The most common question about the campaign launch is ‘Why now?’

Because the time is right. The University has achieved numerous successes in recent years, but to move forward we absolutely must raise additional resources. We could stay good forever, but who wants to settle for good when we have the potential to be so much better? To get the University to that next level, we have to power up in a big way. And that will take considerable investment.

Why a billion-dollar campaign? Is there something magical about that number? How was it determined?

A billion dollars is what it’s going to take to begin to propel this institution forward. When we tallied up the total needs across the University, the bottom line was in the billions. From there, the deans and faculty of the schools and colleges took a hard look at their wish lists and pared them down to lists of the top strategic priorities. We gave particular focus to areas of need that would help each school and college reach the next level of excellence and that also had strong potential for funding through philanthropy. The bottom line for identified priorities actually totals $1.2 billion. Our goal is to raise $1 billion of that by April 30, 2007.

There is another reason for making this a billion-dollar campaign. We need a giant stride, not incremental steps. I have said repeatedly that I didn’t come to the University with a notion of being a caretaker. I’m a terrible caretaker. My goal—and it’s a goal that we all share—is to move the University into the top tier of American universities. This campaign will help provide the funds that will enable us to do just that. Most of the universities we compare ourselves to have completed or are in billion-dollar campaigns. There are 21 other universities and colleges currently engaged in billion-dollar campaigns.

What are the general priorities that the campaign funds will support?

This campaign is about people. We structured it that way from the beginning. Funds raised will be used to establish scholarships for students, create endowed professorships for faculty, and build state-of-the-art facilities for teaching, research, patient care, and student housing.

How were the campaign priorities developed?

As I mentioned earlier, the campaign priorities emerged as a result of strategic planning by the schools and colleges. They reflect not only the aspirations of each school and college but also what we hope is a realistic assessment of the areas of focus that have potential for philanthropic support.

Priorities for the medical campus account for more than half of the campaign goal. Why?

Over the years, the School of Medicine has consistently represented about 60 percent of the philanthropic dollars raised at the University, so its prominence in the campaign does not reflect a shifting of priorities or more emphasis on medicine. The priorities for each school and college are ambitious, but we have tried to set goals that are attainable. In particular, there is a critical need for new clinical and research space at the School of Medicine, and those types of facilities are extremely expensive to build. We will be relying on funds from private philanthropy that will, in turn, help us leverage future funding from important sources such as the National Institutes of Health.

We’re now in the public phase of the campaign. Before the launch, we were in what is commonly referred to as the “quiet phase.” What’s the difference?

The quiet phase began in May 2000. During that phase, the University was developing strategic plans and priorities, assembling a dynamic group of volunteers to help lead the effort, hiring and training the professional staff who will manage the campaign on a daily basis, and securing lead gifts that helped us establish a strong platform for the campaign.

Typically, institutions raise about 40 percent of their campaign goal by the time they announce the public phase. We announced our campaign publicly with $552 million, so I’d say we’re off to a terrific start!

How does this campaign compare with the University’s last campaign, which ended in 1989?

It’s almost impossible to make an apples-to-apples comparison, primarily because the generally accepted accounting standards have changed since the last campaign. There were things counted in campaigns during the 1980s—contracts, for instance—that no longer are counted. Generally speaking, I think it’s fair to say that this campaign will be about three times bigger than the last one.
(Continued)