their companies and the future of the Nation depend in large measure on American education.

Corporations have developed many kinds of programs for their contributions. These involve direct and indirect grants, scholarships, fellowships, and other types of aid, to all kinds of educational institutions.

The rise in corporation contributions and importance attached by educators to this source of support have aroused concern in some quarters. The basis of this concern is fear of corporation influence over the Nation's colleges and universities. Educators have denied such charges.

C. NATURE OF CORPORATE SUPPORT OF HIGHER EDUCATION*

1. Divergent policies

Recognition by business of its increasing need for college-trained men and women has found significant expression in corporate financial aid to higher education. Such aid is, however, a new and evolving phase of corporation management.

Some companies have established foundations to develop and administer programs of financial aid to higher education. Other companies have taken steps toward determining their interests in higher education and are formulating policies with respect to their financial support of it.

Some corporations which have adopted a policy of financial aid to higher education in principle have not decided upon ways of implementing that policy. They are considering such questions as: Which are worth helping that financial aid to inferior ones is relatively the money? Which are doing most to help themselves?

A wide diversity of views and objectives affects corporate giving. Business executives and other people feel that only "good" colleges are worth helping-that financial aid to inferior ones is relatively unproductive. Others think that investment in "have-not" institutions may bring the greatest proportionate returns-that such colleges have the seeds of greatness and often provide educational opportunities to young people who otherwise would be denied them.

Some persons consider that corporate financial aid should go only to private institutions, since tax-supported ones can turn to Government for their financial needs. Other persons would help State and municipal institutions since they may be called upon to render educational services beyond the scope of support available from public funds.

Differences of opinion affecting corporate giving also relate to such questions as: Should aid be given only to 4-year colleges? Would economy in higher education be effected by greater support of junior colleges? Should corporate aid go only to institutions whose own alumni and patrons are actively supporting them?

Most of the colleges and universities need faculty salary and capital funds. Many are seeking funds for scholarships, fellowships, and student loans.

The Council for Financial Aid to Education, Inc., has pointed out that

Basic source. Council for Financial Aid to Education, Inc. Aids to Corporate Support of Higher Education, 1955, 25 pp.

There is the same reason for diversity and competition in corporate financial aid to higher education as for diversity and competition in the higher education which it seeks to support.

2. Kinds of funds

The kinds of corporate financial aid to higher education vary widely. The principal present types of funds are

(a) Funds for current corporations: (1) Unrestricted; (2) restricted to support of a special school or department; (3) for added compensation for teachers; (4) for improvements in study and teaching.

(b) Funds for special services: (1) research, pure or applied; (2) product-testing; (3) work-study projects; (4) institutes and lectures; (5) faculty consulting service.

(c) Capital funds: (1) buildings; (2) physical equipment other than buildings; (3) endowment.

(d) Student-aid funds: (1) scholarships (undergraduate); (2) fellowships (graduate); (3) loan funds.

3. Corporation and institutional preferences

On the basis of reports in 1954 from 367 large national corporations, the composite preference of corporations as to forms of financial aid to education is in this order: First, funds for current operation; second, funds for special services; third, capital funds; fourth, student-aid funds.

This showed a change from the general preference for research or other special services expressed 2 years earlier.

On the basis of 1954 reports from 753 colleges, universities, and technical and professional schools, their composite preference as to forms of financial aid to higher education is in this order: First, funds for current operations; second, capital funds; third, studentaid funds; fourth, funds for special services.

The preferences expressed by the institutions showed increasing appreciation of funds earmarked for increase in faculty compensation and for aids to study and teaching. The data also showed greater concern for future capital needs.

4. Criteria of company interest

Corporations determine their own criteria for aid to higher education. At present these criteria are largely: First, the location of plants, employments, or markets in relation to the location of educational institutions. Second, the institutional sources of the corporation's own college-educated personnel. There are many other criteria. The trend is toward a broader national interest.

5. Immediate and long-range benefits

In giving aid to higher education, a number of corporations evidence interest only in immediate and direct benefits. Some of the companies having such interest are inclined to finance special services, such as research, product testing, and special institutes. Others give aid to special kinds or departments of instruction related to their products or services, and provide scholarships for students in specific fields related to the company's product or interests.

There is a growing number of corporations showing interest in the long-range benefits from increasing the range of educated manpower.

6. Illustrative forms of corporate aid

The Council for Financial Aid to Education, Inc., has listed a number of illustrative forms of financial aid to higher education in use or under consideration by corporations in the United States. Among the listed forms are

(a) Grants to institutions in areas in which principal plants, branches, or employments are located-unrestricted funds, also funds designated for purposes such as faculty salary improvements, etc.

(b) Sponsored scholarships for undergraduate study-administered by the company or for it by a professional agency, open to qualified applicants, etc.

(c) Grants to institutions in area of principal company markets-unrestricted funds to liberal arts colleges, either through State or regional associations, or by individual selection, etc.

(d) Grants to institutions which are the principal sources of the company's personnel-unrestricted funds to alma maters of named company executives, etc.

(e) Grants for increasing educated manpower-scholarships (including cost-of-education supplement) to selected institutions to be administered by them in accord with their own regulations,

etc.

(f) Grants expressive of general interest in the future-unrestricted funds to schools and colleges eminent in training for community service or welfare type of professional career, etc.

D. NATIONAL MERIT SCHOLARSHIP CORP. PROGRAM

Recently much publicity has been given to increased corporate financing of scholarships. Particularly the establishment of the National Merit Scholarship Corp. received widespread attention. This corporation began its operations in 1955 with a grant of $20 million from the Ford Foundation, supplemented with $500,000 from the Carnegie Corp., $600,000 from the Sears Roebuck Foundation, and $30,000 from Time, Inc.-totaling the largest single sum ever devoted to scholarship purposes.

However, estimates from various sources concerning the total amount needed for scholarships have generally been several times greater than the total amount currently available from all sources for this purpose.

With respect to prospective financing of scholarships by the National Merit Scholarship Corp., the Educator's Dispatch for September 22, 1955, said:

The college scholarship plan announced last week by the National Merit Scholarship Corp. may leave the impression that a college education is being underwritten for most able but needy high-school graduates. Actually, the funds provided, although the largest in history earmarked for that purpose, show how big the need, how few the resources.

The Educator's Dispatch pointed out further that in 1956 the corporation expected to provide 350 all-expense scholarships. This would have given each high school of the Nation 1 chance in 70 of getting only 1 of these scholarships.

The corporation hopes eventually to keep 4,000 men and women in college, all expenses paid. But in order to be able to do so many

more foundations, industries, and corporations would have to build up the fund. This scholarship plan is nevertheless a heartening event in American education.

E. SOME OTHER CORPORATE PROGRAMS

Following are details of some other large corporate programs, which give aid to higher education in various ways.3

1. The Young & Rubicam Foundation

Total grants in 1956: $100,000.

Gift-matching program: $38,000. Foundation will match gift of any employee to a privately endowed, accredited college or university. Employee need not have attended the benefiting institution. If fund set aside by the foundation for this purpose is not sufficient to cover each gift in full, the foundation will match the first $100 in each case and apply the balance of the fund pro rata to the excess.

Scholarships and grants-in-aid: $62,000. For 4-year scholarships and grants-in-aid. Scholarships range from $200 to $2,000, depending on need. No restriction on colleges or courses of study. Relatives of Y. & R. employees are given preference. In all cases, scholarship applicants must be nominated by Y. & R. employees. Scholarships to non-tax-supported schools are supplemented by grants-in-aid to the school. These grants equal cost of tuition. 2. Esso Education Foundation (Standard Oil Company of New Jersey and affiliated companies)

Total grants for 1955-56: $1,067,900.

Direct grants for operating expenses: $566,000 to 193 privately supported institutions for undergraduate education. Recipients broadly distributed geographically and by types of institutions. Direct grants for capital expenditures: $200,000 to 11 selected colleges and universities for building and other capital projects. Indirect grants: $57,000 (capital funds and operating expenses) to the 31 member colleges of the United Negro College Fund, Inc.; $75,000 (operating expenses) to the 80 member medical schools of the National Fund for Medical Education.

Special programs: $99,900 to 10 selected institutions for assistance in carrying on research projects in the physical sciences; $69,500 to 9 colleges and universities carrying on special studies in the field of human relations.

3. Johns-Manville Corp.

Total grants in 1956 and 1957: $100,000.

$50,000 in 1956, and $50,000 in 1957, to a total of 100 accredited, non-tax-supported colleges and universities. Grants vary in size from $500 to $1,000, depending on the size of the student body. Program also includes small grants to the National Fund for Medical Education and the United Negro College Fund.

Criteria for support:

(a) Institutions from which members of J-M's management have graduated.

Council for Financial Aid to Education, Inc., Information Bulletin, November 1956.

(b) Institutions from which J-M has received the largest portion of recently employed salaried personnel.

(c) Institutions offering best potential source of new employees in specified areas and to meet special requirements.

(d) Institutions serving communities where large numbers of J-M employees reside.

4. International Harvester Foundation

Total grants in 1956: $57,000.

To 22 State associations of independent, privately endowed colleges (operating expenses).

Criteria for support:

(a) The association of colleges must be in a State or region in which the company is relatively important in the business life of the area.

(b) The group must be representative of the 4-year accredited, privately supported educational instituions in the area which it

serves.

(c) The group must have achieved stability and local area recognition as evidence by the continuous support of local business and other organizations.

5. American Can Co.

Total direct grants for 1956: $300,000.

Earmarked for faculty salaries to be distributed over the next 5 years; $500 will be granted for each alumnus working in the company having five years of service (regardless of rank). (Example: A school having 20 graduates in the company's employ will receive $10,000.) Program includes 176 4-year degreegranting private institutions.

Direct grants are earmarked for faculty salaries to assist in relieving one of the most critical problems in the field of education.-R. F. Hepenstal, treasurer.

Indirect grants: The company makes special grants to the United Negro College Fund and the National Fund for Medical Education.

Student aid and cost grants: 4-year competitive scholarship grants to employees and children of employees covering full tuition to schools of their own choice. Includes cost of education grants of $500 per year to the institution.

Research: The company will make a number of grants for research in designated areas of scientific study.

6. United States Steel Foundation, Inc.

Total grants for 1956-57: $1,150,000.

Direct and indirect grants to institutions: $557,000 (operating expenses) to 219 4-year member schools of liberal arts fund-raising associations in 12 States, to 131 liberal arts colleges, institutes, and universities not affiliated with such associations, to 107 member schools of the 24 fund-raising associations not included above, and to 81 member schools of the National Fund for Medical Education; $340,000 (capital needs) for endowments, buildings, equipment, or other facilities. Recipients: 2 technological institutes, 2 liberal arts colleges, and 3 universities, in varying amounts.

91747-57