The Student Organization Finance Committee, responsible for $740,000 of student funds annually, has recently suffered much criticism for its lack of organization and oversight.
Curious as to whether these accusations were true, I was given the opportunity to sit in briefly on one of SOFC’s weekly meetings. Admittedly, my understanding of SOFC’s inner workings, including its undisclosed decision-making guidelines for allocating funds and formal proceedings which are also withheld from the public, is far from complete. Through my own personal observations, however, I have come to realize that merely pointing fingers at SOFC will not provide long-term solutions for student life and events on campus.
To provide greater context for SOFC’s role, SOFC distributes $640,000 to student organizations annually and allocates $100,000 to student groups who request funding for events. SOFC is also in charge of recognizing and chartering new student organizations that then become eligible for funds. That means your love of many major events, including K-ville, Awaaz and Springternational, are in the hands of 12 very important students. Despite the low rates of participation, and often times, awareness, of what happens in our government, we should really care where the $114.50 Student Activities Fee that we pay each semester goes.
Elected by Duke Student Government and not by the student body, SOFC members have been accused of being unrepresentative of the student population. Although many arguments can be made for or against various decisions made by governmental officials, how can we blame them for failing to represent us when only 27 percent of the student body voted in the last senatorial elections and several DSG senators ran unopposed?
The concern with misappropriated or wasted funding is not only an issue regarding the accountability and leadership of SOFC. It is an obstacle many student groups face as well. During the SOFC meeting, groups were asked about how they reached their estimates for food and advertising and how they planned to promote their event—important considerations that had not been taken sufficiently into account. Many student organizations that request funds for events often times miscalculate their budget, have poor estimates of turn out and struggle to publicize their event. Events held by selective living groups and fraternities that use public funds also tend to fail to recruit students from places on campus other than their own community. Many student groups, through no fault of their own, do not know how to plan good events.
Furthermore, many of Duke’s 329 student groups do not get sufficient recognition. Due to the sheer number of groups, some will fall to the waysides. There must, however, also inevitably be some groups that do great things or have the potential to do great things that are hindered by a lack of public support. The Duke Innovative Design Agency, of which I am a designer, has begun to improve advertising with events, especially through more noticeable Plaza boards and flyers, but is not responsible for developing the general structure of groups or helping them reach their goals. Many groups simply do not know how to get their names out there or gain public support.
As a counterexample, Purple and WISER, two active and well known organizations on campus, were able to effectively make use of their affiliations within the Greek system to heavily promote their causes and events. Reliance on fraternities and sororities, however, as a way to garner the majority of support for events skews the social scene at Duke and neglects the greater issue.
As part of a solution, the Duke University Union has reproposed a Union Consulting Group, initially formed in spring 2009, to provide personalized advice to student groups with the overall goal of improving the quality of student-run programs. Partnering with UCG, SOFC could make funding contingent on meetings with UCG which would cut excessive costs. Or, after funding an event, SOFC could refer event planners to UCG to help plan and effectively carry out the event. Although only time will tell what holds for the future, UCG is at least taking one of the first steps towards improving events on campus. Even brochures that could provide tips can benefit emerging student groups and ultimately, make better use of funds.
President Richard Brodhead, the Board of Trustees and Larry Moneta are big names at Duke. They are some of the administrators that make funding decisions and shape Duke policy. At the end of the day, however, they don’t run Duke. Duke students run Duke, or at least, run the parts that make Duke memorable. Yes, the selection process for SOFC should be more stringent, and there should be greater accountability for such an important presence on campus. That is a given.
Recently, the SOFC Auditing Committee has expressed renewed concern and more vested interest in SOFC’s practices. But until we can increase public awareness, educate students and motivate them to get involved, there’s only so much blame that we can place on a select number of our peers.
Sue Li is a Trinity senior. Her column runs every other Monday.