Vice president for development and alumni relations since 1998
How does it feel now that the Lift High the Cross campaign has wrapped up?
It’s wonderful, but a bit disorienting. Wonderful for all the obvious reasons: we succeeded; staff and volunteers are happy about what we accomplished; Holy Cross ended up with far greater financial resources than it had just five years ago. When success is in the air, life is good.
But it is also disorienting. The campaign gave us a specific reason, day-in and day-out, to talk with people in a focused way about what Holy Cross is striving to accomplish. With the campaign over, however, we don’t have that comfortable framework, that occasion, anymore.
We are, however, getting back on the road, doing what we do best, which is talking about Holy Cross: its mission, its needs, how those needs relate to mission and the ways in which our many alumni, parents and friends can make a difference.
The campaign finished $41 million over the goal. How did that happen?
There are many reasons for our amazing finish, and I will speak to them, but let me start with the strongest reason: the Park Smith challenge.
From the earliest days of the campaign, it was clear that Park thought we should aim high—higher than we had ever achieved. Although our goal of $175 million, once realized, would amount to $100 million more than any previous Holy Cross campaign, Park was convinced we should shoot for $200 million. As we closed in on the last year of the campaign, Park sensed we could reach that number, but only if a dramatic challenge was put before our constituency. Park made that challenge: if our alumni, parents and friends could find a way to get the campaign to the $190 million mark, he would add the final $10 million, thus enabling Lift High the Cross to finish at $200 million. From that day forward the campaign shifted gears entirely. Everyone wanted to know: Are we going to make it? What can I do? It was the first time in my 25 years in this business that people called me up to ask those sorts of questions.
But there are other reasons for our success. The Campaign Steering Committee intensified its efforts, as did Fr. McFarland. Our campaign chair, Jack Rehm ’54, inspired us all with his enthusiasm and unflagging support. Our development team, now seasoned, came into its own. They were nothing short of spectacular. I have never seen a harder-working group of individuals. We had good marketing support from our Public Affairs Office. And, in the final phase, there were no major disruptions in our economy or in national affairs to distract us—or our supporters—from the goal.
In addition to the campaign going so far over goal, were there any other surprises?
Sure. Shortly after the public launch of the campaign, our nation suffered one of its biggest tragedies: 9/11. In three days, we went from celebrating a campaign that had already attained over 50 percent of its goal—to not knowing when or even whether we could re-start the campaign. Somehow or other, however, our alumni, parents and friends figured out that our nation’s welfare and the welfare of Holy Cross were inextricably linked. They instinctively understood that what we were trying to accomplish was not only in our College’s interest, but in the national interest. And so they continued their support; they did not abandon us. This was a moment of high emotion for all of us. I knew we would be fine.
A second surprise was the fivefold increase in the number of people whom we identified as having the financial capacity to help the campaign in a significant way, and the ability of our staff to meet most of them on behalf of the campaign. Not only did this help the campaign to succeed, but it laid the groundwork for the success of future campaigns.
A third surprise was that 80 percent of our alumni made a gift at some time during the campaign. That is a phenomenal number!
Where does this campaign position Holy Cross in relation to schools with which it is compared, i.e., other highly regarded liberal arts colleges, specifically those in the Northeast?
Catholic institutions have been slow to get involved in large-scale fund raising. In my view, this was mainly due to the presence of large numbers of priests, brothers and sisters who taught at our institutions and whose presence helped keep costs low—thus dampening the need for the kind of fund raising that our non-denominational peer institutions were doing. Certainly by the early 1970s all that changed, and we began to mount serious efforts to raise significant amounts of money.
But getting in the game did not erase the financial gap that separated us from our peers. Through the next three decades we always seemed to be a campaign or two behind the “competition.” To the credit of our generous supporters and the volunteers who worked so hard, we were able to catch up. At $216 million, Holy Cross has finished within the range ($200-250 million) that its liberal arts peers either have finished at within the last three years, or, hope to finish at over the next three years. This is a significant accomplishment that is impossible to overstate.
Are there any misperceptions you would like to clear up about this campaign or about campaigns in general?
I think there is a major misunderstanding about campaigns, so I am glad you asked me this question. The principal misperception is that campaigns are about money. Of course they are about money, but only in a secondary sense. Campaigns are primarily about institutions: their mission, their vision for the next several years, and how to marry mission and vision. At their best, campaigns speak to the soul of the institution, and to how individuals can band together to preserve and enhance what is best about it.
Throughout this campaign, people heard our message. Our constituents understood the importance of that message, and responded most generously.
So what will happen now that the campaign is over?
Last January, the Board of Trustees endorsed a strategic plan intended to guide the College over the next five years: 2007 to 2011. One of the principal objectives of that strategic plan is renovating and expanding our science facilities. In support of this, next March we will break ground for a $60 million integrated science complex (See article in this issue). We must raise $25 million in support of that project.
Within the next year, at the urging of a major benefactor who wishes us to address our inadequate athletic facilities—and who is willing to take the lead if we do—we will likely mount a significant fund-raising effort in this area as well.
We will have to raise resources to support the “First Year Experience” initiative set to launch in the fall of 2007. This is likely to lead to requests for additional faculty positions and types of meeting spaces that are not in our current inventory.
Is that the complete list of objectives for the near future?
There is one more very important thing to mention. During the campaign, annual alumni participation slipped by almost two points, from 51 to 49 percent. It has always been a point of pride at Holy Cross that our participation percentage has been at the 50 percent mark and even higher. I want to return to those days. So do our volunteers. We are determined to do so and are working on a set of activities that we believe will take us there.
So, no rest?
You know, all of us—volunteers and paid staff—believe in and enjoy working for such a wonderful institution. The work that we do enlivens us to some degree, and the success of the campaign has given us new insight into what we can accomplish. So, just a very short rest.
|
