Phillips Brooks and HAND

To the Editors of The Crimson:

Your recent article on the Phillips Brooks House Association and the House and Neighborhood Development programs portrayed an inaccurate and incomplete picture of PBHA and its interaction with HAND.

First, you stated that PBHA and HAND have broached a new topic in their talks--that of a possible "merger." In fact, nothing new is being discussed. A dialogue between the two bodies began with the inception of the HAND programs in 1982. This dialogue has consisted of both formal and informal meetings and discussions with the administration and the HAND coordinators. PBH is not "asking" the HAND programs to merge with them. Rather, as has always been the case, PBHA welcomes others to join our ranks and benefit from our resources and experience. In the past, programs such as Harvard Hunger Action, the homeless shelter at the University Lutheran Church, Inner-City Outreach, and World Teach, have joined the Brooks House.

The article also stated that all the Hand programs, if they joined PBHA, would join as one committee amongst the 34 total. Having such a large unwieldy committee would not make much sense. If the HAND programs were to join, each House program could be a separate committee.

Why does PBHA have an open door policy? PBH's very purpose is to provide a context which facilitates the effective operation of a program. Any program that becomes a part of Brooks House retains all its current advantages while gaining access to an entire support system. With a 100-year history, PBHA is a wealth of knowledge and experience; programs that join need not start from scratch, learning from their own mistakes. Rather, they can benefit from the accumulation of experiences and the other 34 programs that are currently operating. Furthermore, PBHA provides resources, like vans, supplies, etc., training for the directors of programs, and administrative and programming advice--all to facilitate and ensure the successful running of a program.

The current structure of public service on campus is problematic for a number of reasons. Supporting two separate parallel structures is inherently a drain on resources. Extra layers of bureaucracy are needed to coordinate between the two organizations in an attempt to minimize duplication of services which still occur. With efforts spread between creating the HAND structure and strengthening PBHA's infrastructure, there is insufficient progress in both.

In sum, PBHA's stance has never wavered--other programs, whether HAND or others, are welcomed to come aboard and reap the fruits of the Association. Anthony Romano   President, PBHA   Maria A. Salas   Vice President, PBHA