Adequate financial support for higher education, whether in the form of private monies, state tax support, tuition charges or federal grants, is becoming a greater concern for school administrators, those who govern the schools and friends and alumni of the institutions.

This situation exists at schools such as Kansas University, smaller state schools, church-sponsored private institutions, community and junior colleges, and even the most prestigious schools.

There never seems to be enough money to feed the voracious appetite of school administrators to fund all the projects on the “wish lists” of these schools. Student tuition costs have skyrocketed, state legislators must deal with tighter revenue streams and those able to give private funds are being more choosy or specific in what they wish to fund.

This being the case, and with KU’s growing wish list, it is unfortunate the school is not engaged in a major, well-planned and well-supported capital campaign – if not at the well-advertised and publicly promoted stage, at least in a well-directed “silent” or quiet phase effort.

With the KU football team winning the Orange Bowl in January and the KU basketball team winning the NCAA Championship this month, there couldn’t be a more opportune time to approach those interested in the betterment of the school and ask for their financial support.

History shows, whether at KU or at universities across the country, athletic success usually results in greater private giving and a bump in enrollment.

Unfortunately, about the only public effort to capitalize on this unique KU athletic achievement is a postcard-type mailing asking individuals to show their appreciation for the basketball team’s achievement by making a contribution to a fund. The basketball team then would decide how the funds could be best used by university students.

This effort may or may not generate a sizable amount of money but it also disappointed and/or angered many and certainly is weak.

The university’s last capital campaign, KU First, ended in 2004 with $653 million raised. Prior to that, Campaign Kansas wrapped up in 1992 with $277 million raised.

The only other capital campaign in the university’s history was “Program for Progress,” which covered a three-year period from 1966-69 and raised $21 million. At that time this was the second-largest fund drive for any state-aided university.

The two most recent campaigns were five-year efforts. During Campaign Kansas, the Jayhawks won the NCAA and those involved in the capital effort said the basketball victory helped generate enthusiasm and excitement for the school that encouraged individuals to be generous with their fiscal support.

Well-conceived, well-organized and well-directed capital campaigns are good for a university.

They bring in added money to an endowment association to be used for the benefit of the university. These monies help fund many excellent programs that state funds cannot support.

As the late and outstanding KU Chancellor Franklin Murphy used to say, private monies given by KU alumni and friends provide the “frosting on the cake” that separates KU from average and mediocre schools.

A capital campaign also does a great job in telling the university’s story. It generates added interest and knowledge of the university among its alumni, strangers and friends. By outlining the strengths, needs and dreams for the school, young men and women considering where to go for their college education are given a great overview of the institution – its academic excellence, its faculty, student life and the vision for the future.

All this raises the question of why doesn’t KU have a capital campaign under way now – at least a campaign in the planning stage? There hasn’t been a time in the school’s history when the athletic successes of its football and basketball teams have provided such a supportive springboard.

Also, with state fiscal aid likely to become even tighter, there is all the more need for private monies. Students and their families can be priced out of going to KU if tuition costs continue to soar.

KU Endowment Association officials should have been engaged years ago in planning the next capital campaign. The successes and failures of KU First would have been reviewed. Challenging goals would have been set, most likely well above the $500 million in KU First and probably close to the $1 billion mark. Ohio State University, for example, is set to launch a $3 billion-plus effort. Potential leaders of a new drive should have been selected and a campaign staff organized.

Why isn’t KU in the capital campaign business?

There probably are several reasons.

Some of the blame might be aimed at the very successful KU Endowment Association for not pressing for an aggressive capital campaign. However, prior to any campaign, there must be a skilled and professional assessment of the degree of enthusiasm and support of the university at that particular time. Also, economic conditions play a significant role.

Justified or not, but unfortunate, the level of excitement and enthusiasm about the direction of KU among many of those who have a deep love for the university, and who keep a close watch on Mount Oread, is not as high as it should be.

There always are going to be challenges and reasons why some may claim a capital fund drive goal is too high or that the time is not right. But one essential factor is enthusiasm and confidence in the vision being projected by senior KU officials about where the university is headed.

Have some at KU become complacent or tired, whether at the Endowment Association, the KU Alumni Association or in Strong Hall?

Too much is at stake for KU and its future for Lawrence and for the State of Kansas not to have KU firing on all cylinders. Once forward momentum is lost – whether it is the present disappointing condition of Lawrence’s growth and development, the state itself or at the university – it is doubly difficult to regain that momentum, enthusiasm and excitement.

Maybe it is time for a small, well-respected group of individuals to meet with endowment, alumni and administration officials to make a deep, properly motivated, objective and respectful examination of KU and where it is headed. Why haven’t members of the Kansas Board of Regents stepped in to ask what is going on?