Reforming the UCONN Alumni Association

[Dooley]

I mailed my ballot this afternoon. I voted 'Yes'. At the end of the day, I felt uniting our alumni base into one, large unified front was in the best interest of UConn's future.

Thank you all for sharing your thoughts. I took this vote very seriously and weighed both sides before casting. And to all members of the UCAA/Foundation, past and present, I thank you for all of your efforts.

 

[UConnNick]

I'm sure this person and a lot of others have worked hard to for the betterment of the Alumni Association and I wouldn't want to dismiss their opinions out of hand. Oversight is a valid concern, but most of the objections raised in that letter sound small-time. They're worried about UConn controlling the Alumni House? Like what, Herbst is going to convert it into classrooms or something? I don't think so. And raising the point of the $6m portfolio... again, I'm sure the A.A. folks were working hard to raise that money, but $6 mil is probably pennies compared to what our peers are working with. 10k members is embarassing. Performance matters.

The "Distribution Plan" now posted on the alumni website does not guarantee that the Alumni House will continue to be used for alumni purposes on campus. The plan essentially gives the university the right and sole option to decide to do anything with the building that they want, and to move any "alumni center" on campus to another building, perhaps the basement of the Student Union, or anywhere else they choose to put it.

The plan also indicates that the 6 million in liquid assets can be used for a number of purposes. The key language used is "...including, but not limited to, ...", with a listing of intended uses for the money. That pretty much gives the university administration carte blanche to use the money to pay salaries of housekeeping personnel, or anything else they want to spend it on.

This entire process has been handled very poorly by the university administration. You shouldn't deliberately alienate an alumni group that includes some of the largest individual donors to the university. Perhaps they're right about the efficiency and economies of scale that come with a consolidation of alumni relations and fundraising efforts, however the manner in which they have gone about making these changes has been dictatorial and totally non-transparent. The university administration notified the UCAA in mid-January that their funding from the university would be cut off on March 31, and they would also no longer be allowed the use of the school's logos or database of alumni names and addresses. No discussion or written plan for the transition was offered.

Also, if the UCAA is deemed a failure for not engaging a larger number of alumni, the UCONN Foundation has failed equally in not generating the level of endowment worthy of an institution which is the top land grant university in New England and which ranks in the top 20 of public universities nationwide. Why they are suddenly deemed the savior of all things UCONN is beyond me.

This matter should at the very least be held open for discussion. The university administration should be forced to put in writing some assurances that the money being turned over will be used for the purposes it was intended (scholarships, etc.), and under no circumstances should the Alumni House ever be converted to some other use, or worse, torn down to make room for some new construction.

The bottom line here is we're looking at nothing but a power and money grab by Susan Herbst and the university administration. That's all this is about. She'll be gone from UCONN in a few more years. The rest of us will have to live with these decisions forever, whether positive or negative.

For these reasons, I will vote NO on dissolution of the UCAA, and I urge all other members to do the same.

 

[UConnNick]

Setting aside the alumni association has not appeared for at least a few decades to provide sufficient compelling reasons for too many alumni to join, why is this group of members so small? Young, not so young, somewhere in between? Professionally successful, or not overly successful? Significant donors, less than average? Are they typically past versus current elected representatives of the apparently dissolved alumni association? Whomever the small group may be, why are they so ornery?

I consider myself a highly enthusiastic Huskies' fanatic, a relatively supportive alumnus, and despite occasional spousal suggestions aside, generally have a life beyond UCONN. For example, I've attended many alumni events in multiple locations (CT and beyond); gone to home and away hoops, hockey, soccer, and gridiron games (regular season, tourney, and bowl games alike - hung on to season tickets despite football's current point in a desired, anticipated gradual upturn); donated some money (not excessive compared with some alumni yet also not the paltry little to absolute zip far too many alumni share); volunteered in the past to mentor new grads - didn't get much or any response from career center representatives nor alumni association professionals, etc.

Along with similarly enthusiastic, relatively non-failure alumni, some time back we exhurted significant effort and hours attempting to get a major city alumni chapter up and running. For whatever reasons in Storrs, we sadly found it challenging at best to get much of a pulse out of the alumni association - at least from the paid professionals.

Granted there are obvious motivating factors, but my interactions with Foundation representatives and recently from university leaders have generally been more favorable to quite positive. Perhaps some things were beginning to improve in very recent years with the alumni association, but it certainly was not and has not been apparent. Why I don't know, but perhaps whatever small, ornery group you refer to contributed to the alumni association's own internal challenges (???).

The UCAA had parameters for establishing local chapters in the past, which involved demographics. They required a certain number of alumni in a metro region before they would devote any time and resources to establishing a chapter. There are probably many large cities in the U.S. that do not have a large enough local population of UCONN alumni to justify trying to start a chapter. I know for a fact that Tulsa and New Orleans are two such metro areas.

Whether that was a good or bad idea I don't know, but I also don't think that dynamic is going to change simply by transferring those responsibilities over to the UCONN Foundation. There will still be such rules, whether right or wrong.

 

[UConnNick]

Hi--Full disclosure: I'm both an alumna and a Foundation employee. Also a Boneyard lurker for some time, but that's beside the point!

Under the new model, you don't have to "join" anything--you're automatically a "member" because you attended UConn. So you can already attend alumni events, volunteer, and get any other benefits we offer. Additionally, since our alumni relations staff no longer have to focus on driving membership, they are now better equipped to expand programming, event support, and communication with alumni groups (such as NYC). So not only is it a dues-free model, BUT alumni relations staff now have the full support and resources of the Foundation working alongside them.

All funds that are currently dedicated for alumni relations purposes will continue to be set aside ONLY for alumni relations, scholarships, or whatever the donor's intent is/was. This is consistent with how the Foundation works as a whole, and more or less how the funds were managed previously.

In other words: We're now all working together to strengthen UConn.

The vote is the last major piece of this transition. A "no" vote means the Association still exists as a corporate entity, but can't use the UConn wordmark, the logo, or the alumni database, nor can it work with any of the alumni relations staff. This is outlined in the MOU with the University that the board signed last year.

This is a model other institutions, including many big public universities, have found a lot of success with. If you talk with the alumni relations staff you'll find they're all really excited for the potential this brings.

Happy to answer any other questions as I can.

I don't know about other chapters, but I have been a chapter president, and I have never required anyone who attended chapter events or contributed their time and energy to promoting the university to be a dues-paying member of the UCAA, so that's a red herring. It's also my understanding that the UCAA discontinued trying to get attendees at chapter events to pay dues back about 15 to 20 years ago or more. In fact, we encourage our alumni attendees to bring friends or anyone else they'd like to bring to our events. This notion that the UCAA excludes all but the 6 percent who pay dues is simply untrue.

 

[husky8273]

The "Distribution Plan" now posted on the alumni website does not guarantee that the Alumni House will continue to be used for alumni purposes on campus. The plan essentially gives the university the right and sole option to decide to do anything with the building that they want, and to move any "alumni center" on campus to another building, perhaps the basement of the Student Union, or anywhere else they choose to put it.

The plan also indicates that the 6 million in liquid assets can be used for a number of purposes. The key language used is "...including, but not limited to, ...", with a listing of intended uses for the money. That pretty much gives the university administration carte blanche to use the money to pay salaries of housekeeping personnel, or anything else they want to spend it on.

This entire process has been handled very poorly by the university administration. You shouldn't deliberately alienate an alumni group that includes some of the largest individual donors to the university. Perhaps they're right about the efficiency and economies of scale that come with a consolidation of alumni relations and fundraising efforts, however the manner in which they have gone about making these changes has been dictatorial and totally non-transparent. The university administration notified the UCAA in mid-January that their funding from the university would be cut off on March 31, and they would also no longer be allowed the use of the school's logos or database of alumni names and addresses. No discussion or written plan for the transition was offered.

Also, if the UCAA is deemed a failure for not engaging a larger number of alumni, the UCONN Foundation has failed equally in not generating the level of endowment worthy of an institution which is the top land grant university in New England and which ranks in the top 20 of public universities nationwide. Why they are suddenly deemed the savior of all things UCONN is beyond me.

This matter should at the very least be held open for discussion. The university administration should be forced to put in writing some assurances that the money being turned over will be used for the purposes it was intended (scholarships, etc.), and under no circumstances should the Alumni House ever be converted to some other use, or worse, torn down to make room for some new construction.

The bottom line here is we're looking at nothing but a power and money grab by Susan Herbst and the university administration. That's all this is about. She'll be gone from UCONN in a few more years. The rest of us will have to live with these decisions forever, whether positive or negative.

For these reasons, I will vote NO on dissolution of the UCAA, and I urge all other members to do the same.

Amen!!

 

[husky8273]

The "Distribution Plan" now posted on the alumni website does not guarantee that the Alumni House will continue to be used for alumni purposes on campus. The plan essentially gives the university the right and sole option to decide to do anything with the building that they want, and to move any "alumni center" on campus to another building, perhaps the basement of the Student Union, or anywhere else they choose to put it.

The plan also indicates that the 6 million in liquid assets can be used for a number of purposes. The key language used is "...including, but not limited to, ...", with a listing of intended uses for the money. That pretty much gives the university administration carte blanche to use the money to pay salaries of housekeeping personnel, or anything else they want to spend it on.

This entire process has been handled very poorly by the university administration. You shouldn't deliberately alienate an alumni group that includes some of the largest individual donors to the university. Perhaps they're right about the efficiency and economies of scale that come with a consolidation of alumni relations and fundraising efforts, however the manner in which they have gone about making these changes has been dictatorial and totally non-transparent. The university administration notified the UCAA in mid-January that their funding from the university would be cut off on March 31, and they would also no longer be allowed the use of the school's logos or database of alumni names and addresses. No discussion or written plan for the transition was offered.

Also, if the UCAA is deemed a failure for not engaging a larger number of alumni, the UCONN Foundation has failed equally in not generating the level of endowment worthy of an institution which is the top land grant university in New England and which ranks in the top 20 of public universities nationwide. Why they are suddenly deemed the savior of all things UCONN is beyond me.

This matter should at the very least be held open for discussion. The university administration should be forced to put in writing some assurances that the money being turned over will be used for the purposes it was intended (scholarships, etc.), and under no circumstances should the Alumni House ever be converted to some other use, or worse, torn down to make room for some new construction.

The bottom line here is we're looking at nothing but a power and money grab by Susan Herbst and the university administration. That's all this is about. She'll be gone from UCONN in a few more years. The rest of us will have to live with these decisions forever, whether positive or negative.

For these reasons, I will vote NO on dissolution of the UCAA, and I urge all other members to do the same.

"......The university administration notified the UCAA in mid-January that their funding from the university would be cut off on March 31, and they would also no longer be allowed the use of the school's logos or database of alumni names and addresses."

few know that the that the database of alumni names and addresses was in fact an asset of the Alumni Association that it granted to the Foundation for its use to raise funds for the endowment; including at one time to reimburse the UCAA for the $3MM it spent from its own funds to construct the Alumni House at the Administration's request. The Foundation and Administration reneged on that commitment without a second glance over 20 years ago. No one criticized the UCAA when it stepped up to do so, nor when it committed its own funds to the construction of Gampel or the Sports Museum. Imagine if the UCAA had maintained the right to have the database revert to the AA if they had deemed the Foundation to have been ineffective or inefficient.

 

[husky8273]

So he isn't the author. Why exactly does that matter? The letter that came from the 14 prior Board members wasn't written by all 14 of them. So I guess that letter is useless also. At least 13 of them signed their name to something they didn't write. So they aren't credible either?

it was a question of authorship, not credibility, spurred by the OP comment that Donny was a good writer

 

[Mr. Wonderful]

"Dysfunctional from top to bottom." - ACC's assessment of UConn's Administration, Athletic Department, and Alumni relations pre alignment.

 

[junglehusky]

The more I hear from the "No" camp, the better I feel about my "Yes" vote.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Also, if the UCAA is deemed a failure for not engaging a larger number of alumni, the UCONN Foundation has failed equally in not generating the level of endowment worthy of an institution which is the top land grant university in New England and which ranks in the top 20 of public universities nationwide. Why they are suddenly deemed the savior of all things UCONN is beyond me.

While I am a longtime member (life member) of the alumni association I've never held any position within the UCAA. I have donated (to many different areas) of the school but I also have never held any position within the foundation.

I do know that for a little more than three decades I've complained publicly and privately on how the school continually operated under very limited thought processes and viewed the successes we had achieved as being in spite of our school's leadership, not because of it.

Yes, prior to very recently (I personally believe we finally have a quality leader in charge of the school) it could easily have been stated that neither the alumni association nor the foundation were run properly and that a tremendous amount of opportunity (success in many sports) to capitalize on had been wasted. Not long ago we hired Josh Newton to run the foundation (I've met him and I am as impressed with him as I am with Susan Herbst, look up his track record and you will realize that this was a tremendous hire). I see this as the school seeing two poorly run departments, with some overlapping functions and deciding that the best solution would be to combine all functions into one department and build that department to run as well as possible. Not only do I not see this as a bad thing, I've seen approach work exceptionally well in many businesses.

One thing that is glaring from the very recent posts that are in favor of maintaining the alumni association is a thought process that obviously exists here and often exists in businesses that are run poorly. When people build silos of power, when departments have an us and them attitude when dealing with other departments within the same company, inefficiencies pop up everywhere. Whether anyone wants to accept this or not, the alumni association and the foundation are working towards the same cause. What the school is building towards is what will ultimately do the most to improve the school, increase the school's endowment and offer the most it can to the alumni. I personally believe that under Newton's leadership this can be better accomplished than if one portion of this (alumni relations) were not under his leadership.

I encourage everyone who sees combining the alumni association into the foundation to contact Mr Newton (his phone number and email address are available on the foundation's page on the UConn website). He is very approachable and I am confident will find time to address any concerns. I believe that any of you who go into this with an open mind will walk away believing that his leadership will be the best for all alumni.

 

[CL82]

it was a question of authorship, not credibility, spurred by the OP comment that Donny was a good writer

Wait I thought the case was closed? You can go opening and closing cases willy nilly, my friend. Chaos would ensue.

 

[Dooley]

I've asked how a 'NO' vote would help UConn to advance itself in conference realignment. No answer.

Instead, the two biggest reasons that have been offered (multiple times) for a 'NO' vote are:

1. the alumni house - it may or may not be repurposed and...gasp!...moved to a different location (personally, I don't see how this affects UConn's CR profile);
2. $6M distribution - this money has been donated, correct? If the money was rolled over into the endowment, for example, how is this a bad thing? Again, I don't see how this would affect UConn's CR profile.

I still view combining the alumni base as a larger, unified front is the best CR move to strengthen UConn's future. This approach would maximize fundraising efforts and allow UConn to effectively manage and engage all alumni. We all know that UConn's future is tied to finding a better conference and a 'YES' vote, to me, would help that process.

 

[husky8273]

Wait I thought the case was closed? You can go opening and closing cases willy nilly, my friend. Chaos would ensue.

You intended this for J187, no?

 

[CL82]

You intended this for J187, no?

naivete case closed.

irrational and illogical - case closed

Nope.

 

[husky8273]

Nope.

as illogical as ever

 

[UConnNick]

".The university administration notified the UCAA in mid-January that their funding from the university would be cut off on March 31, and they would also no longer be allowed the use of the school's logos or database of alumni names and addresses."

few know that the that the database of alumni names and addresses was in fact an asset of the Alumni Association that it granted to the Foundation for its use to raise funds for the endowment; including at one time to reimburse the UCAA for the $3MM it spent from its own funds to construct the Alumni House at the Administration's request. The Foundation and Administration reneged on that commitment without a second glance over 20 years ago. No one criticized the UCAA when it stepped up to do so, nor when it committed its own funds to the construction of Gampel or the Sports Museum. Imagine if the UCAA had maintained the right to have the database revert to the AA if they had deemed the Foundation to have been ineffective or inefficient.

I was completely unaware of that, Husky8273.

Look, I've met Josh Newton on a few occasions and I think he's a great guy, and he may very well have the expertise and PR knowhow to pull this off. What troubles me isn't him, it's the decision of the university administration to shove this whole plan down everybodys' throats, without any input or consultation with some of the biggest movers and shakers in the donor category. Why risk alienating anybody in this whole process? You profess to embrace an all-inclusive business model, yet you clearly don't intend to include certain key components? I don't blame him because I suspect he doesn't have much of a choice in the decisions that are being made for him.

One of the university deans indicated to me that everybody is "terrified" of Susan Herbst. He wasn't joking. Unless you're a tenured faculty member right now at UCONN, you're walking on eggshells with this administration. One wrong move and you're probably gone. We have gone through multiple employees in the same positions just during Herbst's tenure, which hasn't been all that long. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that she's difficult to deal with and work for, at the very least.

If Susan Herbst is that divisive within the UCONN family, how does that look to outside parties (i.e. prospective conference members) when we try to put our best foot forward regarding conference realignment?

 

[J187Money]

I was completely unaware of that, Husky8273.

Look, I've met Josh Newton on a few occasions and I think he's a great guy, and he may very well have the expertise and PR knowhow to pull this off. What troubles me isn't him, it's the decision of the university administration to shove this whole plan down everybodys' throats, without any input or consultation with some of the biggest movers and shakers in the donor category. Why risk alienating anybody in this whole process? You profess to embrace an all-inclusive business model, yet you clearly don't intend to include certain key components? I don't blame him because I suspect he doesn't have much of a choice in the decisions that are being made for him.

One of the university deans indicated to me that everybody is "terrified" of Susan Herbst. He wasn't joking. Unless you're a tenured faculty member right now at UCONN, you're walking on eggshells with this administration. One wrong move and you're probably gone. We have gone through multiple employees in the same positions just during Herbst's tenure, which hasn't been all that long. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that she's difficult to deal with and work for, at the very least.

If Susan Herbst is that divisive within the UCONN family, how does that look to outside parties (i.e. prospective conference members) when we try to put our best foot forward regarding conference realignment?

You bring up a couple of good points. I'd have rather had it done in the open in an orderly process. But every dealing I've had with the UCAA has proven to me that they are so difficult to deal with and I've heard they have been at odds with Herbst since she has come in. Not everyone is against her, but she wants performance and accountability. Those that can stand up to that do just fine. Herbst isn't divisive for the purpose of being divisive. She demands excellence. Not everyone is on board with that.

I've dealt with these situations a lot in my professional life. I'm sure some people think I'm the devil. But my job is to do X. So X is going to happen. You are either on the team, or off the team. Some people can't make the cut. I think this is very simply what the UCAA faced. And sometimes you just have to rip the band-aid off and move forward. The folks that are really against this would ALWAYS be against it even if it took 3 more years, guaranteed a ring-fence of the $6M and encased the Alumni house in bubble wrap. For this to fail, it means THEY failed.

In short, voting NO is like voting to keep PP, thinking he would eventually figure it out.

 

[J187Money]

".The university administration notified the UCAA in mid-January that their funding from the university would be cut off on March 31, and they would also no longer be allowed the use of the school's logos or database of alumni names and addresses."

few know that the that the database of alumni names and addresses was in fact an asset of the Alumni Association that it granted to the Foundation for its use to raise funds for the endowment; including at one time to reimburse the UCAA for the $3MM it spent from its own funds to construct the Alumni House at the Administration's request. The Foundation and Administration reneged on that commitment without a second glance over 20 years ago. No one criticized the UCAA when it stepped up to do so, nor when it committed its own funds to the construction of Gampel or the Sports Museum. Imagine if the UCAA had maintained the right to have the database revert to the AA if they had deemed the Foundation to have been ineffective or inefficient.

You know what - you are right. You should sue the school, take back your money, take back your lists, privatize the house, and secede from the state. Do you even read what you are writing?

UCONN is in a place right now where we need to win. This isn't a time to settle scores, dredge up 20 year old beefs, or worry about who built what or what happens to what is ultimately a minor sum of money in the scheme of things. It comes down to one simple question:

Which structure is better leading UCONN forward in the future?

YES = the revamped foundation with a proven winner at its helm and the full backing of the University.
NO = the same old same old...no members, no passion, no engagement, no plan

Vote however you like, but you aren't defending the UCAA of 20-30 years ago that admittedly did some great things. You are defending a broken organization that has 0% chance of success.

 

[CL82]

as illogical as ever

I guess so.

 

[hardcorehusky]

I don't know about other chapters, but I have been a chapter president, and I have never required anyone who attended chapter events or contributed their time and energy to promoting the university to be a dues-paying member of the UCAA, so that's a red herring. It's also my understanding that the UCAA discontinued trying to get attendees at chapter events to pay dues back about 15 to 20 years ago or more. In fact, we encourage our alumni attendees to bring friends or anyone else they'd like to bring to our events. This notion that the UCAA excludes all but the 6 percent who pay dues is simply untrue.

Nick - in Hartford - we were always requesting people to join the alumni association. UCAA employees were at the first table upon walking into an event trying to get people to join. We even used to raffle off free memberships to the UCAA. We were told it was our responsibility to get more members and we used to price events to be cheaper for alumni members versus nonmembers. We would say that if you went to our 3 events a year, your membership was paid for in the difference in one ticket to each event.

Anyone could come to an event but the cost was determined by membership and access to coaches and players was determined by membership or not.

 

[J187Money]

So the "NO" crowd has come up with the following reasons to vote "NO"

• Herbst is mean
• The Foundation is going to steal our money (maybe)
• The Foundation is going to take our house away (maybe)

I would really like one of you guys to talk about all of the great things that the UCAA plans to do in the future if we reward your faith in it.

• Why is it going to be different this time?
• How does the UCAA plan to repair its relationship with the administration?
• How does the UCAA plan to repair its reputation?
• Given that the majority of its OWN BOARD is in favor of dissolution, why should anyone else feel differently?

We need something better than "The UCAA was great 20 years ago"...

 

[CTMike]

The more I hear from the "No" camp, the better I feel about my "Yes" vote.

I just want to keep liking this post.

 

[UConnNick]

Nick - in Hartford - we were always requesting people to join the alumni association. UCAA employees were at the first table upon walking into an event trying to get people to join. We even used to raffle off free memberships to the UCAA. We were told it was our responsibility to get more members and we used to price events to be cheaper for alumni members versus nonmembers. We would say that if you went to our 3 events a year, your membership was paid for in the difference in one ticket to each event.

Anyone could come to an event but the cost was determined by membership and access to coaches and players was determined by membership or not.

Are you talking about recently (within past five years) or ancient history?

All I know is I've been a chapter president for a little over a year and no one at the UCAA has ever told me to sign up new dues paying members, I've never asked anyone to join and pay dues, and I've never once asked anyone to donate money to either the UCAA or UCONN Foundation. We are strictly a social organization that sponsors group events for any UCONN alum or their guests that want to attend. No requirements.

I understand there was a time when they did emphasize getting new dues-paying members, but I've been involved with a chapter off and on for the past 20 years and no one ever encouraged me to pay dues to join. I was already a life member, but we never solicited new members at any of our events going that far back. Apparently things were done differently elsewhere.

We sponsored an event in 1999 and I don't recall if we charged a different price for dues paying vs. non-dues paying members, but I honestly can't remember charging more for non-members. I even had a few guests there that didn't have any connection to UCONN. If there was a difference, it was maybe five bucks per ticket.

 

[CL82]

All I know is I've been a chapter president for a little over a year and no one at the UCAA has ever told me to sign up new dues paying members, I've never asked anyone to join and pay dues, and I've never once asked anyone to donate money to either the UCAA or UCONN Foundation. We are strictly a social organization that sponsors group events for any UCONN alum or their guests that want to attend.

.

Really how much more needs to be said than that?

UConn needs more than that.

 

[husky8273]

So the "NO" crowd has come up with the following reasons to vote "NO"

• Herbst is mean
• The Foundation is going to steal our money (maybe)
• The Foundation is going to take our house away (maybe)

I would really like one of you guys to talk about all of the great things that the UCAA plans to do in the future if we reward your faith in it.

• Why is it going to be different this time?
• How does the UCAA plan to repair its relationship with the administration?
• How does the UCAA plan to repair its reputation?
• Given that the majority of its OWN BOARD is in favor of dissolution, why should anyone else feel differently?

We need something better than "The UCAA was great 20 years ago"...

There is no misconception that if the dissolution plan is not approved that the activities of the Alumni Association will not continue under the management of the Foundation. That ship has sailed. The entire staff and direction of activities has moved to the Foundation and they're not coming back.

So, it is the Yes folks and the Foundation that must answer your questions:
How will the AA be different? The fact that everyone will be a member without paying dues is not a difference since the AA board had already approved this model.
How does the AA under the Foundation repair its relationship with loyal, committed, generous alumni that have been disrespected in this process whether the dissolution is approved or not?
The majority of the Board voted to approve dissolution because its funding, staff and use of the university logos and alumni database were denied. They had no other choice. A NO vote simply will simply instruct the board to revise their plan to ensure their endowment is used for its original purposes, e.g. scholarships, since the current plan does not do so.