In recent years, increasing market competitiveness and rising educational costs have underscored the importance of external revenues in higher education finance in the United States. Even as the higher education costs continue to exceed the rate of inflation, public funding from both state and federal sources is steadily declining. As traditional funding sources become less reliable, American colleges and universities seek to pursue alternative revenues such as private donations. Using panel data of public colleges and universities from 1994-2003, this study investigated how institutional characteristics and environmental factors influence overall private giving and its varying sources to public colleges and universities. It addressed two major research questions: Which institutional, state policy and governance, and socioeconomic factors are most closely associated with the generation of private giving to public postsecondary institutions? How do these factors differently influence private giving from four sources- alumni/ae, non-alumni/ae individuals, corporations, and foundations? This book is addressed to higher education researchers, policymakers, university administrators, and institutional development officers. The general conceptual framework suggested by this book will help higher education researchers better understand the dynamics of private giving in collges and universities. Findings of this study also have some practical implications to higher education policymakers and practitioners.
Institutional Advancement comprehensively reviews and evaluates the published empirical research on advancement in higher education of the last 23 years, covering fundraising, alumni relations, public relations, marketing, and the role of institutional leadership in all of these.
State and federal funding for higher education is becoming more restrictive at the same time competition for donations to non-profit and educational institutions grows. As such, university development departments are challenged with identifying potential donors and with adopting more efficient practices so as to ensure successful fund-raising campaigns. This study used de-identified alumni donation information from three, private, Ohio-based universities over a 10-year period, 1995-2005. Using Astin's Theory of Student of Involvement (1984) as its framework, the researcher sought to determine what influence, if any, alumni demographic information, undergraduate fields of study, and undergraduate experiences in on-campus academic, social, and athletic pursuits have on alumni donations. A significant finding from this study is the fact that having alumni involved in more than one on-campus academic, social, or athletic pursuit was the most significant predictor of alumnus total donations, the study's criterion variable. This study is believed to be the first to have applied Astin's student involvement theory to alumni donation patterns. Future researchers may identify even more opportunities to target philanthropic opportunities among alumni so as to ensure more efficient, effective higher education donor campaigns..
Educational scholars have examined the relationship of philanthropy and its contributions to the public university. Yet, there has been little discussion of the influence of philanthropy on the governance space of the public research university, and specifically as conditional philanthropy may affect academic integrity and shared governance. In this chapter, we consider these larger issues in the context of a study of a recent case. Drawing on public records, interviews, and university documents, the chapter examines conditional donation of The Charles G. Koch Foundation (CKF) to the Florida State University (FSU). We suggest that the Koch Foundation gift appears to illustrate a new model of governance based philanthropy. It has done so by tying donations to control or influence of the internal governing mechanics of an academic unit of a public university. This model has generated controversy. Though there was substantial faculty and student backlash, the model appears to be evidence of a new philanthropic relationship between the public university and substantial donors, one in which donors may change the nature of traditional shared governance relationships within the university. We maintain that instances of such “new” strategic philanthropy require greater focus on and sensitivity to shared governance and faculty input as a way to ensure accountability, especially to preserve the integrity of the academic enterprise and its public mission where donors seek to leverage philanthropy into choices relating to faculty hires, courses and programs traditionally at the center of faculty prerogatives in shared governance.
As California's financial commitment to higher education continues to waver amidst fiscal crises and competing policy priorities, it is important that public institutions explore other strategies to cope with budget shortfalls (Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC), 2012). Such strategies have generally consisted of tuition and fee increases, expenditure reductions, and enrollment management (PPIC, 2012). There are numerous consequences related to each. Tuition and fee increases heighten worries about affordability. Expenditure reductions raise concerns about quality. Enrollment maiJagement practices threaten to limit access. One less explored strategy in the California State University (CSU) system is the solicitation of philanthropic support. Unlike private colleges and universities who have relied on philanthropic support for generations, most CSU schools lack a culture and tradition of giving back. Indeed, it has only been since the state legislature began cutting back support in the 1990s and 201 Os that CSU schools started becoming interested in philanthropy and expressing the need for more money than the state provides. Given this, many higher education administrators view philanthropic support as a promising way for public institutions to continue funding university initiatives no longer supported by the state. Focusing specifically on the CSU system, this study used a mixed-methods approach of both quantitative and comparative research to further examine philanthropic support through the lens of alumni giving. For the quantitative research, I utilized data from a CSU Advancement Office to conduct a two-part regression analysis and examine alumni giving patterns over a five-year period. The quantitative research also included a forecast prediction model. For the comparative research, the study compared its predictions on donor likelihood and target gift amount to that of a third party analytics company which conducted similar research with the same dataset. Corroborating past literature, the study overwhelmingly found that the type of degree earned and the number of degrees earned impacted alumni giving. Master, doctoral, and second-degree earners were significantly more likely to be donors. Similarly, student athletes and students who participated in at least one university-sponsored activity were more likely to be donors. In terms of total amount given, the results again substantiated that higher educational attainment and student involvement corresponded with larger gifts. The variables of age, median household income, and proximity to campus also had an effect on total amount given. When comparing the study's predictions to a third party company's predictions, the analysis revealed that the study's model may lack a robust indicator for high-end donors. Yet for low-end donors, the study may provide a more nuanced prediction that could prove to be helpful for annual funds. Based on these findings, there is evidence to suggest that regression analysis can assist CSU University Advancement Offices to understand the factors that predict alumni giving. Learning more about the influences that cause an alumnus/na to make a financial contribution in support of the CSU can help inform policy decisions about state general fund allocation. The study can also help CSU Advancement Offices engage in more fruitful, meaningful, and strategic fundraising.
The use of race-based affirmative action in higher education has given rise to hundreds of books and law review articles, numerous court decisions, and several state initiatives to ban the practice. However, surprisingly little has been said or written or done to challenge a larger, longstanding "affirmative action" program that tends to benefit wealthy whites: legacy preferences for the children of alumni. "Affirmative Action for the Rich" sketches the origins of legacy preferences, examines the philosophical issues they raise, outlines the extent of their use today, studies their impact on university fundraising, and reviews their implications for civil rights. In addition, the book outlines two new theories challenging the legality of legacy preferences, examines how a judge might review those claims, and assesses public policy options for curtailing alumni preferences. The book includes chapters by Michael Lind of the New America Foundation; Peter Schmidt of the "Chronicle of Higher Education"; former "Wall Street Journal" reporter Daniel Golden; Chad Coffman of Winnemac Consulting, attorney Tara O'Neil, and student Brian Starr; John Brittain of the University of the District of Columbia Law School and attorney Eric Bloom; Carlton Larson of the University of California--Davis School of Law; attorneys Steve Shadowen and Sozi Tulante; Sixth Circuit Court Judge Boyce F. Martin Jr. and attorney Donya Khalili; and education writer Peter Sacks.
Support in higher education is an emerging area of great interest to professors, researchers and students in academic institutions. Sustainability in Higher Education provides discussions on the exchange of information between different aspects of sustainability in higher education. This book includes chapter contributions from authors who have provided case studies on various areas of education for sustainability. Focus on sustainability Present studies in aspects related with higher education Explores a variety of educational aspects from an sustainable perspective
