↓ Download PDF ← Back to Library
Donor Bill of Rights – Antioch University
www.theantiochpapers.org
On November 4, 2007, the Antioch University Board of Trustees amended their University Commitment
Acceptance Policies by adding the Donor Bill of Rights. At the Board meeting in which the University
Trustees adopted the bill, it was stated, “there’s nothing here we’re not already doing.” Given this statement, it
is clear the Donor Bill of Rights extends these Rights to all Donors to Antioch College/University before and
after the adoption date of these Rights. If you have donated to Antioch College/University, read the Bill and
know your Rights.
We have included Antioch University Chairman Art Zucker’s written comments to the Village of Yellow
Springs from July 2007. We feel Chairman Zucker’s comments need to be read carefully in relationship to a
donor’s first right – the right “to be informed of the organization’s… capacity to use donations effectively for
their intended purposes.”
At the Village Council meeting Chairman Zucker stated:
—”In November 2006, the Board reviewed the cash flow challenges and it was clear that the financial
situation was becoming increasingly more perilous.”
—”At the Board’s meeting in early February [2007]… the financial condition was still quite perilous… The
Board further suggested that a consultant with financial “work-out” expertise be engaged….”
“Wall Street Words: An A to Z Guide to Investment Terms for Today’s Investor” defines “workout” as:
1. The process of a debtor’s meeting a loan commitment by satisfying altered repayment terms. For example, a
firm in Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings might reach an agreement with its creditors for ways in which the
firm’s obligations can be worked out.
Index
Page 2 Antioch University’s Donor Bill of Rights
Page 3 Antioch University Board of Trustee Minutes related to the Donor Bill of Rights
Pages 4-8 Art Zucker & Toni Murdock – Key Talking Points to the Yellow Springs Village Council
Pages 9-10 Grants, Gifts, & Pledges – Oct. 1 to Dec. 31 – Fiscal Year 2006/07
———-
The documents in this exhibit were accessed through the Timeline of Antioch College’s Finances and
Management, an online resource “originally compiled by Laura Fathauer with some assistance from Matthew
Baya.” Donor’s can use this timeline as a tool to contextualize their philanthropic rights granted by the
bill. This timeline can be found here (http://wiki.antiochians.org/index.php?title=Timeline). The 2004-07
Antioch University Board of Trustee minutes can be found here http://www.analyze.antiochians.org
Brian Springer – The Antioch Papers – www.theantiochpapers.org- 2008
ANTIOCH UNIVERSITY’S DONOR BILL OF RIGHTS Adopted November 4, 2006 Philanthropy is based on voluntary action for the common good. It is a tradition of giving and sharing that is primary to the quality of life. To assure that philanthropy merits the respect and trust of the general public, and that donors and prospective donors can have full confidence in the not-for-profit organizations and causes they are asked to support, we declare that all donors have these rights: 1. To be informed of the organization’s mission, of the way the organization intends to use donated resources, and of its capacity to use donations effectively for their intended purposes. 2. To be informed of the identity of those serving on the organization’s governing board, and to expect the board to exercise prudent judgment in its stewardship responsibilities. 3. To have access to the organization’s most recent financial statements. 4. To be assured their gifts will be used for the purposes for which they were given. 5. To receive appropriate acknowledgment and recognition. 6. To be assured that information about their donations is handled with respect and with confidentiality to the extent provided by law. 7. To expect that all relationships with individuals representing organizations of interest to the donor will be professional in nature. 8. To be informed whether those seeking donations are volunteers, employees of the organization or hired solicitors, 9. To have the opportunity for their names to be deleted from mailing lists that an organization may intend to share. 10. To feel free to ask questions when making a donation and to receive prompt, truthful and forthright answers.
ANTIOCH UNIVERSITY -BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETING MINUTES YELLOW SPRINGS, OHIO – November 2-4, 2006 Saturday, November 4, 2006 Trustees present: Art Zucker/Chair, Bruce Bedford/Treasurer, Amy Chappell, Howard Coleman, Dan Fallon/Vice Chair, John Feinberg, Dianne Brou Fraser, Sherwood Guernsey/Secretary, Reuben Harris, Hal Joseph, Niels Lyster, Tom McNicol, Sharon Merriman, Jack Merselis, Larry Stone, and Barbara Winslow. Absent: Michael Alexander, David Crippens, Everette Freeman, Jeff Kasch, and Paula Treichler ULC: Toni Murdock, Chancellor; Laurien Alexandre, Vice Chancellor University Academic Affairs; Leslie Bates, Exec Assist’t to the Chancellor & Assist’t Sec’y of the Board; David Caruso, President, Antioch New England; Barbara Gellman-Danley, President Antioch University McGregor; Tom Faecke, Vice Chancellor and Chief Financial Officer; LucyAnn Geiselman, President Antioch University Southern California; Mark Hower, Interim President Antioch Seattle; MaryLou Lapierre, Vice Chancellor for University Advancement; Steve Lawry, President Antioch College. Legal Counsel: David Weaver Others present: Karen Ely, Secretary of the Board; Rick Jurasek, Antioch College Chief Operations Officer; College Community members included Tom Wamsley, Vice President Office of Institutional Advancement; McGregor: Michael Robinson, Iris Weisman. Donor Bill of Rights. David W was asked to speak to the Donor Bill of Rights. It was initially suggested by the College Development Office as beneficial when speaking with donors. It is widely used by non-profits and is consistent with current University practices. Following is the bill in its entirety: Philanthropy is based on voluntary action for the common good. It is a tradition of giving and sharing that is primary to the quality of life. To assure that philanthropy merits the respect and trust of the general public, and that donors and prospective donors can have full confidence in the not-for-profit organizations and causes they are asked to support, we declare that all donors have these rights: 1. To be informed of the organization’s mission, of the way the organization intends to use donated resources, and of its capacity to use donations effectively for their intended purposes. 2. To be informed of the identity of those serving on the organization’s governing board, and to expect the board to exercise prudent judgment in its stewardship responsibilities. 3. To have access to the organization’s most recent financial statements. 4. To be assured their gifts will be used for the purposes for which they were given. 5. To receive appropriate acknowledgment and recognition. 6. To be assured that information about their donations is handled with respect and with confidentiality to the extent provided by law. 7. To expect that all relationships with individuals representing organizations of interest to the donor will be professional in nature. 8. To be informed whether those seeking donations are volunteers, employees of the organization or hired solicitors, 9. To have the opportunity for their names to be deleted from mailing lists that an organization may intend to share. 10. To feel free to ask questions when making a donation and to receive prompt, truthful and forthright answers. If we adopt these bullet points, we accept these principles, we as trustees should feel comfortable that these are being adhered to. Although it imposes obligations on us, there’s nothing here we’re not already doing; i.e., recognition of gift receipts, access by donors to our audit, etc. RESOLUTION 11.4.06:7 (J. MerselisID. Fraser) RESOLVED, that the upon the recommendation of the Development Committee, the Board hereby amends the University Commitment Acceptance Policies as needed to incorporate into and make a part of said policies the “Donor Bill of Rights” by the Council for the Advancement and Support of Education (CASE). Passed by unanimous voice vote.
The Yellow Springs Village Council invited Board Chair, Art Zuckerand Chancellor Toni Murdock to attend Council meeting on July 16,2007. Council allotted time on their agenda for Art Zucker and ToniMurdock to address the audience.Below are their comments:
Yellow Springs Village CouncilKey Talking PointsOpening StatementJuly 16, 2007Arthur ZuckerChair, Board of TrusteesChancellor Toni Murdock and I appreciate the opportunity to speak with youthis evening. The past 45 days have been very difficult and challenging forAntioch College and its many constituents. The Board’s decision to suspendoperations at the College will be remembered throughout her illustrioushistory.We are very sensitive to the obvious economic impact it will have on theYellow Springs Village. Re-opening the College will require thecooperation and assistance of the Village and its residents.This was one of the most difficult decisions many of us have been forced tomake in our personal and professional lives. That decision has been met withsome acceptance; and with much resentment. I understand and appreciateboth reactions very well.We are pleased to have the opportunity to join you this evening to explainwhat was done, how and why. But first, I have one request: Members of thisBoard have deep, compelling reasons for having joined this governancebody and contributing to the leadership of Antioch: Many of us have spentthe formative years of our lives on this campus, remain closely connectedsince graduation, are loyal donors, and care deeply – deeply – about Antioch.I am dismayed by the personal attacks aimed at Board members and wouldask that we return to a more civil discussion.
I am asking that all Antiochans, from faculty and students to graduates andsupporters, come together as a family, as we have done so many timesbefore, to help us develop a plan to resume the operations of the campus atthe earliest possible date. When that day comes, Antioch College will re-emerge as one of the nation’s most innovative, progressive institutions, fromits dramatically strengthened infrastructure to its revamped curriculum and,as always, very close ties to this most important community.While the Board of Trustees declared financial exigency for Antioch Collegeon June 9, 2007, that decision actually goes back many months, years andeven decades. Each of you knows the College never rebounded from thedifficult student strike of a generation ago. Since then, the enrollment hassteadily dropped. With each passing year, the financial model of Antiochbecame more difficult to sustain.You are well aware that the declining full time enrollment, the lifeblood ofAntioch, has been on a sharp decline for a generation. Since 2000-01, thenumber of matriculating students has fallen from around 600 to a projected300 for 2007-08. For a number of reasons, fund-raising has also not metexpectations. Over the last seven years, the College has raised $42 million;over half of which was designated to cover operating deficits.The College has been operating at a loss for many years. From 1995 to 2005we experienced deficits every year. These were offset by reserves from theother five campuses, budget cuts and private support. For the year 2006-07the deficit was $5.4 million, and for the 2007-08 operating year, weprojected a deficit of $5.3 million. These budgets will be balanced by a $10million gift from a donor who agreed to re-direct his gift from theendowment to cover operating deficits. The university management teamestimated the cash deficit at the College would exceed $5.6 million for the2008-09 fiscal year had operations not been suspended – a level theuniversity could not have absorbed and which would have jeopardized itsfuture.By not acting promptly, it was clear that, in 18 months time, AntiochUniversity would not be able to pay the salaries of faculty, staff oradministration at any of our campuses, and there was the high probabilitythat the assets of the University would be turned over to creditors.
Conversely, since the early 1990s, Antioch’s five other campuses have
directly contributed $740,000 per year as an income stream toward the
operational expenses of the College. In addition, during that time almost $7
million in reserves from the other campuses have been used to balance the
College budget and finance its 1990s capital campaign. All together, the
current support to the College by the other five campuses is approximately
$1.5 million annually since the College does not contribute to management
operations of the university. This is a business model that simply cannot be
sustained.
[n November 2006, the B – – . – . 1 reviewed the cash flow challenges and it wa: . – . .
to consider what actions could take place to correct the condition, and to
report back to the Board at the February meeting. An ad hoc committee was
formed, consisting of Trustees and senior management, who worked on the
effort between November and the end of January.
1 the Chancellor provided the –
irk of the ad hoc committee.
to provide verification and assistance with the situation.
In March, after considering several firms, Chancellor Murdock hired Porter,
Wright, Morris & Arthur, a Columbus-based law firm with national
expertise in institutional financial matters. After an in-depth review by
Porter, Wright they strongly recommended bringing in a second firm,
Gateway, which has been used by banking organizations to evaluate the
financial condition of higher education institutions. Both firms were asked
to objectively analyze the financial condition of the College and to work in
conjunction with our management in developing options for getting back on
a sustainable financial footing.
In late March, during a conference call, the Board reviewed the information
we had at the time and it was clear that the viable options were few,
particularly in light of the dismal projections for fall FTE enrollment. What
we discussed focused on the aforementioned deficits that now threatened the
existence of the university. The private support that had sustained us theprevious few years had ended, and enrollment numbers did not meet theforecast. Contributions from the other Antioch campuses have beenincreasingly difficult for those institutions. This business model, asmentioned, was simply no longer sustainable.In April, the Chancellor convened a group comprised of collegeadministrators and a financial team. They met for three days to review thefinancial reports and determine options the Board would consider at its Junemeeting.Both Porter Wright and Gateway validated and confirmed Antiochmanagement’s findings. The June 2007 BOT meeting was devoted almost entirely to the financialcondition of the College. After months and months of deliberations,hundreds and hundreds of hours of analysis by our senior staff, two outsideexpert consulting firms, and members of the Board’s Finance Committee,we were left with no other viable option. We also believed strongly that ifwe were going to suspend operations, we had a moral obligation to notifyfaculty, staff and students 12 months before the suspension was to takeplace. The Chancellor and campus presidents were unanimous in theirdecision to recommend this action to the Board.Again, this was one of the most difficult personal and professional decisionsour Board members have been forced to make. The Trustees love Antioch.We had to make this decision when we made it, or we would lose the entireUniversity and thereby relinquish any hope of ever re-opening the College.There was no other viable option.Now I would like to ask Toni to make a few comments.Toni MurdockChancellor, Antioch UniversityI have been instructed by the Board to develop a plan to reopen the Collegeat the earliest possible time, with a target date of 2012. No one characterizesI have been instructed by the Board to develop a plan to re-open the Collegethat work as easy. It is going to take considerable faith, trust and money onthe part of a number of people, including yourselves.
We understand the economic impact that suspending operations has on theYellow Springs village. I have already been meeting with various villageorganizations and learn more and more the interdependency of the villageand the college. It is obvious that the village cares about the college and itsfuture.It is important to recognize that the decision has been made to suspendoperations of the College; the Board has no intention of reversing thatdecision. We need to focus our attention on the students coming here nextyear to ensure they have an outstanding year and that we graduate as manystudents as possible. After that, the College needs to rest in order for us tofocus then on its rebuilding—and I’m optimistic because of the fact thatthere are 5 other campuses committed to its reopening and willing tofinancially support that the period of rest while we focus on planning. Weneed to dramatically enhance our facilities and design our curriculum tomeet the needs to tomorrow’s students. With your help, we can achievethese goals, and allow Antioch to emerge as a competitive, comprehensiveliberal arts institution.
WHEREAS? since the said parcel is surplus property not needed for University purposes? the
University believes it is i.n its best interest to convey the fee simple title to the entire parcel to
the City of Cincinnati.
BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED? that the Vice Chancellor and Chief Financial Officer is
hereby authorized to execute the documents necessary to terminate of record the lease of the
said parcel with The Penn Central Corporationy to undertake the sale of the said parcel to the
City of Cincinnati at a price of $4,565.00 and on such other terms and conditions as he deems
best? and to execute any and all documents necessary to complete this sale, including the
Contract? Settlement Statement, and Deed.
RESOLUTION 2.3.07:3 (A. ZuckerJJ. Merselis)
RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees of Antioch University hereby ratifies and
confirms the actions of the Executive Committee as reported in the minutes of the
meetings held by conference call on July 18, September 6, and September 22,2006.
Passed by unanimous voice vote.
Development Committee Report. Jack Merselis reported on the following resolutions. On behalf
the Board? Art expressed great appreciation for these gifts and grants.
RESOLUTION 2.03.07:4 (J. MerselislS. Guernsev)
RESOLVEDy that the following new endowment gifts and pledges received fiom October
1 2006? through December 3 1,2006? are gratefully accepted acknowledged by the Antioch
University Board of Trustees:
Donor Amount ANTIOCH UNIVERSITY NEW
ENGLAND
Restriction I T v ~ e
1 Donor 1 Amount 1 ANTIOCH COLLEGE
Board of Trustees
Feb 2007 Meeting Minutes
Restriction 1 Type
–
$12y000.00
$1 1 ?722.50
$2y000.00
$1 y500.00
$1,288.50
$1 ? 134.00
$1 yOOO.OO
$l,OOO.OC
$1,000.00
$250,00
$250.0C
Coretta Scott King Endowed Scholarship
Patterson Endowed Scholarship Fund
Anne Fischer Endowed Scholarship Fund
Abrams Endowed Peace Fund
Glen Endowment – general operations
Glen Endowment – general operations
Patterson Endowed Scholarship Fund
Paul A. Coney Endowed Scholarship Fund
Abrams Endowed Peace Fund
General Puvose Endowment
Coretta Scott King Endowed Scholarship
8
$200.00 Scholarship Endowment
$100.00 Scholarship Endowment
Donor
1 $250.001 Scholarship Endowment 1
$3 1.001 Scholarship Endowment
Amount
$100.001 Scholarship Endowment 1
ANTIOCH UNIVERSITY SEATTLE
Restriction 1 Type
$1 10.00 Scholarship Endowment
$40.00 Scholarship Endowment
$3 1 .OO Scholarship Endowment
Passed by unanimous voice vote.
RESOLUTION 2.03.07:5 (J. MerselislS. Guernsey)
FCESOLVED, that the following new foundation grants and pledges received fiom October
1,2006, through December 3 1,2006, of $50.000 or more are gratefully accepted and
acknowledged by the Antioch University Board of Trustees:
Restriction 1 Type
Antioch University Seattle
Early College High Schools for Native Youth
Antioch College
Waste Water Treatment Grant for Glen Helen
Antioch College
Bonner scholars hi^ Proa-am
Antioch University Southern California
Funding for Student Scholarshi~s
Passed by unanimous voice vote.
With regard to the sale of the property known as G. Stanley Hall hall, Tom provided background to
the $200K appraised value which appears in the budget. Bruce asked for a modification to the
resolution to include that the university seek independent appraisal; involve the Antioch School as a
way of addressing the politics of the situation. The resolution was modified and David Weaver read
the new version.
Board of Trustees
Feb 2007 Meeting Minutes
