Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
 
USM Forum -- Message Board -> AAUP-USM MESSAGE BOARD -> Capital campaigns at other universities
Post Info TOPIC: Capital campaigns at other universities
truth4usm/AH

Date:
Capital campaigns at other universities
Permalink Closed

(My note:  this is what USM is competing against in SFT's quest for it to be a "world-class university."  Until SFT gets that capital campaign back on track, USM will be losing ground...there's no way he's going to replace millions of $$ lost in private donations with millions in research dollars).


From the Chronicle of Higher Education:


Updates on Billion-Dollar Campaigns at 20 Universities
> Compiled by KELLIE BARTLETT
>
> The 20 American universities that are seeking to raise at least
> $1-billion collected a total of $567.9-million in gifts and
> pledges during the last month for which they had data available.
>
> The campaign with the largest gain in the last month was the
> University of Wisconsin at Madison, with $351.9-million,
> including a single gift of almost $300-million.
>
> On May 14, the University of Michigan announced its campaign to
> raise $2.5-billion. The campaign had already raised more than
> half that amount (The Chronicle, May 17).
>
> The 20 universities -- each with its most recent total, last
> month's increase,* the original goal, and the planned completion
> date -- are as follows:
>
> * The California Institute of Technology, $924.4-million as
> of April 30 (increase of $3.3-million in the last month); the
> goal is $1.4-billion by 2007.
>
> * The Johns Hopkins University, $1.345-billion as of April 30
> (increase of $21.6-million in the last month); the goal is
> $2-billion by 2007.
>
> * The Massachusetts Institute of Technology, $1.879-billion
> as of April 30 (increase of $5-million in the last month); the
> goal is $2-billion by 2004.
>
> * Michigan State University, $811.8-million as of April 30
> (increase of $8.7-million in the last month); the goal is
> $1.2-billion by 2007.
>
> * Purdue University, $896.5-million as of April 30 (increase
> of $10.2-million in the last month); the goal is $1.3-billion by
> 2007.
>
> * Stanford University, $940-million as of April 30 (increase
> of $10-million in the last month); the goal is $1-billion by 2005.
>
> * Texas A&M University at College Station, $785.5-million as
> of April 30 (increase of $14-million in the last month); the goal
> is $1-billion by 2006.
>
> * The University of Arizona, $1.038-billion as of April 30
> (increase of $6.5-million in the last month); the goal was
> $1-billion by 2005.
>
> * The University of California at Los Angeles, $2.496-billion
> as of April 30 (increase of $15.3-million in the last month); the
> goal was $2.4-billion by 2005.
>
> * The University of California at San Diego, $591.7-million
> as of April 15; the goal is $1-billion by 2007.
>
> * The University of California at San Francisco,
> $1.326-billion as of April 30 (increase of $8.8-million in the
> last month); the goal is $1.4-billion by 2005.
>
> * The University of Chicago, $1.022-billion as of May 5
> (increase of $4.2-million in the last month); the goal is
> $2-billion by 2006.
>
> * The University of Miami, $606-million as of April 30
> (increase of $14-million in the last month); the goal is
> $1-billion by 2007.
>
> * University of Michigan, $1.281-billion as of May 14; the
> goal is $2.5-billion by 2008.
>
> * The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill,
> $1.23-billion as of April 30 (increase of $30-million in the last
> month); the goal is $1.8-billion by 2007.
>
> * The University of Pittsburgh, $690-million as of April 30
> (increase of $15-million in the last month); the goal is
> $1-billion by 2007.
>
> * The University of Texas at Austin, $1.538-billion as of
> April 30 (increase of $24.2-million in the last month); the goal
> was $1-billion by 2004.
>
> * The University of Wisconsin at Madison, $1.202-billion as
> of May 24 (increase of $351.9-million in the last month); the
> goal is $1.5-billion by 2007.
>
>

__________________
Invictus

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: truth4usm/AH
"...there's no way he's going to replace millions of $$ lost in private donations with millions in research dollars..."


But isn't the bottom line that SFT understands research grants & (more importantly) he knows how to juggle the "funny money" that goes along with grant funding?

Commercialization is "cutting edge," right? Another opportunity to blaze new ground with funny money accounting.

The big problem with private donations is that the donors may attach stipulations to their contributions & there is less opportunity to be creative when keeping books. If I were to fund a scholarship for needy students in my old department or if I contributed to a specific capital campaign, that money would have to be spent for the "advertised" purpose & not used to buy fancy rugs for offices.

Private contributions don't come with hidden "indirects" that can be shuffled around in some bureaucratic shell game. SFT knows that.

__________________
Eve

Date:
Permalink Closed

Excellent point from The Chronicle, Truth4USM!


The dome administration at USM does not understand development and it does not understand that the hard science model of grant funding will not transcend to other disciplines.  In encouraging the chasing of grants to the exclusion of much else, it is systematically destroying the centers of excellence that gave the University of Southern Mississippi the chance to rise above its reputation as the third tier school in the 50th state. 


For some reason that I cannot seem to fathom, with increasing frustration on my part by the way, the administration of this university is unwilling to employ the best practices of schools that have shown the path to academic quality and success.


Why is it that people with virtually no experience elsewhere, little experience in academic administration, and questionable scholarly credentials think they can come up with a better way of managing a university?


I am sorry to say that I have joined the ranks of those who believe there is a conspiracy to destroy both the history and potential of a university that was and could be far better than its reputation would indicate.  The Board does not care; the broader community does not care; the administration does not care.  They have an agenda and it is simply not that of the majority of the faculty. 


My advice?  Lower level administrators, do the best you can for your current programs and faculty.  Professors, do the best you can for your current students and junior colleagues.  Faculty governance committees, do the best you can to expose the violations of practices accepted as standard at good universities.  Friends of the university, give specifically to programs you believe in.  Do what you can for the here and now because the future is being destroyed.


 



__________________
truth4usm/AH

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: Invictus
" But isn't the bottom line that SFT understands research grants & (more importantly) he knows how to juggle the "funny money" that goes along with grant funding? Commercialization is "cutting edge," right? Another opportunity to blaze new ground with funny money accounting. The big problem with private donations is that the donors may attach stipulations to their contributions & there is less opportunity to be creative when keeping books. If I were to fund a scholarship for needy students in my old department or if I contributed to a specific capital campaign, that money would have to be spent for the "advertised" purpose & not used to buy fancy rugs for offices. Private contributions don't come with hidden "indirects" that can be shuffled around in some bureaucratic shell game. SFT knows that."

You're exactly right, Invictus.  But the larger point is this:  a world-class university is funded through large donations NOT research grants.  Research grants are key (trust me, I know!), but as Eve so wisely pointed out, the hard sciences model will not translate to other disciplines.  There just isn't as much grant money to be gotten in the humanities as there is in the hard sciences (what SFT and Co. REALLY want is a partnership with a medical school in order to get at NIH grant money, but that's another post).  So, this is a model that cannot translate into the same kind of success for other disciplines and SFT knows this.  Art and Humanities will never be fully funded by grants, but they can be fully funded by private donations.  But if the top man isn't willing to cultivate these donors (as AKL did--whatever you want to say about him, he was a great friend to the arts and humanities at USM), then these disciplines will wither away.


     



__________________
Invictus

Date:
RE: RE: RE: Capital campaigns at other universitie
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: truth4usm/AH
"
You're exactly right, Invictus.  But the larger point is this:  a world-class university is funded through large donations NOT research grants."


Lets not forget that the Vanderbilts, Chicagos & Stanfords in this country were established by mega-wealthy benefactors who spared no expense to have excellence from the git-go. They didn't want a "gold mine", but rather, they were established as a way to invest the gold mine for long-term dividends.

Let's also not forget that Mississippi has at least four more "universities" than it needs. This not only dilutes state money; it dilutes donor money as well.

Of course, there isn't a lot of donor money in Mississippi to begin with & Ole Miss gets the lion's share of that due to history.

__________________
Robert Campbell

Date:
RE: Capital campaigns at other universities
Permalink Closed

The fund-raising numbers for some high-profile state universities really put Thames' derelictions in perspective.

His henchcrew can't even raise enough money to get the Trent Lott Center built. And the Trent Lott Center will serve one of the few programs that Thames values: Economic Development.

Robert Campbell

__________________
Advocate

Date:
RE: RE: RE: RE: Capital campaigns at other universitie
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: Invictus
" Lets not forget that the Vanderbilts, Chicagos & Stanfords in this country were established by mega-wealthy benefactors who spared no expense to have excellence from the git-go. They didn't want a "gold mine", but rather, they were established as a way to invest the gold mine for long-term dividends. Let's also not forget that Mississippi has at least four more "universities" than it needs. This not only dilutes state money; it dilutes donor money as well. Of course, there isn't a lot of donor money in Mississippi to begin with & Ole Miss gets the lion's share of that due to history."
But look how many state institutions are on the list; there appear to be more public universities than private ones.  That is pretty amazing.  Several are also within the same state and within 45 minutes to an hour of each other.

__________________
noel polk

Date:
RE: Capital campaigns at other universities
Permalink Closed


USM can never be a "world class university" if only because we simply dont have the resources here, in the city or the state, to be "world class," so that sort of talk from Shelby Thames is either utter nonsense or a subterfuge, or (likely) both.


Thanks to market conditions over the past 25 years, and thanks to Aubrey Lucas's good sense and benevolent guidance, USM was able to attract an unusually large number of professors who 1) could and do easily carry on conversations as equals with faculty at real world class universities; 2) found USM and Hattiesburg a good place to work and live and decided to stay. Aubrey frequently talked about making USM a "distinguished" university, and many of us remember the giggles and titters that ran through Bennett auditorium when he would say that. But in retrospect that seems to have been a realistic goal.


Without quibbling with anybody about the meaning of "distinguished," what's heartbreaking to so many of us oldtimers is to think how close we came, on so many occasions, to becoming a really good, a very good, regional university distinguished by its faculty, its students, and its commitment to raising the educational level in Mississippi and the region. Those occasions passed for a lack, at that moment, of the right infusion of money, the right decision here or in Jackson, the right roll of the dice, whoever was shooting them. Folks, we almost made it; we almost turned that corner, and still might have, except for the giant leaps backward we have made under the present lack-of-leadership.


Shelby knows that you can't turn a USM into a Harvard or Berkeley or Sorbonne with a few grants, no matter how large, so that "world class university" talk is world-class patronizing, world-class insulting, and world-class foolish. He clearly believes that Harvard is world class because of its endowment and not because of its faculty; and he clearly does not know that the very idea of "university" is built upon a humanities curriculum nearly always taught by faculty who dont get grants but who write wonderful books about things that matter to a lot of other people who dont get grants either. 


It is to weep, what Shelby Thames has done to this place: he's made it a world-class ruin.


quote:




Originally posted by: truth4usm/AH
"(My note:  this is what USM is competing against in SFT's quest for it to be a "world-class university."  Until SFT gets that capital campaign back on track, USM will be losing ground...there's no way he's going to replace millions of $$ lost in private donations with millions in research dollars).



__________________
truth4usm/AH

Date:
RE: Capital campaigns at other universitie
Permalink Closed

Right...I'm not saying that USM is falling short because it's not Vanderbilt.  I'm accutely aware of the "unlevel" playing field that private universities have (esp. ones like Vandy that were started by wealthy benefactors).  I'm more interested in looking at what other state universities are doing (and how well they are doing it!).  If I were prez of USM (maybe I can buy 15 minutes worth? ref. to old post on Fire Shelby for those of you who came late to the party), I would be studying what these other state universities are doing RIGHT, and trying to replicate their strategies at USM.  Although all of these universities probably have a healthy amount of research dollars coming in, I'll bet they make sure their development offices are doing just as well, too. 


And I'm positive that abandoning a successful capital campaign is not among the best practices of any "world-class" university. 



__________________
Invictus

Date:
RE: RE: Capital campaigns at other universities
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: noel polk
"USM can never be a "world class university" if only because we simply dont have the resources here, in the city or the state, to be "world class," so that sort of talk from Shelby Thames is either utter nonsense or a subterfuge, or (likely) both."


Once again, Dr. Polk, you have hit the nail squarely on the head. I also very much agree with what you say about Dr. Lucas' "distinguished" university. It was kind of funny at the time, but it was a goal that people could legitimately work toward. What's wrong with being a "very good regional university"? Nothing at all.

A few years back, the institution where I work adopted the "world class" phrase. It fell upon me to define "world class." After much study, I concluded that it was very much like Jimmy Buffett's Margaritaville ("It's wherever you want it to be.") In other words, "world class" is an utterly meaningless cliché.

"Distinguished" may sound even mushier on the surface, but at least it implies a level of dignity & pride that isn't implied by the over-used "world class."

Perspective has always been a problem for "educational administration." Not every institution can be "world class," but every institution should be morally obligated to provide the best possible education to its students, whether that education occurs in a traditional classroom, in the field, or in a research lab.

__________________
noel polk

Date:
RE: RE: Capital campaigns at other universitie
Permalink Closed


Andrea, dear heart, I dont think I've disagreed with anything you've ever put on this Message Board, and bless you for having said all you have said. You've energized the Board and the entire FireThames gang. Again, you are right on here too. I was, once again, indulging in a plaint about how things used to be and might have been if only if only if only....


 


quote:

Originally posted by: truth4usm/AH
"Right...I'm not saying that USM is falling short because it's not Vanderbilt.  I'm accutely aware of the "unlevel" playing field that private universities have (esp. ones like Vandy that were started by wealthy benefactors).  I'm more interested in looking at what other state universities are doing (and how well they are doing it!).  If I were prez of USM (maybe I can buy 15 minutes worth? ref. to old post on Fire Shelby for those of you who came late to the party), I would be studying what these other state universities are doing RIGHT, and trying to replicate their strategies at USM.  Although all of these universities probably have a healthy amount of research dollars coming in, I'll bet they make sure their development offices are doing just as well, too.  And I'm positive that abandoning a successful capital campaign is not among the best practices of any "world-class" university.  "



__________________
truth4usm/AH

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: noel polk
""
Noel, I think our messages got crossed...I was responding to Invictus' message about USM not having the financial advantages of a Harvard or Vanderbilt.  I think everything you've said is right on as well.  So much lost...it's a crime, for sure.  Thanks for your message!

__________________
Eagle in Cairo, Egypt

Date:
RE: Capital campaigns at other universities
Permalink Closed

USM may never truly be a world-class university.  But as a graduate, let me say this.  I am proud of the education I received there.  I had classes under scholars and teachers (I've said before that just because you are one does not mean that you are the other).  Not only that, but some of these men and women were/are tops in their chosen fields. 

__________________
Invictus

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: Eagle in Cairo, Egypt
"USM may never truly be a world-class university.  But as a graduate, let me say this.  I am proud of the education I received there.  I had classes under scholars and teachers (I've said before that just because you are one does not mean that you are the other).  Not only that, but some of these men and women were/are tops in their chosen fields.  "


Eagle in Cairo speaks for a lot of alumni. When I think back to when I was a student, I don't remember ballgames or any of that jazz. I remember a group of teachers who worked very hard, who cared about me as a person & who never got the full recogition they deserved.

The only things I remember about the administration was the "Exit 13" controversy & how much different the campus "felt" when I returned to grad school to find McCain gone & Lucas in office. I hope that things will be similarly positive when SFT is gone.

__________________
truth4usm/AH

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: Eagle in Cairo, Egypt
"USM may never truly be a world-class university.  But as a graduate, let me say this.  I am proud of the education I received there.  I had classes under scholars and teachers (I've said before that just because you are one does not mean that you are the other).  Not only that, but some of these men and women were/are tops in their chosen fields.  "
Eagle in Cairo, I agree with you wholeheartedly!  USM was such a large part of my life (both as an undergrad & grad student, and as a staffer there for 8 years), and a large part of my family's life (6 of my family members have degrees from USM).  I always felt that the education I received there was top-notch.  I was always proud to tell people about the great things going on at USM.  Now, my only hope is that SFT steps down soon, and life gets back to some semblance of normality at my beloved alma mater.  Unfortunately, I believe it will take a very long time for things to truly "get back to normal."     

__________________
Mississippian in Exile

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: truth4usm/AH
"Eagle in Cairo, I agree with you wholeheartedly!  USM was such a large part of my life (both as an undergrad & grad student, and as a staffer there for 8 years), and a large part of my family's life (6 of my family members have degrees from USM).  I always felt that the education I received there was top-notch.  I was always proud to tell people about the great things going on at USM.  Now, my only hope is that SFT steps down soon, and life gets back to some semblance of normality at my beloved alma mater.  Unfortunately, I believe it will take a very long time for things to truly "get back to normal."      "
Very good posts, Eagle in Cairo & truth4usm/AH. One thing I recall, fondly and vividly, is driving through the campus when the dorms opened in the Fall. I often watched from my car window as I passed through campus, as the parents of the new students proudly assisted their sons and daughters move into their new rooms. The proud looks on the faces of those parents, and their animated behavior, said it all! Many of those new students were, no doubt, first generation college students. Those students were coming for an education. In the past,the faculty and the administration truly valued undergraduate education. Will the needs of the students who arrive this Fall be met by the depleted and demoralized faculty and by the new emphasis on economic development? I am greatly saddened by what has happened to the university during the past two years.

__________________
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.
USM Forum -- Message Board -> AAUP-USM MESSAGE BOARD -> Capital campaigns at other universities
Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse 		Powered by ActiveBoard