Comments on NPS and C & O Canal Trust Draft General Agreement
J. Glenn Eugster
NPS, National Capital Region Partnerships Office
December 13, 2007
Dear Joe and Lisa,
This is in response to your November 28, 2007 request to me to review the draft General Agreement between NPS and The Trust for the C & O Canal submitted by CHOH Superintendent Brandt on November 30, 2007. As part of this review I contacted Superintendent Brandt and the identified agreement liaison, and Park Partnership Coordinator, John Noel by telephone and e-mail for information and input. My review indicates the following information.
Summary
The partnership between CHOH and The C & O Canal Trust is an exciting effort that has great, great potential to help the park and the public we serve. The park managers and I agree that this effort does require a fundraising agreement and plan. John Noel indicates that he will give the completion of this agreement priority attention.
Background
In September 2007 the CHOH and NCR Contracting Office entered into a Cooperative Agreement and a Task Agreement with the C & O Canal Trust. The Cooperative Agreement describes a range of general collaborative activities. The Task Agreement provides the Trust with funds through Challenge Cost Share program. Neither of the existing agreements authorizes the Trust to fundraise for the C & O Canal.
On November 2, 2007 The Herald Mail, of Hagerstown, MD. reported that The Trust was introduced at a two-hour event in Williamsport, MD “as a fundraising body for the C & O Canal National Historical Park”. It was noted by Matthew Logan of the Trust that: 1) C & O only receives about $10 million--37% of the funds needed to operate. Part of the organizations mission is to find a way to raise the remainder of the needed money”; 2) it was reported that The Trust has raised some money at a fundraiser, and has several benefactors.
On November 27, 2007 The C & O Canal Trust website was released broadly to a range of public and private interests. The website, which follows, solicits donations.
http://www.canaltrust.org
In early December 2007 The Trust began to contact potential donors requesting financial contributions for park programs, projects and support for the operation of The Trust. The attached letter includes five goals including:
- re-establishing and preserving the continuity of the towpath;
- creating locally-appropriate destinations throughout the park (rehabilitation of historic structures; re-watering select sections of the canal; providing passenger boat access; expanding recreational access);
- developing and delivering high quality educational, interpretive, and volunteer programs;
- restoring ecological health of the park;
- building a broad constituency for the park.
On November 28, 2007 Deputy Regional Director Mendelson and Regional Director Lawler requested the NCR Partnerships Office to review the fundraising effort. Superintendent Brandt and John Noel were contacted by e-mail and telephone and asked to provide information about this effort and the existing partnership with The Trust.
Review Comments
On November 30, 2007 the Regional Director received a draft General Agreement from Superintendent Brandt. The Partnerships Office requested information from Superintendent Brandt and John Noel and concludes the following.
- The C & O Canal Trust has begun a fundraising effort for the C & O Canal without proper authorization from NPS. The Trust has held a fundraiser and begun soliciting donors by mail. Fundraising is being requested for NPS projects, programs and capacity building for The Trust.
- The draft General Agreement as currently written is not the appropriate way, in format or substance, to authorize The Trust to fundraise for the C & O Canal.
- The managers of the CHOH and The Trust should prepare a fundraising agreement and plan for this effort and submit it to the Regional Director for review as soon as possible. Superintendent Brandt or John Noel should also contact the leaders of The Trust and request that they delay any further public announcements or fundraisers until the necessary agreement is in place.
The draft General Agreement essentially mirrors the September 2007 Cooperative Agreement with provisions added for fundraising. The General Agreement authorizes The Trust to conduct fundraising to support ongoing park needs and non-specific projects. It indicates that funds collected must be unrestricted and could be used to support the overhead costs of The Trust.
The use of a General Agreement to authorize fundraising, in this situation, is problematic. First, the park is proposing that the General Agreement follow the Cooperative Agreement. This is essentially the reverse order of what our guidance suggests. DO-20 indicates that a General Agreement may establish an administrative framework under which a subsequent Cooperative Agreement or Interagency Agreement will be entered.
Second, Directors Order-20 indicates that the term "General Agreement" may be applied to any agreement not defined above as a Cooperative Agreement or an Interagency Agreement. The draft General Agreement is essentially the September 2007 Cooperative Agreement which has been re-titled and modified slightly. Information normally in a General Agreement has not been included, while information from the approved Cooperative Agreement is included. Specific information on fundraising activities that are currently underway by the partner is not included with any specificity.
Third, the draft General Agreement misinterprets DO-21 as to when a fundraising agreement is required. The park seeks to authorize The Trust to conduct fundraising to support ongoing Park needs and non-specific projects. The General Agreement indicates that funds collected must be unrestricted and could be used to support the overhead costs of the Trust. The draft language indicates that fundraising for specific projects would constitute a capital campaign and would require a separate fundraising agreement.
The draft General Agreement does not recognize that Directors Order-21 states that fundraising agreements are required for a variety of activities including, but not limited to, park programs, construction, fabrication of exhibits restoration and capital campaigns. The Trust’s December 2007 donor solicitation letter requests support for NPS programs and projects. Although the park and The Trust are not proposing a partnership construction project at this time, a fundraising agreement and plan for this fundraising effort is required now for the activities being proposed. Such an agreement and plan would provide fundraising information that is not currently in the draft General Agreement and would make this effort consistent with DO-21.
Agreed Action
John Noel and I are both in agreement that a fundraising agreement is more appropriate because of the type of fundraising activities that the Trust has already initiated. The Trust wants and needs to be able to fundraise for donations that have the flexibility to be used to support the Trust's operating costs and, or various park needs. John is going to call the solicitor to confirm the appropriate document and language for us to allow the Trust to be our fundraising partner. The trick is to allow the Trust to talk about the type of projects they want to help support without misleading donors that a donation to the Trust is going to be earmarked for a specific project. I have suggested to John that he use the approved agreements from the Trust for the National Mall effort as a model. The Trust for the National Mall was in a similar situation to the C & O Canal Trust and the documents will be helpful to the park managers and partners.
John Noel indicated to Superintendent Brandt that he will make this a top priority.
Please let me know if you would like to discuss these comments.
J. Glenn Eugster
No comments:
Post a Comment