KOI ANUNTA/YH

Financially thirsty groups seek an oasis.

Three years ago, in its first year of existence, the Yale Mock Trial Association qualified two four-person teams to compete in the national mock trial competition in Iowa. Due to lack of funds, however, the team could only afford to send one. Since then, the team has been able to send two teams to the competition, but only because members pay for their own airline tickets.

This situation exists even though each year, the group receives the maximum amount of money the Undergraduate Organization Funding Committee (UOFC) is allowed to give any single organization. The problem is that the UOFC money totals $1,000, while the group incurs $9,000 in annual expenses, according to Mock Trial President Alexandra Rethore, BR '99. The difference forces the organization to scramble for money. They're not the only ones scrambling--many groups face the exact same challenge.

Too many beaks, not enough birdseed

Dean of Student Affairs Betty Trachtenberg attributed the squeeze for funds to the substantial number of groups competing for slices of the same pie. "We have a very rich landscape of programs--cultural, political, social. There is not a dearth of things to do, but lots of things to do," she said. "I get involved with lots of student groups with ambitious programs. They might have to trim their budgets from $60,000 to $30,000, but they still go on."

According to Assistant Dean Philip Greene, director of undergraduate organizations, there are currently 156 registered undergraduate organizations at Yale. Since organizations can register throughout the year, he expects that number to climb to around 250 by May. For many of these groups, especially smaller or newer ones, the UOFC represents the best, if not only, source of funding.

This year, the total budget allocated to the UOFC by the Student Budget Advisory Committee (SBAC), which allocates all of the Yale College General Account money earmarked for student life, was $45,086. This amount is the second lowest total among comparable funds in the Ivy League. "The numbers are misleading," Greene cautioned. "Yale is like a medieval fiefdom. Everything is decentralized." The total amount of money Yale spends on undergraduate organizations, including funding for the residential colleges and cultural centers, "is comparable to Harvard or Stanford," Greene claimed.

Nonetheless, the UOFC is the only source of funding in the Yale budget open to all undergraduate groups. Especially for upstarts, this support is crucial.

Comprised of a chair, who is elected as a Yale College Council (YCC) officer every spring, and eight other student members appointed by the chair in consultation with Greene, the UOFC is responsible for distributing the money the University has earmarked for undergraduate organizations.

Technically, the committee only makes recommendations to the Dean's Office as to how to spend this money, but according to Greene, only one UOFC allocation has ever been denied--the budget for last year's Spring Fling. The problem was in the specif- ics of the proposal, Greene said, and it was approved upon its resubmission.

However, many groups still believe they deserve more. If the committee's total were divided equally among all organizations, each would get only about $200. While many groups don't apply for or receive funding from the UOFC, the funds for the ones that do rely on the UOFC are clearly scarce.

In general, the groups that receive UOFC funding are neither Yale's largest nor its smallest. "Some groups are laughed at because they already have so much money. The smallest ones also generally don't get funds," Greene said. "For example, once the chess club has its time clocks, how much more do they need?"

Drew Pomerantz, PC '99, former president of Yale Model Congress, says his organization is too large to receive UOFC funds. "We asked Dean Greene about our chances, and we were told that they weren't very good," he said. "For the chances that we would actually get money, even the effort of compiling a budget was not worth it."

Last semester, the UOFC awarded a total of $19,467 to 60 organizations. Although this is less than half its yearly budget, "Generally, the UOFC spends more in the spring than the fall, because most if not all of the organizations that applied for funding in the fall reapply in the spring, plus the new groups," Greene said. If this is true, the UOFC will exceed its budget this year. But this is not a great concern.

Below the bottom line

Each of the past three years, the UOFC has gone over its allotment. Each year's overrun was between $3,000 and $7,000, according to Greene. On each occasion, the difference was paid for out of Dean Richard Brodhead's, BR '68, GRD '72, discretionary account. Brodhead maintains that he will repeat this performance if the UOFC goes over budget this year. "I have found money to cover shortfalls the last few years, and I will continue to do so," he said.

"The system is anti-pedagogical" in the spending lesson it teaches the committee, Greene said. "We encourage students to break the bank." He explained that the UOFC has everything to lose and nothing to gain from staying within its budget. Five years ago, the UOFC did just that. "Having money left over is very bad," Greene said. "The University then says that [the committee] doesn't need more."

Although the committee's overspending usually acts as a cry for assistance, resulting in an increased allotment the following year, UOFC Chair Adiya Dixon, BR '00, maintains that it does not intentionally go over budget in order to secure more funds. "We're trying our best to stick to our budget, but we're also not trying to cheat organizations out of money that they deserve," she said.

Further, this pattern of fiscal excess brings uncertainty for the UOFC. "When you depend on discretionary funds, you never know," Trachtenberg said. In 1989, the UOFC ran out of money and was forced to pro-rate spring allocations at about 20 cents on the dollar, according to Greene.

Deputy Provost Charles Long is not concerned by the committee's behavior. "There are so many bright people with bright ideas here. The people on the committee are not financial people," he said. "We could have rigid controls on spending, but we likely would not punish the right people. Therefore, we need some financial flexibility. One way would be to allocate everybody less than they need; then, when they come back screaming, give them more. Using slush funds to cover deficits is a better way."

Trachtenberg and Greene both advocate increasing the UOFC budget, perhaps by $10,000 to $15,000, as a better way to solve the overrun problem. "With so many organizations, we would like to see more funding for the UOFC and for them to live within their budget," Trachtenberg said.

Brodhead concurs. "The real solution here is to build up the amount actually budgeted," he said. "I've made that a high priority in my annual negotiations with the Provost and we've achieved percentage increases far beyond what's been available for other causes, but there's still plenty of room for further progress."

The lucky few

A high priority? From last year to this year, the UOFC budget saw the smallest percentage increase of any item in the SBAC budget.

This year, the SBAC is spending $370,515. This includes the UOFC money, $123,000 distributed to the residential colleges, and $89,480 for the four cultural centers and the Women's Center. The remaining $112,337 goes directly to five designated student organizations.

Other than the outlay to the colleges, the largest entry in the SBAC budget--larger than the entire UOFC budget--is the $48,912 given to Yale University Bands. This includes the Yale Precision Marching Band, Yale Jazz Ensemble, and Yale Concert Band. The Yale Symphony Orchestra receives $16,459 directly from the SBAC as well. These performing groups are saved from UOFC application by a technicality: rather than undergraduate organizations, they are "non-academic departments."

But three registered undergraduate organizations draw funding directly from the SBAC as well. The Yale Dramatic Association received $21,361, the Yale Debate Association was given $17,728, and the YCC got $7,859. (The YCC also receives money from the UOFC and the private funds of Brodhead and University President Richard Levin, GRD '74.) These organizations have been singled out for SBAC funds due to special circumstances and need. "There are lots of organizations not included [in the SBAC budget]. Probably each has a story," Associate Dean John R. Meeske, chair of the SBAC, said. "Why not the Glee Club? Because they have a large endowment and don't need the money." Many of Yale's largest groups--the Political Union, the Yale Corinthian Yacht Club, and the Guild of Carillonneurs, to name a few--survive almost entirely on alumni contributions.

Greene invoked "critical mass" to explain why the University steps in to fund these prominent undergraduate organizations. Simply put, it is the point at which the quality of an organization will decline sharply if funds are not infused. Both the Dramat and the Debate Association were added to the SBAC budget in times of financial difficulty decades ago.

Today, both organizations are thriving financially, but they are still funded by the SBAC because Yale has traditionally supported them, according to Meeske. Not only have the Dramat and the Debate Association remained a part of the SBAC budget, they are among its fastest-growing elements. The Dramat received a 9 percent increase in its budget this year, while the Debate Association's budget jumped 7.5 percent. The UOFC budget, on the other hand, increased by only 2.5 percent.

Even if the UOFC budget is increased, as Brodhead, Trachtenberg, and Greene hope, there is still at least one class of organizations which will feel a financial pinch.

Writers can't be beggars

The only restriction placed on the UOFC by the Dean's Office is a ban on funding undergraduate publications. The Administration claims it maintains this stricture to avoid infringing on students' right to free speech. "What we don't want to do is act as censors," Trachtenberg explained. "When we give money, we feel entitled to interfere." Meeske provided another reason for the rule. "This way, the alumni can't complain about undergraduate [articles] they object to," he said.

Large publications, such as The Yale Herald, can survive on revenue from advertising, subscriptions, and special projects, but for students attempting to start up and maintain smaller journals, the dearth of funding options presents a sometimes insurmountable hurdle.

Emily Levine, SY '01, publisher of Type magazine, laments the situation small publications such as hers face. The restriction, coupled with the decision earlier this year not to give Sudler funding to publications, has left her organization scrambling for dollars. "[Fundraising] takes away from spending time on innovative aspects of publications. One would think that Yale would want to encourage innovative publications," Levine said. She added that lack of funds has forced the magazine to publish biannually rather than quarterly.

The restriction on UOFC funding for undergraduate publications isn't entirely rigid, however. Five undergraduate publications did receive UOFC funds this past semester. The Yale Literary Magazine received $440, the Yale Record was given $264, the Yale Political Quarterly got $240, the Yale College Course Critique was awarded $88, and Magazine of Fantasy was granted $40.

For all other publications, the only recourse is funding from residential colleges, academic departments, and advertising. In the case of smaller journals, advertising is not a realistic possibility either, since advertisers want to reach large numbers of readers.

According to Levine, Type's fall issue was paid for largely through money from academic departments. With that money now spent, however, the magazine must find new sources. "We're pursuing other opportunities, but the future looks bleak," she said.