The board of the Iowa State University Foundation approved a policy last week that will make donor names and other once-private information public, starting in May. But on Tuesday, the Georgia House of Representatives headed in the other direction on the issue, passing a bill that allows university foundations to keep donor records private.
The opposite actions illustrate the widespread controversy surrounding the records of private foundations that raise and manage money on behalf of public universities.
“Clearly we are in an era of increased emphasis on accountability,” said John Lippincott, president of the Council for Advancement and Support of Education. “There is more public interest in ensuring the integrity of nonprofit organizations.”
The Iowa Supreme Court ruled in February that the Iowa State foundation must open its records to the public, but the court left room to interpret which records are subject to public scrutiny.
A trial in Iowa district court is scheduled for May 4, to follow up the Supreme Court decision. In the meantime, the foundation’s board updated its public-information policy, which will make public the donor names, the range of the gift given, and how the donation will be used, beginning May 1. The policy still allows the foundation to honor donor requests for anonymity.
Dan Saftig, president of the Iowa foundation’s board, said he does not believe that opening up records will discourage people from donating to Iowa State. The policy allows the foundation to keep some information private, such as fund-raising strategies, student information, and other donor financial records.
“There is a concern about going beyond what we are making available,” he said. “But things like biographical information, demographic information, estate plans, and other donor information are still confidential and protected by law.”
Mark Gannon, former manager of the ISU Agricultural Foundation, and Arlen Nichols, a Des Moines resident, filed the lawsuit to force the ISU Foundation to open its records. Mr. Gannon said in an interview that he is still not satisfied with the foundation’s new policy, and that the foundation is trying to define which records should be open before the court decides in May.
“They’re just trying to set a precedent prior to the court date, and it’s a way of trying to get around the law,” he said. “We want all of the records opened up, and we’re not going to agree to anything less.”
In Georgia, House Speaker Glenn Richardson, a Republican, cast the deciding vote in favor of a bill that shields the identity of university-foundation donors. Although the measure is protective of donor privacy, it denies anonymity to people who also do business with the university to which they donate. The bill is being sent to Gov. Sonny Perdue for his signature.
The Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia had proposed the legislation. Arlethia Perry-Johnson, a spokeswoman for the system, said that officials want to be more competitive with the private sector in soliciting donations.
“We want to emphasize that we will continue to comply with national fund-raising reporting standards,” she said. “Our goal is to enhance our competitiveness -- we want a level playing field.”
Opponents of the bill said that it would allow the university system to do the public’s business in secret. Thomas M. Clyde, a lawyer representing Georgia news media companies who testified against the bill before the Georgia Senate Higher Education Committee, said the measure was first presented as an effort to protect donor financial records, but “it became clear it is to protect anonymous and secret donations.”
“I don’t think the media will give up trying to get information about donors,” he said. “The media has always tried to monitor foundations and this gives more reason to monitor them more closely.”
Mr. Lippincott said that leaders of more public universities and their foundations should talk with legislators before problems arise.
“There is generally a lack of understanding of the purpose of foundations and why they exist,” he said. “Part of the reason for the attention that foundations are receiving is the fact that we’re seeing reductions in state funding as private resources increase. It calls attention to foundations and how that money is being used.”
Indeed, another battle is brewing in Arkansas, where the University of Arkansas System is fighting a proposal by members of the state’s Legislative Joint Auditing Committee. The bill the lawmakers have proposed would give the legislature the power to investigate private foundations that support government agencies. The bill is likely to be presented on Friday, according to local news reports.
Background articles from The Chronicle:
