Radcliffe Still Uncertain One Year Later

UNIVERSITY

Next Monday will mark the one-year anniversary of the news that rocked Radcliffe College-a Boston Globe article predicting the college's impending demise.

One year later, the college remains, but as negotiations with Harvard drag on, uncertainty about Radcliffe's future is creating headaches for college officials.

Radcliffe's alumnae association is having an existential crisis, wondering what its role will be if Radcliffe ceases to be a college. And with those alumnae making up the bulk of the college's donors, its planned $ 100 million Capital Campaign could be in danger of falling short.

This weekend, the Radcliffe Board of Trustees will hold a regularly-scheduled meeting--another opportunity for the group to discuss options for Radcliffe's future.

While the board debates the future of the college in one meeting room of the Cronkhite Graduate Center, the Radcliffe College Alumnae Association (RCAA) will discuss its own future just down the hall.

Members of RCAA Board of Management say they initially felt "betrayed" by the Globe's report that the college's governing board had been talking to Harvard without their input. Now RCAA leaders say they're satisfied that the trustees are at least listening to their concerns.

But RCAA leaders say the trustees are still providing alumnae with few clues about what the future face of Radcliffe might be. This uncertainty is forcing the 27,000-member alumnae organization to come up with multiple scenarios for its own future role.

And meanwhile, Radcliffe College is relying on these same alumnae to fulfill its first Capital Campaign, an ambitious $100 million project set to finish in the year 2000.

Radcliffe officials say the campaign, which kicked off in 1993, is chugging away and should reach its final goal in 2000 as planned. But some alumnae say they've heard that the yearlong secret talks have persuaded some to delay donating until they know to what they're giving.

Long Haul

This weekend, Chairman of the Board of Trustees Nancy-Beth G. Sheer '71 will convene a full meeting of the trustees. Other such meetings in the past have included timefor at least some members of the board to meetwith members of the Harvard Corporation.

According to one high-level source, both sideshave been frustrated in recent weeks. The sourcesays Radcliffe negotiators were consideringtotally breaking off talks with Harvard asrecently as two weeks ago.

But, while the talks are now back on track,both sides recognize that the process will notreach a conclusion anytime soon, the source says.

Many alumnae leaders say they will not toleratea process that goes on interminably-at least notone in which they are told so little aboutpossible out-comes.

"I keep waiting for there to be some closure,"says Marcy W. Plunkett '71, RCAA Director for fourstates in the Midwest. "One doesn't get the sensethat there's been any progress."

Plunkett calls the current attitude amongalumnae one of "frustration."

Faced with such criticism for a year, Radcliffehas reached out to alumnae in attempts to helpthem feel involved in the process. Alumnae opinionhas been solicited both through a special e-mailaccount and through letters to the RadcliffeQuarterly.

And last fall, college President Linda S.Wilson embarked on a month-long, 10-city nationaltour to gather alumnae opinion about the process.

Plunkett says all of these efforts havesuccessfully gathered alumnae opinion, but noneallowed alumnae a glimpse at options the trusteesare considering for the future.

Plunkett says she understands Radcliffe'sunwillingness to describe details of thenegotiations. But she says the trustees have saidso little that they have not convinced alumnae whytalks are needed in the first place.

"There's just been silence--a very officialstance of silence," Plunkett says.

At the close of the fall trip, Wilson had saidthat she might embark on another tour this spring,but according to Radcliffe spokesperson Michael A.Armini, such a tour has not yet been planned.

But RCAA Second Vice President Diana E. Post'67 says Wilson shouldn't leave Cambridge if shecan't bring alumnae more details about theprocess.

"I think going on another tour would frustratepeople more than it would be helpful," Post says.

And Post says it's now time to either come toan agreement with Harvard or break off talksaltogether.

"There should be a tremendous pressure to getthis settled in the near future," she says.

Post calls the possibility of talks dragging onfor another a year a "disaster."

"It think that would be the slow death ofRadcliffe," she says. "I would at that point bevery suspicious that Harvard was doing it onpurpose. It's not life or death for Harvard. It'slife or death for Radcliffe."

RCAA Debates

And as the Board continues to negotiate withHarvard, the RCAA still awaits any announcementsabout the future of the college.

Constitutionally required to examine its ownfuture every five years, the RCAA is currentlywrapping up its own strategic planning process,which started in July of last year. The grouphopes to present its "futures report" to Radcliffeand the trustees in June.

But RCAA President Jane E. Tewksbury '74 saysits reevaluation process is hamstrung byuncertainty about Radcliffe's future.

"Until we know the outcome of theHarvard-Radcliffe discussions, then it's prettydifficult to make any firm recommendations for thefuture of the RCAA," Tewksbury says.

Two of the most significant issues facing RCAAare its funding and its membership.

While RCAA is considered autonomous, theassociation has no funding outside of thatprovided by the college.

"We are a line item on the Radcliffe Collegebudget," says RCAA First Vice President A'Lelia P.Bundles '74, who will become president of theassociation in June. "We're not a dues-payingorganization."

In the event of a merger, it is unclear ifHarvard would continue to fund the RCAA.

"We haven't had that conversation," Bundlessays.

Post says the organization will have to dealwith the issue eventually.

"If there is no Radcliffe College, then [RCAA]cannot be funded by something that does notexist," Post says. "We don't know what that meansfor us, but we can't ignore that."

Post acknowledges that RCAA would behard-pressed to mount its own fundraising efforts.

"It's never had to," she says. "It's not set upto do it... I think that nobody is proposing thatas a choice method."

A more basic structural question than funding,though, is who makes up the RCAA's membership inthe first place.

Currently, all female undergraduates at Harvardare automatically members of both RCAA and theHarvard Alumni Association (HAA) upon graduation.The RCAA also includes graduates of Radcliffeprograms-the publishing course, the Radcliffeseminars, the business administration program-aswell as research institutes like the Bunting.

But what happens if Radcliffe relinquishes itscollege status in a possible merger agreement withHarvard? The RCAA leadership is left with theknotty question of who would make up its futuremembership.

"I think nobody wants to see an RCAA thatdoesn't include future undergraduates," Post says."That would mean that we would kill ourselves overtime. We would cease to exist."

In fact, the RCAA board of management mighthave to consider just that possibility-a mergerwith HAA which would end RCAA's independentstatus.

However RCAA leaders say that they're notconvinced that the two organizations would be agood fit. RCAA leaders envision a future role fortheir organization advocating for opportunitiesfor women at Harvard.

"I think [HAA] has carved out a differentpurpose for itself [than RCAA]," Bundles says."The HAA is really there to support whatever theUniversity asks it to do. It's not there takingany positions on issues."

On the other hand, Post says an RCAA of thefuture might choose to broaden its membership baseto include female alumnae of Harvard's graduateschools as well as of Harvard College, and perhapseven women Faculty members.

Such a membership arrangement would needHarvard's stamp of approval, possibly as part of apotential merger agreement itself.

In the absence of more details from the boardof trustees meeting down the hall, Tewksbury saysher association can't plan too specifically.

"We've tried to do that, but there's so manypermutations of the 'if-then' that we've beenfocusing more on a statement of principles, thingsthat are valuable to the RCAA and the alumsgenerally," Tewksbury says.

RCAA leaders say that while they hope thenegotiations end soon, the past year has not beenspent in vain.

"It's really forced people to think about whatthey value about Radcliffe and about RCAA," saysRCAA Secretary Susan C. Eaton '79. "I'm not sayingit's been easy, but it has encouraged us all to re-examinethe value of Radcliff.”

Following the Money

What remains unclear is if alumnae confusionabout the future has affected donations toRadcliffe.

Fay House officials say they have no evidencethat giving has slowed in the past year. But asRadcliffe enters the last year of its $100 millioncampaign, any slowdown could threaten the 2000goal.

Last fiscal year's fundraising set a new recordfor giving to Radcliffe-$16 million, with thetotal now standing at over $72 million. Radcliffeneeds to match that figure in order to stay ontrack, but through the first three quarters ofthis fiscal year, only $4 million has come inaccording to Radcliffe.

A drop-off in giving could paralyze Radcliffe'sdaily operations-campaign income makes up 32percent of Radcliffe's income for 1999, accordingto the Radcliffe Web site.

But Armini says he is still certain thatRadcliffe can raise $27 million by the end of2000.

"We're very upbeat and confident," hesays. "Radcliffe is very much a fourth quarterteam."

As an analogy, Armini notes that much of lastyear's record-breaking sum flowed in during thelast quarter of the year.

In fact, Armini says development officers arecurrently working with major givers, and severalseven-figure gifts are currently "in thepipeline."

Yet, alumnae still worry that fulfilling thecampaign goal will become harder the longer talksgo on.

"People don't know what they're giving to,"Plunkett says. "I would only conjecture that itwould make it more difficult to raise that kind ofmoney."

And some alumnae say the possibility of amerger with wealthy Harvard might convincepossible donors that Radcliffe no longer needstheir money.

"I've heard people say that now that werejoining up with Harvard... well, they've got a lotof money," says Betty Hosmer Mawardi '43, whoserves as the national co-chair of planned givingfor the campaign

According to one high-level source, both sideshave been frustrated in recent weeks. The sourcesays Radcliffe negotiators were consideringtotally breaking off talks with Harvard asrecently as two weeks ago.

But, while the talks are now back on track,both sides recognize that the process will notreach a conclusion anytime soon, the source says.

Many alumnae leaders say they will not toleratea process that goes on interminably-at least notone in which they are told so little aboutpossible out-comes.

"I keep waiting for there to be some closure,"says Marcy W. Plunkett '71, RCAA Director for fourstates in the Midwest. "One doesn't get the sensethat there's been any progress."

Plunkett calls the current attitude amongalumnae one of "frustration."

Faced with such criticism for a year, Radcliffehas reached out to alumnae in attempts to helpthem feel involved in the process. Alumnae opinionhas been solicited both through a special e-mailaccount and through letters to the RadcliffeQuarterly.

And last fall, college President Linda S.Wilson embarked on a month-long, 10-city nationaltour to gather alumnae opinion about the process.

Plunkett says all of these efforts havesuccessfully gathered alumnae opinion, but noneallowed alumnae a glimpse at options the trusteesare considering for the future.

Plunkett says she understands Radcliffe'sunwillingness to describe details of thenegotiations. But she says the trustees have saidso little that they have not convinced alumnae whytalks are needed in the first place.

"There's just been silence--a very officialstance of silence," Plunkett says.

At the close of the fall trip, Wilson had saidthat she might embark on another tour this spring,but according to Radcliffe spokesperson Michael A.Armini, such a tour has not yet been planned.

But RCAA Second Vice President Diana E. Post'67 says Wilson shouldn't leave Cambridge if shecan't bring alumnae more details about theprocess.

"I think going on another tour would frustratepeople more than it would be helpful," Post says.

And Post says it's now time to either come toan agreement with Harvard or break off talksaltogether.

"There should be a tremendous pressure to getthis settled in the near future," she says.

Post calls the possibility of talks dragging onfor another a year a "disaster."

"It think that would be the slow death ofRadcliffe," she says. "I would at that point bevery suspicious that Harvard was doing it onpurpose. It's not life or death for Harvard. It'slife or death for Radcliffe."

RCAA Debates

And as the Board continues to negotiate withHarvard, the RCAA still awaits any announcementsabout the future of the college.

Constitutionally required to examine its ownfuture every five years, the RCAA is currentlywrapping up its own strategic planning process,which started in July of last year. The grouphopes to present its "futures report" to Radcliffeand the trustees in June.

But RCAA President Jane E. Tewksbury '74 saysits reevaluation process is hamstrung byuncertainty about Radcliffe's future.

"Until we know the outcome of theHarvard-Radcliffe discussions, then it's prettydifficult to make any firm recommendations for thefuture of the RCAA," Tewksbury says.

Two of the most significant issues facing RCAAare its funding and its membership.

While RCAA is considered autonomous, theassociation has no funding outside of thatprovided by the college.

"We are a line item on the Radcliffe Collegebudget," says RCAA First Vice President A'Lelia P.Bundles '74, who will become president of theassociation in June. "We're not a dues-payingorganization."

In the event of a merger, it is unclear ifHarvard would continue to fund the RCAA.

"We haven't had that conversation," Bundlessays.

Post says the organization will have to dealwith the issue eventually.

"If there is no Radcliffe College, then [RCAA]cannot be funded by something that does notexist," Post says. "We don't know what that meansfor us, but we can't ignore that."

Post acknowledges that RCAA would behard-pressed to mount its own fundraising efforts.

"It's never had to," she says. "It's not set upto do it... I think that nobody is proposing thatas a choice method."

A more basic structural question than funding,though, is who makes up the RCAA's membership inthe first place.

Currently, all female undergraduates at Harvardare automatically members of both RCAA and theHarvard Alumni Association (HAA) upon graduation.The RCAA also includes graduates of Radcliffeprograms-the publishing course, the Radcliffeseminars, the business administration program-aswell as research institutes like the Bunting.

But what happens if Radcliffe relinquishes itscollege status in a possible merger agreement withHarvard? The RCAA leadership is left with theknotty question of who would make up its futuremembership.

"I think nobody wants to see an RCAA thatdoesn't include future undergraduates," Post says."That would mean that we would kill ourselves overtime. We would cease to exist."

In fact, the RCAA board of management mighthave to consider just that possibility-a mergerwith HAA which would end RCAA's independentstatus.

However RCAA leaders say that they're notconvinced that the two organizations would be agood fit. RCAA leaders envision a future role fortheir organization advocating for opportunitiesfor women at Harvard.

"I think [HAA] has carved out a differentpurpose for itself [than RCAA]," Bundles says."The HAA is really there to support whatever theUniversity asks it to do. It's not there takingany positions on issues."

On the other hand, Post says an RCAA of thefuture might choose to broaden its membership baseto include female alumnae of Harvard's graduateschools as well as of Harvard College, and perhapseven women Faculty members.

Such a membership arrangement would needHarvard's stamp of approval, possibly as part of apotential merger agreement itself.

In the absence of more details from the boardof trustees meeting down the hall, Tewksbury saysher association can't plan too specifically.

"We've tried to do that, but there's so manypermutations of the 'if-then' that we've beenfocusing more on a statement of principles, thingsthat are valuable to the RCAA and the alumsgenerally," Tewksbury says.

RCAA leaders say that while they hope thenegotiations end soon, the past year has not beenspent in vain.

"It's really forced people to think about whatthey value about Radcliffe and about RCAA," saysRCAA Secretary Susan C. Eaton '79. "I'm not sayingit's been easy, but it has encouraged us all to re-examinethe value of Radcliff.”

Following the Money

What remains unclear is if alumnae confusionabout the future has affected donations toRadcliffe.

Fay House officials say they have no evidencethat giving has slowed in the past year. But asRadcliffe enters the last year of its $100 millioncampaign, any slowdown could threaten the 2000goal.

Last fiscal year's fundraising set a new recordfor giving to Radcliffe-$16 million, with thetotal now standing at over $72 million. Radcliffeneeds to match that figure in order to stay ontrack, but through the first three quarters ofthis fiscal year, only $4 million has come inaccording to Radcliffe.

A drop-off in giving could paralyze Radcliffe'sdaily operations-campaign income makes up 32percent of Radcliffe's income for 1999, accordingto the Radcliffe Web site.

But Armini says he is still certain thatRadcliffe can raise $27 million by the end of2000.

"We're very upbeat and confident," hesays. "Radcliffe is very much a fourth quarterteam."

As an analogy, Armini notes that much of lastyear's record-breaking sum flowed in during thelast quarter of the year.

In fact, Armini says development officers arecurrently working with major givers, and severalseven-figure gifts are currently "in thepipeline."

Yet, alumnae still worry that fulfilling thecampaign goal will become harder the longer talksgo on.

"People don't know what they're giving to,"Plunkett says. "I would only conjecture that itwould make it more difficult to raise that kind ofmoney."

And some alumnae say the possibility of amerger with wealthy Harvard might convincepossible donors that Radcliffe no longer needstheir money.

"I've heard people say that now that werejoining up with Harvard... well, they've got a lotof money," says Betty Hosmer Mawardi '43, whoserves as the national co-chair of planned givingfor the campaign

RCAA Debates

And as the Board continues to negotiate withHarvard, the RCAA still awaits any announcementsabout the future of the college.

Constitutionally required to examine its ownfuture every five years, the RCAA is currentlywrapping up its own strategic planning process,which started in July of last year. The grouphopes to present its "futures report" to Radcliffeand the trustees in June.

But RCAA President Jane E. Tewksbury '74 saysits reevaluation process is hamstrung byuncertainty about Radcliffe's future.

"Until we know the outcome of theHarvard-Radcliffe discussions, then it's prettydifficult to make any firm recommendations for thefuture of the RCAA," Tewksbury says.

Two of the most significant issues facing RCAAare its funding and its membership.

While RCAA is considered autonomous, theassociation has no funding outside of thatprovided by the college.

"We are a line item on the Radcliffe Collegebudget," says RCAA First Vice President A'Lelia P.Bundles '74, who will become president of theassociation in June. "We're not a dues-payingorganization."

In the event of a merger, it is unclear ifHarvard would continue to fund the RCAA.

"We haven't had that conversation," Bundlessays.

Post says the organization will have to dealwith the issue eventually.

"If there is no Radcliffe College, then [RCAA]cannot be funded by something that does notexist," Post says. "We don't know what that meansfor us, but we can't ignore that."

Post acknowledges that RCAA would behard-pressed to mount its own fundraising efforts.

"It's never had to," she says. "It's not set upto do it... I think that nobody is proposing thatas a choice method."

A more basic structural question than funding,though, is who makes up the RCAA's membership inthe first place.

Currently, all female undergraduates at Harvardare automatically members of both RCAA and theHarvard Alumni Association (HAA) upon graduation.The RCAA also includes graduates of Radcliffeprograms-the publishing course, the Radcliffeseminars, the business administration program-aswell as research institutes like the Bunting.

But what happens if Radcliffe relinquishes itscollege status in a possible merger agreement withHarvard? The RCAA leadership is left with theknotty question of who would make up its futuremembership.

"I think nobody wants to see an RCAA thatdoesn't include future undergraduates," Post says."That would mean that we would kill ourselves overtime. We would cease to exist."

In fact, the RCAA board of management mighthave to consider just that possibility-a mergerwith HAA which would end RCAA's independentstatus.

However RCAA leaders say that they're notconvinced that the two organizations would be agood fit. RCAA leaders envision a future role fortheir organization advocating for opportunitiesfor women at Harvard.

"I think [HAA] has carved out a differentpurpose for itself [than RCAA]," Bundles says."The HAA is really there to support whatever theUniversity asks it to do. It's not there takingany positions on issues."

On the other hand, Post says an RCAA of thefuture might choose to broaden its membership baseto include female alumnae of Harvard's graduateschools as well as of Harvard College, and perhapseven women Faculty members.

Such a membership arrangement would needHarvard's stamp of approval, possibly as part of apotential merger agreement itself.

In the absence of more details from the boardof trustees meeting down the hall, Tewksbury saysher association can't plan too specifically.

"We've tried to do that, but there's so manypermutations of the 'if-then' that we've beenfocusing more on a statement of principles, thingsthat are valuable to the RCAA and the alumsgenerally," Tewksbury says.

RCAA leaders say that while they hope thenegotiations end soon, the past year has not beenspent in vain.

"It's really forced people to think about whatthey value about Radcliffe and about RCAA," saysRCAA Secretary Susan C. Eaton '79. "I'm not sayingit's been easy, but it has encouraged us all to re-examinethe value of Radcliff.”

Following the Money

What remains unclear is if alumnae confusionabout the future has affected donations toRadcliffe.

Fay House officials say they have no evidencethat giving has slowed in the past year. But asRadcliffe enters the last year of its $100 millioncampaign, any slowdown could threaten the 2000goal.

Last fiscal year's fundraising set a new recordfor giving to Radcliffe-$16 million, with thetotal now standing at over $72 million. Radcliffeneeds to match that figure in order to stay ontrack, but through the first three quarters ofthis fiscal year, only $4 million has come inaccording to Radcliffe.

A drop-off in giving could paralyze Radcliffe'sdaily operations-campaign income makes up 32percent of Radcliffe's income for 1999, accordingto the Radcliffe Web site.

But Armini says he is still certain thatRadcliffe can raise $27 million by the end of2000.

"We're very upbeat and confident," hesays. "Radcliffe is very much a fourth quarterteam."

As an analogy, Armini notes that much of lastyear's record-breaking sum flowed in during thelast quarter of the year.

In fact, Armini says development officers arecurrently working with major givers, and severalseven-figure gifts are currently "in thepipeline."

Yet, alumnae still worry that fulfilling thecampaign goal will become harder the longer talksgo on.

"People don't know what they're giving to,"Plunkett says. "I would only conjecture that itwould make it more difficult to raise that kind ofmoney."

And some alumnae say the possibility of amerger with wealthy Harvard might convincepossible donors that Radcliffe no longer needstheir money.

"I've heard people say that now that werejoining up with Harvard... well, they've got a lotof money," says Betty Hosmer Mawardi '43, whoserves as the national co-chair of planned givingfor the campaign