UC Social Grants Stalled

The Undergraduate Council renewed its push for a new grants program proposed last semester that would fund upperclassman social events­—and limited alcohol purchases—but its efforts have been stalled by the College administration.

The UC Student Initiatives Committee introduced a grants program proposal last month that included revisions and additional restrictions to April’s Social Grants Act to alleviate ensuing administrator concerns raised last semester.

The Student Initiated Programming Fund would allow upperclassmen ages 21 and above to apply for up to $200 of retroactive UC funding for student events—including parties—in common spaces in the Houses.

Under the proposal, party hosts must stay sober and only one third of the grant may be used for purchasing beer or wine—a figure that reflects the number of House residents of legal drinking age, according to committee chair Mallika Khandelwal ’11.

The UC will award grants to fund one student event in each of the four House neighborhoods every weekend that would be open to all students in the nearby Houses.

In spite of the restrictions added in response to the College’s earlier concerns, the proposal has been met with continued resistance. House Masters and other administrators have argued that the revisions are not enough to prevent underage drinking—the driving issue behind the demise of the UC’s party grant fund two years ago.

A TWO-YEAR HANGOVER?

The UC has historically struggled to find common ground with the administration on funding social events where alcohol is served.

In Oct. 2007, then-Interim Dean of the College David R. Pilbeam penned a sharply worded letter to the UC, ending the four-year-old party grant program, which had distributed $1750 per week to fund private student events. Pilbeam accused the UC of condoning parties that centered around alcohol and turning a blind eye to underage drinking.

“What prompted the [party grant] policy to change is that when we have public events, we have to be sure we’re doing our best to regulate events and make them safe,” Dean of Student Life Suzy M. Nelson said last week.

“We can’t be a safe haven for service of alcohol to minors,” said Nelson, who at the time was associate dean of residential life.

Last year, members of the UC began developing a new program to meet the “need” left by the abrupt termination of the old party grants, according to UC President Andrea R. Flores ’10. “People really feel the absence of the party fund,” she said.The Social Grants Act was approved in April and included many of the same restrictions carried over to the current proposal in order to appease many of the administration’s concerns, former UC Finance Committee Chair Sundeep S. Iyer ’10 said.

The Social Grants Act authorized a pilot program to be launched during reading period last semester, but Iyer said the program was sidelined because the UC had its hands full with other projects.

Despite the added measures in the Social Grants Act—which were initially approved by Nelson and then-Associate Dean of the College Judith H. Kidd—the administration later backtracked after House Masters voiced concerns that the program was too similar to the old UC party grants system.

WORKING ON IT

Cognizant of the delicate nature of funding social events where alcohol is likely to be served, UC members said that the current SIP Fund proposal is fundamentally different from the 2007 party grants fund.

“I think the entire intent has changed. It is [about] student-initiated events, not necessarily parties,” Khandelwal said, likening the proposed program to the grants offered by the Freshman Dean’s Office for freshman-initiated events.

George X. Huang ’12, a representative from Winthrop House who was heavily involved in developing the current proposal, said the SIP fund’s focus is to support medium-sized social events, which are rarely seen at Harvard.

“It’s centered around providing a new type of socialization on campus that alcohol may or may not be necessary for,” he said.

The proposal also incorporates new measures to address some of the concerns of House Masters raised last spring, such as mandating that the host of the party remain sober throughout the event.

Khandelwal said that House Masters were primarily worried about providing effective supervision to prevent underage drinking and damage to House property.

Last Friday, members of the UC met with Nelson to discuss the current proposal.

According to Khandelwal, Nelson continued to raise concerns about adequate supervision and insisted on oversight of the event by either resident tutors or Beverage Authorization Teams—graduate students trained to prevent underage drinking. Khandelwal said that both options are unfeasible due to financial constraints and staffing challenges.

Although the meeting resulted in a postponement of final decisions, Nelson said that she is keeping an open mind about the SIP Fund.

“[The UC has] taken comments from me and others, and they’ve really tried to shape their proposal accordingly,” Nelson said. “This is a good example of collaborative exchange.”

Ahmed N. Mabruk contributed to the reporting for this story.

—Staff writer Melody Y. Hu can be reached at melodyhu@fas.harvard.edu

—Staff writer Naveen N. Srivatsa can be reached at srivatsa@fas.harvard.edu