Harvard also signed at least $1.5 million worth of contracts with the Iranian government since 1974. Harvard will help the Iranians with several urban development, health and educational projects. Critics of the Iranian government cite repressive internal policies as a reason for careful consideration of any involvement cooperation or agreement with the Iranian government. Peterson, referring to a $400,000 contract to help plan a graduate research center in Iran, the only Iranian contract with which he has been involved, says the question is "not whether I approve of the government but whether this university project is possible, whether the project itself would benefit or harm the Iranian people, not necessarily the Iranian government." Peterson suggests that the university and the presence of Americans whose free speech will be ensured by the terms of the contract--the Americans' salaries are in escrow, and they will get the money no matter what they say--will further rather than harm the cause of free speech in Iran. The whole venture will help "open up the minds in the country," Peterson says.
Rosovsky says all unrestricted grants to the University--from individuals, corporations and foreign sources--are examined before the Harvard Corporation accepts them. Although Rosovsky would not give specific examples of cases where the University has rejected a grant, he says situations have arisen in the past where gifts were refused. A gift designed to propagate certain ideological viewpoints or from a country that discriminates against certain people would not be accepted, he says. It is for those reasons, for instance, that the University has decided to decline to work with projects in Saudi Arabia, where Jews are not admitted.
Fundraisers and development officers must deal with the effect of changes within the University as well. Clifton feels that Harvard's termination of Reserve Officers Training Corps (ROTC) program had a discernible effect on many alumni, particularly those from classes which served in either World War I or II.
Alumni who are veterans or who watched their classmates die in the war "feel very stongly about civilian influence on the military. They feel that without ROTC, Harvard cannot provide this," Clifton says. He adds, however, that these alumni were a minority and had little effect on overall fundraising. In addition, he says sometimes they decide to give to the Fund anyway when they learn that ROTC is available to Harvard students through cross-registration at Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Changes in the format of Harvard Magazine, an alumni publication may also affect donations to the Fund, Clifton says. "Alumni need to feel they belong to a chronolgoical experience, not just four years," Peterson adds. The magazine will go free of charge to all alumni on alternate months. When the magazine does not publish, the Fund will send out a small pamphlet called Forum. Forum is not a fundraising appeal, he says, but a brief, more personal profile of a member of the faculty. Five or six times each year, the Fund will also send out a "flat, outright appeal," he says. Recent alumni surveys showed that 83 per cent of the alumni felt "quite favorable" about their experience here and only 5 or 6 per cent were "really anti-Harvard." But, Peterson says, the problem remains in getting many of these potential donors to give, even a small amount. Presently only about 32 per cent give to the Fund annually.
Gifts to the Fund range from $1 to $100,000, Clifton says. The largest gift given by a single living individual through the Development Office was between $10 and $15 million, Peterson, who did not have the exact figure, says. The donor wishes to remain anonymous, he adds. Several bequests in this range or even larger have been made in recent years, Peterson says, such as the Mallinckrodt gift which matures in 1984 at a value in the $20 million range.
Equal access admissions is unlikely to greatly effect fundraising, Peterson predicts. Clifton disagrees. Clifton is concerned with short term cash gifts more than long range investments or gifts for capital construction and his donors are primarily male Harvard graduates--Radcliffe has a separate alumnae fund. As more women enter the College, there will obviously be fewer men entering and thus fewer male alumni in the future to give to the fund. Clifton would like to see an additional House built in the College so that the school can accommodate more women without decreasing the number of men. But no alumni outrage against equal access has shown up in giving patterns. Although an occasional alumni writes an angry letter about how "Radcliffe is using up Harvard's" endowment, or that "Harvard is a men's school," Clifton says they are mostly "crazy stuff" and not representative of alumni sentiment. However, Susan F. Lyman '36, chairman of the Radcliffe Board of Trustees, said earlier this year that Radcliffe's $2 million drive for a scholarship fund fell $700,000 short of its goal, partially because of equal access.
Another way to minimize the drop in Harvard alumni giving could be to merge the Harvard and Radcliffe fundraising offices. Although Harvard and Radcliffe senior Classes gave a joint gift last year for the first time, creating the Harvard-Radcliffe Fund, and soliciting donation from over 40 per cent of the Class which will value $80,000 in four years. But Clifton does not foresee a merger of the Harvard and Radcliffe College Funds for "at least ten years, if then." This year's graduating Class will also give a joint gift and Clifton thinks the new Harvard-Radcliffe fund will continue to operate.
Peterson does not deal exclusively with Harvard graduates. Women's roles are changing: one cannot predict what the long range effect of this will be, he says. If alumnae revert to a traditional "nurturing" role, rather than going into business and other professions, they will have occupied spaces in the University which--from a fundraiser's point of view--would have been more financially lucrative for the University if they had gone to men. However, Peterson says he's "betting that women will be active in the business world. If we're wrong then we're reducing the number of people who can support Harvard to a critically low figure." He emphasized, however, that he did not anticipate that women would revert to their traditional roles, nor would he urge all Harvard alumni to go into work in corporations or other businesses that will provide high incomes, so they could give huge gifts to Harvard.
"We don't need everyone to be a future corporation leader," he says. As long as Harvard can get enough financial support to survive and grow, "we can enjoy the luxury" of seeing alumni in the non-corporate world, "who can go and write an esoteric book that will add a great deal to human knowledge but will never sell more than 20 copies."
Recruiting financial support from young alumni is another problem Clifton faces. In response to this difficulty, the Fund set up special councils, meeting in 14 major cities to meet with alumni from recent classes and find out how to reach them. Although Harvard fundraisers do not generally expect 20-year-olds who are in graduate or professional schools or paying off debts from college to give huge grants, they would like a better response from this group than they are presently getting. Part of the problem, Clifton believes, is that they "have an image of Harvard College Fund as a Fort Knox that has lots of money and does nothing with it." He hopes the Council program will show participants how gifts contribute to undergraduate life.
Fundraisers are optimistic about Harvard's financial future. Peterson says private educational insitutions are "a social experiment in many ways. I think it's an experiment that can continue to work." Last year, with increased giving and an improving national economy, the endowment reached a record value of approximately $1.4 billion. Maybe Peterson's optimistic forecasts will come true.