↓ Download PDF ← Back to Library
DOS • P
Minutes of Development Committee Meeting
Friday, October 18,2002
4:00-5:00 p.m.
Present: Development Committee Members – Jack Merselis, Chair, Amy Chappell, Sherwood
Guernsey, Reuben Harris and Kay Thomson. Trustees Present – Dan Kaplan, Board Chair,
Everette Freeman, and Art Zucker. Staff – Lois Mann, Barbara Gellman-Danley, Toni Murdock,
Chloe Reid, and Peter Temes. Others – Gail Gregory, Ketchum, Inc. and Karen Ely (minutes)
Committee Members Absent: Sandra Deming, Dianne Fraser, Jeff Kasch and Peter Ostrander
I. Purpose of Committee
Jack Merselis referred to the recent October 8,2002 Development Committee conference call
where the committee reviewed their role. He asked Lois Mann to summarize for those in
attendance. Lois referenced the minutes of the June 2002 Development Committee Meeting in
Seattle. It was agreed at that meeting that the following would be the future work of the
Development Committee:
• Separate the college campaign and leave that work to the Campaign Cabinet
• Develop a way to monitor campus development plans
• Concentrate on resource, infrastructure and accountability of adult campuses
• Find ways to train the committee in fundraising and develop itself so that it can help
make the board a fundraising board
• Review materials and information to better understand what it takes to raise a dollar
Lois referred to the minutes of the October 8,2002 committee meeting and reiterated that while it
is the responsibility of campus presidents to hire development staff, the Development Committee
can make sure that plans are in place and ensure that resources are there to carry them out. As a
result of that conference call, each president was requested to submit his/her development plan to
the committee and was invited to attend today’s Development Committee meeting.
II. Review Campus Reports
The committee had copies of each campus report to review. Jack Merselis stated that one
common message from all campuses relative to their circumstances and needs was that the
committee should “find ways to help us keep our money”. He then asked each campus president
to give an overview of their campus report and advise the committee of what types of
development needs their campus requires, and explain some of their opportunities and successes.
• Antioch University Seattle – Toni Murdock
Toni reiterated that although the unexpected death of Mel Jackson took a toll on their
development efforts, they are in the middle of a search process and have narrowed the
selection down to two candidates. She is encouraged that if a new Development person is
hired within the next month things will be fine, but if this search fails then it could be a major
setback.
She stated that although there has been some financial set back, the monies from the
W.K. Kellogg Foundation and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation for the Early College
High School Initiative has helped. It has created a lot of visibility for AUS and has had an
impact on Development people both positive and negative. Not enough money is being
allocated to schools and there is extra workload. Dan Kaplan inquired whether the
relationship with Gates was purely Mel Jackson’s and if there were any issues with that
Page 1 of4
relationship, and also if there might be other opportunities with Gates. Toni advised that the
relationship was bigger than that and there are no problems and that large organizations like
Gates have no boundaries. She said it is crucial that they keep things under control with
Gates and be kept in the loop about who they are talking to and about what. She advised that
AUS has to get a vision in place to present to other foundations, but one potential opportunity
is Ford Motor Company, which could support their Native American program.
Concerning Alumni Relations, Toni advised they need staffing because currently every
one is doing bits and pieces. She admits the program needs focus and she hopes to address
staffing needs in next year’s budget.
Jack Merselis congratulated Toni on the successful AUS Board of Visitors program.
Toni stated the goal is to increase the number to a minimum of 15 or larger and to raise the
level of membership to individuals who have greater resources. Part of the success has been
allowing the Board of Visitors to do what is comfortable for them – and conceded they are
not a group that loves big fundraising events or big galas. Workshops and other events where
the individuals can use their respective resources appear to be working. The Maya Angelou
events planned for February 2003 (black tie dinner and breakfast) should bring in some big
money and in 2004 they plan an event selling tables to alums and having an Antioch night.
• Antioch University McGregor – Barbara Gellman-Danlev
Barbara stated that they have a wonderful development person and will continue their
plan to promote activities which help build relations with McGregor alumni, the local
business community, and private and public foundations. She believes it starts with having a
good Board of Visitors and they are continually looking for people who can open doors.
Regarding annual fund goals, McGregor has a lot of special events planned including the
alumni picnic, which has been a huge success in the past, and they have established the
McGregor Society for donors who contribute $l,000/more. Their Executive Spelling Bee
established last year is a big success and gives McGregor great exposure. Barbara advised
that they may want to do a Capital Campaign in a few years, when a decision is made
whether we are fixing Yellow Springs or not.
On the topic of Grants, McGregor has major possibilities, including the Troops for
Teachers program with Wright Patterson Air Force Base. She reminded the committee that
grants are not free money, it is a lot of work, it may cost money, and currently McGregor
does not have any grant writers. When asked how much it costs for a grant writer, Barbara
estimated $50,000/year. Peter Temes acknowledged that they have two full time equivalents
at ANE. Barbara explained that it could take a couple of years for a position like that to pay
for itself and she would rather outsource first, then do a case study and then hire full time.
She advised that there is federal money out there, but that she believes the focus should be on
grants and contracts that deliver something. Lois Mann reminded the committee that we had
approached the Pierson-Lovelace Foundation to provide a capacity building grant to
strengthen the External Relations Office, and were advised to come back when we have done
some other work first (i.e. Tom Clough project). Barbara believes that if she out sources first
for grants and gets results, then it will be easier to get a person permanently. Gail Gregory
agreed and stated that once you have received several grants then at some point in time you
can get others.
• Antioch University Southern California – Chloe Reid
As stated in her campus report, in April 2002 Chloe inherited a completely dismantled
development department with no development employees. First priority is to hire a
Page 2 of4
Development Director for the Los Angeles campus, which has the largest alumni base, and to
build infrastructure.
An Annual Fund Drive has been non-existent, but they will do an alumni fund drive in
early December.
Their Board of Visitors program needs relationship building, but Chloe can not commit
not knowing who will be President next year. The BOV hasn’t met in over a year, and there
is a recurring issue of why do we exist. Barbara Danley told about a notebook that they
prepared for the McGregor BOV where it was stated the two primary reasons for their
existence were: 1) open doors and 2) make sure we are not forgotten. Peter Temes stated his
BOV displays anxiety also at any hint of fundraising. Barbara Danley reminded everyone
that it takes time in cultivating the BOV, not just the breakfasts and dinners, but remembering
birthdays, anniversaries, condolences for funerals, etc. She said there is no cookie cutter
model and each campus must determine what works best for the respective BOV at the
discretion of the President. Jack Merselis stated the interface between the college and
community is important.
The Santa Barbara campus marks its 25th anniversary this year, and the Los Angeles
campus celebrates its 30th anniversary. Anniversary events will be held for both campuses,
with the Santa Barbara event being lower key and Los Angeles more action filled.
• Antioch New England – Peter Temes
Peter said that although some might think this is the worst time to do a Capital Campaign
he feels the dollar goal is important, but the goal of changing the culture of the community
about ANE and meeting people is just as important.
Speaking of the Norman Wilson Scholarship he said their first priority is to get this match
done. The purpose of the scholarship is to promote racial and ethnic diversity at ANE.
The ANE Campaign Strategy is divided into three levels of alumni and potential donors.
The first level is about 25 individuals who have the capability of donating $50,000 plus, and
the plan is to cultivatel to 1 relationships with them, share planning, ask them to share ideas,
and then let them know we need their help. The second level consists of about 200
alumni/friends who will be invited to invitation only events with a goal of asking S500-
$1,000 and migrating them to a higher level of giving. The third level consists of about 6,000
alumni, generally not able to give significant gifts. This level will be educated about the need
to give and the benefits of giving without financial pain.
Peter spoke briefly about a recent ANE Grant of $3M for four school districts. A request
was made that he write up the information about this grant and send to other
Campus presidents,
• Antioch College – Lois Mann
The committee had several reports to review in advance, including the 9-20-02 Campaign
Progress Worksheet, the 9-30-02 Fundraising Progress Report, FY ’02 Fundraising Results,
Annual Fund FY ’02 Executive Summary and Sources of Gifts, and the FY ’03 Development
Plan. Lois Mann explained that although they are extensive reports, they are self-
explanatory.
III. Trustee Giving
Reports were presented showing FY’02 Results and Lois commented that with the
support of the 17 board members who helped receive the Pierson-Lovelace Challenge, she
will be able to ask for payment sooner. Comparative Analysis Chart and Graphs showed a
history of ways trustees support the college and campuses over the past ten years.
Page 3 of4
IV. Resolutions
Two resolutions were presented to the committee for approval: one for Non-endowed
gifts and pledges of $50,000 or more, and one for Endowment Gifts.
On a motion from Kay Thomson, seconded by Sherwood Guernsey the resolutions were
approved for full Board vote.
In conclusion, Jack Merselis said he felt the meeting was productive in showing the
Development Committee where they have work to do and what areas they should celebrate.
A motion to adjourn was made by Kay Thomson, and seconded by Sherwood Guernsey.
Page 4 of4
