of analysis). In addition, based on the number of cases, the design of the case study can be single (one case) or multiple (more than one cases). In this study, the focus is on a single case study.
As mentioned above, the focus of this study is to determine the effectiveness of fund raising projects and capital campaigning initiatives in address the financial needs and issues of Historically black colleges and universities, particularly for small private historically black colleges and universities with a student population of not more than 2,000 students. The qualitative style of approach will allow certain flexibility within the study, to take account of the perceptions of teachers on the program.
In general terms, a case study involves characteristics or configurations of a particular unit of analysis–be this an individual, a community, an organization, a nation-state, an empire, or a civilization. Specifying what is a “case,” as is evident in the discussion below, varies with the researcher’s presuppositions of the proper unit of analysis as well as other related domain assumptions.
That the unit of analysis continues to be a source of contention is stressed by Ragin (1987) in The Comparative Method. In his research, confusion exists about whether units of analysis are “data categories” or “theoretical categories.” It was suggested by social researchers such as Ragin that the data categories acquired by Barrington Moore’s are countries, whereas Moore’s theoretical units are classes. In the case of Wallerstein (1974), the data categories are most frequently nation-states, or core countries and periphery countries, whereas the theoretical unit is the world system. Ragin’s distinction between theoretical and data categories can be useful in some instances, but more fundamental problems are involved. Thus the research shall approach the unit of analysis and the case study from another vantage point.
The question of what is a case study is related to the micro-macro distinction that surfaced as a significant theoretical controversy in sociology during the 1980s. The micro-macro issue has long haunted the field of economics (Thurow 1984). In sociology it has been addressed by Giddens (1984), among others. The researchers can delineate four major orientations in the micro-macro debate, some aspects of which bear, directly or indirectly, on the case approach. First, Collins reasoned, in line with the neoclassical economists, that the “individual” is the basic unit of analysis. Mayhew, on the other hand, would rid sociological analysis of individuals and focus solely on macro (or structural) patterns. Blau adopted the view that the micro and macro levels both have their own integrity and that sociologists are more or less destined to work on one or the other level. Finally, Giddens–and Vaughan and Sjoberg (1984), among others–perceived a complex interaction between the micro and the macro levels of analysis.
The researcher can set this issue, in sharper perspective by examining how adherents of the natural science model typically define the unit of analysis. These persons are committed, in the language of philosopher’s of science, to a form of “methodological individualism.” Thus in general begin with individuals as the basic unit of analysis. In extant studies, individuals are defined in narrow bio-psychological terms, in keeping with the tradition extending to the study made by Homans (1982). These scholars typically adopt some form of utilitarianism and this articulates with the techniques and procedures associated with modern statistics. If one quantifies units and adds them together, the parts equal the whole. Thus, in probability sampling, which today underlies much sociological (especially survey) research, the units drawn must be independent of one another. And they must all be equal. Given these assumptions, one can draw random samples and then add the units to characterize the whole.
The positions made by other studies, as noted above, are in many respects variations on methodological individualism. For Mayhew (1980), the units are structural in nature. Indeed, a number of sociologists select units: such as the nation-state or subunits thereof, including metropolitan areas or states. For example, if the research has selected metropolitan areas as units, the research can add up their characteristics to capture the nature of the whole. (To be sure, the use of units such as states or metropolitan areas has given rise to an ecological fallacy: the assumption that one cannot reason from the characteristic’s of these aggregated units back to individuals.) Still, one can discard individuals and use structural units instead, or one can work on the micro (individual) level and then on the macro structural) level, recognizing that the two cannot be integrated.
Problems arise if one questions the foundations of methodological individualism. For example, standing in sharp contrast to Collins’s orientation is the perspective of the Meadian tradition, which is being rehabilitated by the likes of Habermas (1987). In Meadian terms, the human agent is truly social in nature. The self and the social mind are products of interaction with others, and the concept of an independent actor is foreign to such theoretical orientation. Under these circumstances, it is little wonder that the Meadian heritage has fallen on difficult times in sociology, for survey or experimental procedures require that individuals be conceived of as independent units. This view is sharply at odds with Mead (1934) conception of human agents as dependent on one another, as creatures of, and agents involved in, the construction of their social lives.
As the research comes to move to the intersection of human agents and organizational structures, the situation becomes far more complex than Blau, for instance, would have the researchers believe. The research adheres to the view that human agents not only are social beings but also intersect with organizations that are relatively autonomous. One cannot add up the characteristics of human agents and fully understand the total organization. Yet, the whole, which has a reality somewhat apart from its individual members, nonetheless is dependent on human agents for its existence. If one accepts these domain assumptions about human nature and social reality, it becomes well-nigh impossible to rely on statistical analysis per se for the investigation of certain major sociological issues. As an instance, human agents have complex relationships with nation-states and with large-scale bureaucratic structures that transcend nation-states.
A commitment to methodological individualism, and the use of cases based on this presupposition, produces a range of useful data. Yet because of this assumption, serious limitations inhere in the natural science model. A case approach that is not anchored in this model permits the research to examine relationships and patterns unconstrained by the model’s domain assumptions. The advantage of case studies is that researchers who utilize them can deal with the reality behind appearances, with contradictions and the dialectical nature of social life, as well as with a whole that is more than the sum of its parts. The case study approach that takes into account these kinds of assumptions can provide the research with fundamental sociological knowledge of human agents, communities, organizations, nation-states, empires, and civilizations.
Alba, D. R. (1989), Ethnic Identity: The Transformation of White America. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press
Allen, H. L. (1991), The Mobility of Black Collegiate Faculty Revisited: Whatever Happened to the ‘Brain Drain’?, Journal of Negro Education 60, 1: 97-109.
Allen, W. R., (1985), Black Student, White Campus: Structural, Interpersonal and Psychological Correlates of Success. Journal of Negro Education 54, 2: 135-147.
Allen, W. R., Epp, E.G., & Haniff, N.Z., (1991), College in Black and White: African American Students in Predominantly White and in Historically Black Public Universities. Albany: State University of New York Press.
American Association of State Colleges and Universities. (1989), The Lurking Evil: Racial and Ethnic Conflict on the College Campus. Washington, D.C.: the Association
American Council on Education, (1987), American Universities and Colleges. 13th ed. New York: Walter de Gruyter
American Council on Education, Office of Minority Concerns, (1987), Minorities in Higher Education: Sixth Annual Status Report. Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education
Atlanta University Center, Inc., (1987), Strength through Cooperation. Atlanta: Atlanta University Center
Ayers, E. L. (1992), The Promise of the New South: Life After Reconstruction. New York: Oxford University Press
Babbie, E., (1989), The Practice of Social Research. 5th ed. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Baker, P. S. (1989), Federal-State Relations. In Encyclopedia of Southern Culture, edited by C. R. Wilson and W. Ferris, 229-50. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press
Barthelemy, S., (1984), The Role of Black Colleges in Nurturing Leadership. In Black Colleges and Universities, edited by A. Garibaldi, 14-25. New York: Praeger,
Becker, J. & Weiner, R., (1990), Minority Educators Skeptical about SAT Revisions, Black Issues in Higher Education 7, 19:1,16.
Billingsley, A. C., (1982), Building Strong Faculties in Black Colleges. Journal of Negro Education 51, 1:4-15.
Blackwell, J. E., (1981), Mainstreaming Outsiders: The Production of Black Professionals. New York: General Hall.
Blumenstyle, G., (1989), Cavazos Names Businessman-Turned-College-Official to Direct Bush’s Efforts to Help Black Institutions. Chronicle of Higher Education 35, 45:A14-A17.
Bowles, F. D., Decosta, F.A., ; Tollett, K.S., (1971) Between Two Worlds: A Profile of Negro Higher Education. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Braddock, J. H., (1974), Racial Ideology: Toward a Multidimensional Approach to Measurement. Paper presented at the Southern Sociological Society, Atlanta
Branson, H. R., (1987), The Hazards in Black Higher Education: Program and Commitment Needs. Journal of Negro Education 56,2:129-36.
Brazziel, M. E., ; Brazziel, F.W., (1987), Impact of Support for Graduate Study on Program Completion of Black Doctorate Recipients. Journal of Negro Education 56, 2: 145-51.
Brown, C. I. (1980), The White Presence of Traditionally Black Public Colleges and Universities: A Synopsis 1837-1980. Durham: North Carolina Central University
Browning, J., ; Williams, J., (1978), Black Colleges in America, New York: Teachers College Press, 1978.
Buck, J. (1996), Governance in the historically black colleges and universities. University Faculty Voice, 1, December, 8-9.
Bullock, H., (1970), A History of Negro Education in the South, From 1619 to the Present. New York: Praeger.
Burlingame, D.F. ; Hulse, L.J., (1991), Taking Fund Raising Seriously: Advancing the Profession and Practice of Raising Money, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Carbone, R.F., (1987), Fund Raisers of Academe, Monograph no. 2, College Park: University of Maryland, Clearinghouse for Research on Fund Raising.
Carter, R. T., ; Janet, E.H., (1988), The Relationship between Racial Identity Attitudes and Social Class, Journal of Negro Education 57, 1: 22-30.
Cohen, D. K. (1974), Segregation, Desegregation and Brown. Society 12: 34-40.
Collison, M. N. K. (1990), ‘Fight the Power’: Rap Music Pounds Out New Anthem for Many Black Students. Chronicle of Higher Education 36, 14: A29.
Drummond, T. (2001), Black schools go white. Time almanac, 349.
Durham, M.L. ; Smith, A.B., (2001), Assessing the FundRaising Process at a Public Research II University and Refining the Process Framework, CASE International Journal of Educational Advancement 2, 1: 68–70.
Giddens, A., (1984), The Constitution of Society. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Habermas, J., (1987), A Theory of Communicative Action–Lifeworld and System: A Critique of Functionalist Reason, vol. 2. Boston: Beacon Press.
Healy, P., (1996), Myriad of problems for public black colleges. Chronicle of Higher Education, A35-A36.
Homans, G., (1982), The Present State of Sociological Theory, Sociological Quarterly 23: 285-99.
Kelly, K.S. (1991), Fund Raising and Public Relations: A Critical Analysis Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1991.
Kelly, K.S., (1998), Effective Fund-Raising Management, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 155–192.
Kelly, K.S., (2001), The Nonprofit Handbook: Fund Raising, New York: John Wiley ; Sons, 96–116.
Kohn, M.L., (1989), Cross-National Research in Sociology. Newbury Park: Sage.
Mayhew, B., (1980), Structuralism vs. Individualism, Social Forces 59:335-75.
Mead, G.H., (1934), Mind, Self, and Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Patouillet, L.D., (2001), Alumni Association Members: Attitudes Toward University Life and Giving at a Public AAU Institution, The CASE International Journal of Educational Advancement 2, 1:54–55.
Ragin, C.C., (1987), The Comparative Method. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Rosso, H.A., (1991), Achieving Excellence in Fund Raising: A Comprehensive Guide to Principles, Programs and initiatives, and Methods, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Sargeant, A. ; Kaähler,J. (1999), Returns on Fundraising Expenditures in the Voluntary Sector, Nonprofit Management ; Leadership 10, 1: 5–19.
The top colleges for African Americans. (2000). Black College Monthly, June, 14.
Thurow, L., (1984), Dangerous Currents. New York. Vintage Books.
Time almanac 2001 with information. (2000). Boston: Family Education Company.
Vaughan T.R., ; Sjoberg, G., (1984), The Individual and Bureaucracy: An Alternative Meadian Interpretation, Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 20: 57-69.
Wallerstein, I., (1974), The Modern World System: CapitalistAgriculture and the Origins of the European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century, Agriculture and the Origins of the European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century. New York: Academic Press.
Worth, M.J., (1993), Educational Fund Raising: Principles and Practice, Phoenix, AZ: American Council on Education/Oryx Press