Giving to University of Michigan drops more than 25 percent over two years but rebounds in last year
Giving to the University of Michigan has dropped by more than 25 percent over the last two years, university documents show.
The good news? The bulk of that drop occurred in the fiscal year ending on June 30, 2009.
Last year, the university saw only a 4.4 percent drop in gifts.
University of Michigan students hold up numbers representing the more than $3 billion raised in the Michigan Difference Campaign.
File photo
In 2008, the university had gifts totaling $342,054,221. In 2010, that figure had dipped to $254,086,812, according to documents included in a recent report to the Board of Regents.
One possible reason for the drop is that The Michigan Difference campaign came to an end in December 2008, Malcolm said.
“(Fiscal year) 2008 was the height of The Michigan Difference campaign,” she said. “We had a great deal of activity with tremendous focus placed on fundraising, and donors became very engaged. So it is not at all surprising that total giving would be higher for that year.”
Malcolm said that end of that campaign is evident in the giving to individual colleges and schools.
“Although the campaign ended December 2008 many donors are still making payments on five-year pledges, so some schools are continuing to receive pledge payments while other schools are not,” she said.
Read the full report
Among the schools posting big gains were Taubman Architecture and Urban Planning, which posted a 129.6 percent gain; Engineering, which saw a 59 percent gain; the Ford School of Public Policy, which saw a 96.4 percent gain, and Education, which saw a 231.2 percent increase.
“There are not ongoing campaigns so differences in the totals for these schools represent either pledge payments or recent gifts,” Malcolm said. “For example the college of engineering received a distribution of $5.15 million from a bequest. This would make quite a difference in their totals, but there is not way to anticipate such a gift.”
After experiencing a 12.3 percent drop from 2008 to 2009, the Athletic Department aw a 2.4 percent increase in giving from 2009 to 2010, from $23,651,805 in 2009 to $24,210,629 in 2010. Also seeing a large increase from 2009 to 2010 was the office of the president, which increased from $689,929 in 2009 to $2,480,947 in 2010.
The development office is reporting an increase in giving for the current school year. In the most recent report to the university’s Board of Regents, dated Sept. 30, overall giving year-to-date for 2010-11 is at $48,418,587 as compared to $44,455,635 for the same time last year.
Malcolm said the university is not sure what accounts for the rise. "Donors may feel more confident about the economy, or there could be distributions from estates.”
David Jesse covers higher education for AnnArbor.com. He can be reached at davidjesse@annarbor.com or at 734-623-2534.
Comments
groland
Sun, Oct 31, 2010 : 11:18 a.m.
It is not about negativism, I have worked here for years and find it a great environment. The real question is why a public university that still collects hundreds of millions in state and federal taxpayer subsidies and has raised tuition above the rate of inflation most every year needs a 7 billion dollar investment portfolio?
Scylding
Sat, Oct 23, 2010 : 11:04 p.m.
@Stunhsif: wish I could make that in 20 minutes! Hearing you about funding the U of M Machine! I'm paying them $26,000 for a master's degree. It will be the last dime I ever give them.
yohan
Sat, Oct 23, 2010 : 1:59 p.m.
Giving money to UM is like giving whiskey to an alcoholic. They just want more, more, more....
daytona084
Sat, Oct 23, 2010 : 11:41 a.m.
@jon67: Rather than badmouthing the "haters", do you have anything positive to say about why you think U of M is a good choice for donors to give billions in "charitable" donations?
jon67
Sat, Oct 23, 2010 : 11:16 a.m.
Every time there's a U-M story the same hate and anger comes spewing out of the sourpuss haters. Over and over again. The money, the money, the money! Oh, Oh, Oh! You people should pack up and move. U-M isn't going to get any smaller, any poorer, any more influential and any more significant to Ann Arbor, no matter how much you hate and rant about Mary Sue Coleman. Save yourself the pain and anger. Just leave.
rosewater
Sat, Oct 23, 2010 : 10:39 a.m.
money grabbing and greedy...that's the U of M difference! not to mention Coleman's recent raise
stunhsif
Sat, Oct 23, 2010 : 10:31 a.m.
I am in complete agreement with the first five posts on this thread. The U of M should be taxed on their investment income and should be paying property taxes like everyone else. I would never ever give them money, they are sitting on billions of dollars as it is. I just gave a surgeon several thousand dollars income for a 20 minute hernia repair, ridiculous!
groland
Sat, Oct 23, 2010 : 10:13 a.m.
U of M is run like a corporation ad is sitting on more than 7 billion in endowments. When asked why they need so much cash, the answer is "infrastructure" and "bad times". Well we are in bad times and I have seen no less than 20 major construction projects since I came to the U and the endowment grew from 1.5 to 7 billion. Clearly they are not using the money for infrastructure nor to keep tuition low. INstead they are borrowing for new buildings like Life Science and the Pfizer complex, meanwhile the salaries for the researches are paid by your federal tax dollars and the U collects another 54% indirect cost on all government grants. Granted the U is a big stimulus for the local economy and has certainly kept more than a few contractors in business. I am happy to have a job there but still am left feeling like its central mission of education, service, and research takes a backseat to money and grandiosity.
Sallyxyz
Sat, Oct 23, 2010 : 8:37 a.m.
Good for you, daytona084. Give your own charitable dollars in a wise way. UM should start paying taxes on all of the cash in their endowments, and start paying taxes on their profits (athletics, hospital, etc). And stop asking the state for tax dollars. It's a huge corporation and should be treated the same way as private corporations for tax purposes.
daytona084
Sat, Oct 23, 2010 : 8:24 a.m.
When U of M calls asking for a donation, I tell them they're not even close to my radar screen of causes I would consider donating to. First of all, they are sitting on billions of dollars. Next, they receive billions in tuition payments and tax money. And they don't use that money for anything resembling a "charitable" cause. When I make donations I want to see it go to feeding the hungry or otherwise helping those in real need.
Sallyxyz
Sat, Oct 23, 2010 : 7:30 a.m.
In difficult economic years, even the very wealthy will cut back on charitable giving, which is essentially a tax break, and there is no surprise there. UM has a huge, expensive (and very aggressive)fundraising machine; most every department and unit have development staff, and I'm sure that when times are tough, the machine gets cranked up even more. There are limits, however, to how staff should be used. Many staff who have positions not related to fundraising (or so they thought), find themselves in a position that suddenly includes "development." Some staff are not happy with that arrangement and many are not comfortable with the "schmoozing" of potential donors, especially when their job initially didn't include this kind of activity. Further, what can be most obnoxious is that the "professional" development staff will even try to get staff themselves to give to the UM, especially when times are tough, many of which are not in a position to contribute. Some of the tactics go beyond a simple written/mailed request. UM is sitting on a humongous endowment, several billion $$. They can easily absorb a hit due to decreased donations or a drop in investments. Everyone who was in the market in late 2008 and early 2009 experienced a hit in their investments, institutions and individuals alike. However, a bigger issue is UM not paying taxes on their enormous endowment. There is "profit" being made at the hospital and in other areas of the university, yet no tax is being paid, which greatly affects the high level of property taxes in the community. In addition to not paying taxes and having a huge, multi-billion $$ endowment, the UM receives aid from the state, your tax dollars.
Somewhat Concerned
Sat, Oct 23, 2010 : 6:50 a.m.
The word is getting out that no matter what you specify your gift must be used for, the President, Mary Sue Coleman, can take as much of the gift as she wants and transfer it to a unit she likes. Here's how: she taxes expenditures at any rate she wants to. So, if you give $1,000 to the law school and specify that it must be used only to study poverty law, when the law school spends the $1,000, it must pay a $250 "tax" that she redeploys to one of her favorite programs. The law school doesn't really keep the benefit of your $1,000, only $750, and Mary Sue can change the rate any time she wants to, including after you have given the money. Too many donors, including several major donors, have caught on and see it as a con game - going way beyond the standard taxing of gifts for the overhead of running a development office.