FOCUS: Which Way? Part 2

Some faculty members have said they are unhappy about being called by the United Way at home for a half-hour telephone poll and are even more disturbed that the United Way violated University policy in doing so by using the Faculty/Staff Directory. University Business Services, who control the production of the directory, said the United Way violated University policy by using the phone book, since it is limited to University use only. Assistant to the President Nicholas Constan said that the survey was, "not for the purposes of the University, but for the purposes of the United Way." When told of the violation, United Way officials changed their story several times, both about how they obtained the directory and how they conducted the survey. Divis said that the United Way regularly conducts surveys, but also said the University is not regularly polled as much as it had been during the controversial survey. Divis also added that he believed that the United Way was following University proceedures and therefore did not violate the policy. Combrinck-Graham said that many United Way members are trying to influence University policy, while the combined campaign is a change from within. "The people who are trying to make this change are faculty and staff," Combrinck-Graham said. "The people who are opposing this change are outsiders, not members of this community, and they have a professional interest in the outcome." Assistant to the President Linda Hyatt said that the president's office asked the United Way to stop the survey and it complied. Faculty Senate Chairperson Almarin Phillips said in addition to the, "resentment among the faculty members," he is concerned that the United Way may be "spending an exorbitant amount of money at Penn to influence the vote." Divis said the United Way spends less than one percent of its budget on telemarketing research. Rudovsky said that "[The United Way] is out to defeat a fairer campaign and one that has produced more money." The campaign this year raised more money for all organizations, including the United Way. A study by the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy indicates that the United Way really has little to lose. "Multiple Charity Campaigns, have had no overall ill effects on United Way fundraising efforts," the report said. "In fact in a survey of six major corporations with Multiple Charity Campaigns, total giving increased without undermining the United Way 'system of giving.' " Rudovsky and other supporters of the combined campaign argue that this is direct evidence indicating that reform towards a combined campaign has encouraged people to donate more. "Before the campaign was stagnant," Rudovsky said. "Two years ago it went up 15 percent and this year even more." However, Divis disagreed saying that it is the energy of the fundraisers that has led to the recent increases. He indicated that other organizations that were not implementing a combined campaign witnessed similar increases. Divis showed statistics of workplaces that were not discussing combined campaigns that have shown dramatic increases. In one workplace, where combined campaigns were not an issue, donations rose 159 percent last year and participation was up 90 percent. Rudovsky said, however, that, "The experience of a combined campaign across the country has shown an average increase of over 90 percent of the amount given." Through the referendum, faculty and staff will evaluate which system they feel will best deliver the donation. Combrinck-Graham has asked that faculty keep in mind that this is not a vote for your favorite charity, rather a vote for the better system. Faculty and staff should return their ballot via Intramural Mail after they have cast their vote. Hyatt urged the faculty and staff to remember that "giving is good, though the method determining the way of giving can be difficult."

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.