10+f+grp+3

Strategic Approach Consulting 401 Market Street Philadelphia, PA 19999 (610) 425-8963 1 November, 2010 Tony Goldston Program Specialist 132 Carpenter Sports Building Newark, DE 19711

Dear Mr. Goldston:

Thank you for your recent inquiry concerning the troubles you are facing with the University of Delaware’s intramural sports program. The enclosed proposal outlines how Strategic Approach Consulting can help turn your program around for all involved parties.

Within this document we have stated the specific procedures we intend to utilize in order to develop the best solution for your university. Additionally, we offer you a glimpse of our knowledge and experience to ensure that we are qualified for the job.

We hope that you will choose us to further investigate your problem. We are confident that we will be able to present you with a recommendation that will be the solution to your problem. Please feel free to contact me if you have questions about the proposal, or if you would like to inquire more about the specifics of our process. I look forward to working with you and your team.

Sincerely,

John Smith Lead Consultant (610) 278-3100

Enclosure

Strategic Approach Consulting Proposal for University of Delaware Intramural Sports Program


 * __Introduction/Proposal__:**

Strategic Approach Consulting proposes to design an intramural sports program that satisfies the needs of the UD Intramural Sports Program by increasing the participation rate among registered members.


 * __Background of the problem__:**

Throughout the country, many universities emphasize the importance of providing extracurricular opportunities for students and employees to compete in various sports. Intramural sporting programs have become an important focus for universities, serving to encourage student involvement in the community as well as promote physical fitness. Although these programs have been enjoyed by many, programs have consistently run into problems concerning a lack of commitment from registered participants. Often teams forfeit a scheduled game, with the related consequences being felt by the referees, opposing teams, and program representatives.

There may be several reasons for this particular problem, depending on the University involved. For instance, Carnegie Mellon is a Division III school and fairly small in comparison to the University of Delaware. Hence, their issue with retaining interest in their intramural activities may be as a result of their limited sports offerings. University of Delaware, however, may have more of an issue regarding the talent level of its participants: A great number of competitive individuals unable to make a varsity team, wanting to participate in a sport of some kind, but not feeling the same commitment level as playing at varsity level. Whatever the reason, this is an obvious problem from a planning and logistical standpoint.

//...............Here, I wanted to touch on an idea Carla had, but wanted some feedback first. Specifically, the idea was to emphasize the idea that intramural programs at a school such as UD that offers Division 1 sports and nearly 20,000 students is more inclined to offer an opportunity for sports at the intramural level. From this, we mean that a Division 3 school such as Carnegie Mellon may be less inclined to offer such a wide variety to students due to a lower qualification to play on a Varsity team at a smaller, less competitive school for sports.//

//However, at UD, making the Varsity team may be more far-fetched, and a greater student body leaves many individuals with strong athletic abilities wanting to still play sports at a competitive level.//

//I hope everyone follows the gist of the above information. Either way, I just wanted everyone's opinion on how/if/where I should implement that into the problem. Some re-wording maybe?//

//Let me know. Thanks. -Jeff// //Hey Jeff,// //I added to the background to include the issue you outlined. Let me know if it makes sense, or is what you had in mind.// //Justin//

**__Objective__:**

Upon analyzing the needs specific to your program, our team of consultants will outline several recommendations to develop a program best suited for the UD Intramural Sports Program. We will research other universities' intramural sports programs, interview UD program representatives, and conduct surveys among participating individuals to draft and propose a new plan for UD. We will present the drafted recommendations throughout the entire process to you and your staff. Moreover, we will give guidance on how to carry out our recommendations and explain how each new aspect of the program can be implemented to achieve your desired results. From our understanding of your intramural involvement problem, our target will be a commitment increase for registered members from 70% to 90%. In addition, we aim to improve the way istudents and employees view the program by offering unique incentives for those members demonstrating strong dedication. We are confident that after further investigating your program we will be able to present you with solid ecommendations to solve your intramural problems.

//Hey guys, here when referencing the percentage increase, did you mean that UD's participation is now 70% and we will increase it to 90%, or that we will boost participation 70% to 90%. Depending on which is the case, the wording will be slightly different.// //Justin//

**__Procedure__:**

1. We will meet and discuss the scope of the project including objectives, timetable, and expected deliverables with relevant program employees.


 * Discuss the strengths and weaknesses that you believe exist within your program

2. We will conduct general research about intramural programs at other universities to gain insight into any similarities or differences in their implemented intramural programs.
 * Focus on schools that are similar in size to UD, as well as schools who also have Division 1 athletic programs. Schools that have Division 2 or Division 3 athletic programs may be less inclined to offer such a wide variety of opportunities to participate in intramural sports due to a lower qualification required to play on a varsity team.
 * At Division 1 schools such as the University of Delaware, making the Varsity team may be more far-fetched, leaving a larger student boy with strong athletic abilities who still want to play sports at a competitive level but not at the Division 1 level. Therefore we will focus on schools that we believe we believe have similar intramural programs to Delaware such as James Madison, Temple, Maryland, and Rhode Island.

3. We will contact via phone conference or email other Division 1 schools intramual departments that can provide us with possible explanations to their success or failures in their intramural programs.

4. We will conduct a short 10 question survey that will be distributed to a sample size from the population of the current registered participants. P rimarily, we want to focus on individuals who are already registered participants as opposed to the entire university population. By doing so we will target the individuals who already express interest in playing intramural sports.
 * Include questions about what the participants believe are the strengths and weaknesses of the intramural program
 * Distribute throughout a selected week, prior to the start of the days intramural activities.
 * Sample size of 100 out of an average population of 1000 intramural and club sports participants.

5. Present our preliminary report which will consist of our research results, recommendations, and any other follow up expectations.


 * Take any further suggestions from you and your staff before we make our final recommendations

6. Finalize report

7. Submit report

__**Record of Service**__

We are committed to providing efficient, reliable service for our customers. The issues that your University faces are unique, and thus certainly important. Strategic Approach Consulting has been helping organizations around the country for over 10 years, and our success rate has been outstanding. Our company has worked with many other entities that face similar issues of commitment to programs, organizations, and procedures which make us well suited to address your needs. Some of our successes include:


 * 1) Arbitrated negotiations between Amtrak and their employee unions, resulting in a 15% pay increase with overtime pay protection.
 * 2) Consulted with students and the advisory and displinary boards of UCLA to improve the standards of and student understanding of the code of conduct for the University.
 * 3) Advised the EPA and the U.S. Congress on implementing more green technology initiatives to insure a clean air future.

Because of our close relationship with many current and former organizations, we have access to various resources countrywide that will assist in finding a solution to your current problem. Strategic Approach Consulting would not take on this challenge if not confident that we will be able to fix your intramural problem. It is our belief that our success record in consulting proves that we possess the required knowledge base to facilitate a beneficial arrangement for all involved parties.

**__Budget (Cost to Strategic Approach)__:**

Our consultants at Strategic Approach Consulting are paid on a contractural basis for the research and effort utilized in solving problems for programs such as yours. Therefore, the price of our service is formed around the length of time it takes to complete a designated task. Because our consultants have expertise in solving similar issues faced by other university programs, we anticipate the effort put toward solving your problem will span over a period of about one month.

__**Schedule**__ Initial interviews and research Compile survey questions Survey intramural participants, contact other university intramural departments Compile data N**ovember 15, 2010** Analyze data, formulate preliminary report Present preliminary report Conduce further interviews and or research as needed Finalize report Submit final report
 * Week of November 1, 2010**
 * Week of November 8, 2010**
 * November 22, 2010**
 * November 23-30, 2010**
 * December 3, 2010**
 * December 7, 2010**


 * __Budget (Cost to Strategic Approach)__:**

Our consultants at Strategic Approach are paid on a salary basis for the research and effort conducted in solving problems for programs such as yours. Therefore, the price of our service is formed around the length of time it takes to complete a requested task. Being that our consultants have expertise in solving similar issues faced by other university programs, the effort put forth towards solving your problem span over a short time period of about one month.

__November 1, 2010__


 * Christine & Justin,**

-Carla and I met with Professor Penna today (Mon. 11/1) as you guys both know. I spoke to Justin on the phone, and I know Carla spoke to you Christine about creating your wiki account tonight. Professor Penna has said it multiple times, but up to this point he has been unable to see any work/progress made because we have not been communicating through the wiki.

-Therefore, make sure a wiki name is created asap, and whenever you do any type of editing or discussion, do so in here. This way the communication will be seen for Dr. Penna as our group work in general, and also assure he sees you guys are putting forth an individual effort as well.

-Also, when you make comments within the formal proposal, try to italicize them so they are not confused with the actual parts


 * Carla & Christine**//,//

-When you work on the front matter/cover letter make sure the name of our company matches up. I had mentioned to Carla I had used the name "Strategic Approach Consulting" in my introduction. I do not mind our name, just wanted to make sure it matches up in the heading of the cover letter and the other parts of the proposal.

-I did the introduction, background of the problem, and objectives earlier. Sentences need some minor grammatical work in some areas, and if you guys have any suggestions let me know and we will meet on everything before submitting it tomorrow night.

-Justin should be joining the wiki later tonight. If not, by the latest tomorrow.

-Lastly, I can't figure out how to align the font left, right, center, etc. Let me know if anybody does when you get a chance.


 * Carla,**

(When doing the procedure) ......Like we talked about with Dr. Penna, just try to be as detailed as possible in elaborating on every aspect on HOW WE ARE GOING TO MEET OUR OBJECTIVES. When you work on this part, I was going to ask if there was anything you thought I should take out, or add to include in the objectives. By this I mean if there are specific research tasks, surveys, interviews processes, etc. that you explain in the procedure based on our previous meetings, and I did not breifly mention them in the objectives, let me know so we can make sure they are correlated. (hope that made sense ... i'll talk to you tomorrow about it)

Thanks guys I'll talk to you soon. Jeff

FORMAL PROPOSAL

Strategic Approach Consulting

401 Market Street Philadelphia, PA 19999 (610) 425-8963

1 November, 2010

Tony Goldston Program Specialist 132 Carpenter Sports Building Newark, DE 19711

Dear Mr. Goldston:

Thank you for your recent inquiry concerning the problems you have been having with the University of Delaware’s intramural sports program. The enclosed proposal outlines for how our company can help turn your program around for all involved parties.

Within the document we have stated the specific procedures we intend to utilize to provide the best solution for your university. Additionally, we offer you a glimpse into our expertise to ensure that we are the most qualified for the job.

We hope you will choose us to investigate your program further as we are confident we will be able to present you with several recommendations to improve your program quickly and efficiently. Please feel free to contact me if you have questions about the proposal, or if you would like to inquire more about the specifics of our process. I look forward to working with you and your team.

Sincerely,

John Smith Lead Consultant (610) 278-3100

Enclosure


 * __Introduction/Proposal__:**

Strategic Approach Consulting proposes to design an Intramural Program that satisfies the needs of the UD Intramural Sports Program by increasing the participation rate among the registered members.


 * __Background of the problem__:**

Throughout the country, many universities emphasize the importance of providing extracurricular opportunities for students and employees to compete in various sports. Intramural sporting programs have become an important focus for universities, serving to encourage student involvement in the community as well as promote physical fitness. Although these programs have been enjoyed by many, programs have consistently run into problems concerning a lack of commitment from registered participants. Often teams forfeit a scheduled game, with the related consequences being felt by the referees, opposing teams, and program representatives.

There may be several reasons for this particular problem, depending on the University involved. For instance, Carnegie Mellon is a Division III school and fairly small in comparison to the University of Delaware. Hence, their issue with retaining interest in their intramural activities may be as a result of their limited sports offerings. University of Delaware, however, may have more of an issue regarding the talent level of its participants: A great number of competitive individuals unable to make a varsity team, wanting to participate in a sport of some kind, but not feeling the same commitment level as playing at varsity level. Whatever the reason, this is an obvious problem from a planning and logistical standpoint.

**__Objective__:**

Upon analyzing the needs specific to your program, our team of consultants will outline several recommendations to develop a program best suited for the UD Intramural Sports Program. We will research other universities' intramural sports programs, interview UD program representatives, and conduct surveys among participating individuals to draft and propose a new plan for UD. We will present the drafted recommendations throughout the entire process to you and your staff. Moreover, we will give guidance on how to carry out our recommendations and explain how each new aspect of the program can be implemented to achieve your desired results. From our understanding of your intramural involvement problem, our target will be a commitment increase for registered members between 70 and 90 percent. In addition, we aim to improve the way students and employees view the program by offering unique incentives for members demonstrating strong dedication. We are confident that after further investigating your program we will be able to present you with solid recommendations to solve your intramural problems.

**__Procedure__:**

1. We will meet and discuss the scope of the project including objectives, timetable, and expected deliverables with relevant program employees.
 * Discuss the strengths and weaknesses that you believe exist within your program

2. We will conduct general research about intramural programs at other universities to gain insight into any similarities or differences in their implemented intramural programs.
 * Focus on schools that are similar in size to UD, as well as schools who also have Division I athletic programs. Schools that have Division II or Division III athletic programs may be less inclined to offer such a wide variety of opportunities to participate in intramural sports due to a lower qualification required to play on a varsity team.
 * At Division schools such as the University of Delaware, making the Varsity team may seem more far-fetched, leaving a larger student body with strong athletic abilities who still want to play sports at a competitive level but not at the Division I level. Therefore we will focus on schools that we believe we believe have similar intramural programs to Delaware such as James Madison, Temple, Maryland, and Rhode Island.

3. We will contact via phone conference or email other Division I schools' intramual departments who can provide us with possible explanations to their successes or failures in their intramural programs.

4. We will conduct a short 10 question survey that will be distributed to a sample size from the population of current registered participants. P rimarily, we want to focus on individuals who are already registered participants as opposed to the entire university population. By doing so we will target those who already express interest in playing intramural sports.
 * Include questions about what the participants believe are the strengths and weaknesses of the intramural program
 * Distribute throughout a selected week prior to the start of the days intramural activities.
 * A Sample size of 100 out of an average population of 1000 intramural and club sports participants is optimal.

5. Present our preliminary report which will consist of our research results, recommendations, and any other follow up expectations.


 * Take any further suggestions from you and your staff before we make our final recommendations

6. Finalize report

7. Submit report

__**Record of Service**__

We are committed to providing efficient, reliable, and expedient service for our customers. The issues that your University faces are unique, and thus certainly important. Strategic Approach Consulting has been helping organizations around the country for over 10 years, and our success rate has been outstanding. Our company has worked with many other universities, comapnies, and governmental agencies that face similar issues of commitment to programs, organizations, and procedures which makes us well suited to address your specific needs. Some of our successes include:


 * 1) Arbitrated negotiations between Amtrak and their employee unions, resulting in a 15% pay increase with overtime protection.
 * 2) Consulted with students and the advisory and displinary boards of UCLA to improve the standards and student understanding of the code of conduct for the University.
 * 3) Advised the EPA and the U.S. Congress on implementing more green technology initiatives to insure a clean air future.

Because of our close relationship with many current and former organizations, we have access to various resources countrywide that will assist in finding a solution to your current problem. Strategic Approach Consulting would not take on this challenge if not confident that we will be able to fix your intramural problem. It is our belief that our success record in consulting proves that we possess the required knowledge base to facilitate a beneficial arrangement for all involved parties.

**__Budget (Cost to Strategic Approach)__:**

Our consultants at Strategic Approach Consulting are paid on a contractural basis for the research and effort utilized in solving problems for programs such as yours. Therefore, the price of our service is formed around the length of time it takes to complete a designated task. Because our consultants have expertise in solving similar issues faced by other university programs, we anticipate the effort put toward solving your problem will span over a period of about one month.

__**Schedule**__ Initial interviews and research Compile survey questions Survey intramural participants, contact other university intramural departments Compile data N**ovember 15, 2010** Analyze data, formulate preliminary report Present preliminary report Conduct further interviews and or research as needed Finalize report Submit final report
 * Week of November 1, 2010**
 * Week of November 8, 2010**
 * November 22, 2010**
 * November 23-30, 2010**
 * December 3, 2010**
 * December 7, 2010**

Hey guys,

Now that the formal proposal has been done, we should begin breaking up the various parts of the research. I will leave the different research we plan to do below based off of our procedure, and everyone can volunteer for parts.

-calling other schools intramural departments (schools with similar size such as JMU, Temple, Rhode Island, Maryland, etc.) -researching intramural websites of these schools (-when researching, try to find out as much as possible on their website in regard to forfeiting, and things related to our topic ; i figured percentage of commitment could only be found with phone calls though) -survey (-10 questions for those individuals registered and participating in intramural sports at UD ; if someone wants to create this survey on surveymonkey or just in general on word volunteer ; Professor Penna mentioned having 1 survey be general questions based on opinions and open-ended with thought, and then another survey based on yes/no questions such as "Would this or that motivate you to come"...basically, the 2nd survey would consist of ideas we have found through our research) -interview with Tony Goldston, head of intramurals at UD (-Carla and I can do this because we live on campus, and have had contact with him, so me or Carla can do this part) -interview over phone with other department heads

....basically an outline to start, but volunteer for a few parts so we can get this started.

Professor Penna mentioned that we must cite all of our research we get. Therefore, do not forget to write down where you received any information you have. Also, get the names and information of everyone you speak with, don't just have "Department Head at JMU", find out their name to cite their quotes.

Let me know anything that should be added.

Thanks guys. -Jeff

Jeff if you cold email Goldston and set up a time to meet with him I will come with you for the interview. I am going to be away all weekend for a field hockey tournament so I won't have access to a computer. But I am going to write questions down for us to specifically ask Goldston and also the 10 questions for the survey so we can get the survey and interview done next week.

Christine and Justin - Can you guys divide up schools to research their programs through their website and calling people This way by the end of next week we have research to start the report.

Thanks Carla

Carla,

That sounds good. I will send Goldston and e-mail to set up a time. I will gather some questions too and we can compare before we ask them, as I am sure we will have a lot similar/exactly the same.

Justin and Christine let us know if the research part Carla mentioned sounds good. You guys should split it up and talk to see who's doing which schools, etc. Like I mentioned earlier, no matter how it is split up, don't forget to write all the sources of information down.

We should meet at some point next week in the evening to see what everyone has started, so leave some available times. I am free after 3pm any day. and I know Carla is good Mon. and Wed. after 3pm. We can find out where we are meeting closer to the date, but we can text each other for that possibly Monday or Wednesday evening.

Thanks. -Jeff

11/8 Jeff,

Doing the research on the other schools is fine with me. However, I think we might have a hard time finding people who will be willing give their time to let us interview them. So I'll let you know how that goes when we meet later this week and if I have trouble maybe we can brainstorm some ideas.

I'm going to start searching for D1 schools tonight. I don't have Justin's phone number so could one of you post it on here so I can get ahold of him to split up the work.

Also, I'm not available to meet Wednesday. Would you guys be able to meet sometime after 3 on Thursday?

Ttyl, Christine

Hi everyone,

It's Jeff. Carla and I are scheduled to meet with Tony Goldston for an interview this Wed., 11/10 at 3:00pm. We are in the process of creating and comparing the questions prepared to ask him for our research project. When we have the information, we are going to cite his answers and thoughts in our paper, and compare and contrast them with other schools. I think this interview will further develop our knowledge with what the program has tried to do in the past.

Justin's number is 302-562-9827 (-for Christine). Christine, try to talk with Justin as I said before to plan how you guys may want to go about researching the other schools.

I am going to set some "internal deadlines" below. If they are confusing, or unable to be followed, let me know. Similarly, let me know anywhere you think I should add deadlines or move them to an earlier/later time. Also, we can delegate roles.

First, I am going to leave some general things to remember below on a regular basis

1. Check the wiki everyday. Just do it as if it is your e-mail. Even if it only is 10-15 minutes a day reading a part that was edited, or editing a part of your work, it adds up in the end. Also, it is the only way to keep involved and on the same page. If we can do this I think it will be easier in the long-run.

2. If a problem arises, such as a busy week, an exam coming up, or whatever it may be that is going to interfere with meeting a deadline, tell the group in advance so another member can help out more during those times. Do it in advance though so somebody else can take out the time to make up for it.

3. Whenever you find research (whether it be a survey, interview, online re-search, etc.) cite the source immediately on the works cited page here on the wiki. Even if it is not formally done immediately following the day you do the research, it will be there as a reminder to include.

GROUP PROJECT DEADLINES (-for whole class)

__Fri., Nov. 19th__ - Complete Rough Draft of the report due.

__Dec. 8th__ - Final Draft of the report due

GROUP PROJECT DEADLINES (-for internal Group 3)

__Wed., Nov. 10th__ - try to have any information for interviews, research done, and useful information found from outside sources PLACED ON THE WIKI...this way our progress can be seen, then by Friday we can have information ready to post to Professor Penna with our progress...if busy, submitting Thurs. Nov. 11th should be fine, but try to do it early if possible

__Fri., Nov. 12th__ -send weekly memo to Professor Pena showing progress

__Tues., Nov. 16th__ - Although it is relatively close (about 8 days away), I think this is a safe date to have almost a "rough draft of the rough draft" that is due Fri., Nov. 19th. This can be a meeting in person to check-up with each others progress, on top of the progress we will see through the wiki. Try to leave that Tuesday available tentatively during the evening to meet.

__Thurs., Nov. 18th__ - After meeting on the 16th, any minor changes, additions, or proof-work that still needs to be done should be done through the wiki where whoever submits the final wiki can easily gather it. In the past Carla and I have submitted the final drafts, and one of us can do so again.

__Fri., Nov. 19th__ - Sometime during the evening I would say everyone takes one last final look at the research project on the wiki, before the final project is either left on here, or copied from here to Word. If we do have trouble placing graphs, pictures, or diagrams on the wiki, we need to leave time to adjust this when copied into Word.

__Wed., Nov. 24th__ - Assuming professor Penna makes comments on the group project by Wed., we can all view his comments, then give our feedback and improvements with the help of his suggestions. Or, whenever this date may be if it takes longer until Friday, we will brainstorm at this point so we can start drafting the final one to submit by Dec. 8th. This leaves us about a 2 week time-frame to seriously develop and implement all the data we have gathered from our research (including all references and works cited), and create a final project that is professionally done.

__Fri., Nov. 26__ - send weekly memo to Professor Penna showing progress

__Fri., Dec. 3__ - send weekly memo to Professor Penna showing progress ; at this point, the progress shown should be atleast 95% of the project...with the final project being due within 5 days of this date, there should be only grammatical touch-ups, and the last of the proof-reading to complete.

__Mon., Dec. 6__ - We need to meet if at all possible. When we get closer we can see if we definitely need too. Either way, we need to make sure this is the final day really any work is done to this project that will significantly impact our grade. If should be ready to be presented to the UD Intramural Sports Program by Tues., Dec. 7th.

....There should be a few more deadlines in there towards the end for meeting, but we can figure those out closer to the date, or other people please add things you see are important deadlines.

Thanks. Sorry for the length but I hope this helped.

-Jeff

Hello everyone,

Sorry I'm a bit late posting but I've had a really busy week. I was looking over the breakdown of tasks Jeff posted and they look good to me. I've spoken with Christine and came up with some ideas as to which schools to research. I think UMass, UPenn, and Temple are where I will start providided I can get all relevant information and points of contact. I will update as my research progresses over the next day or so. I do have a couple of questions that I'd like to ask the group, as I am somewhat unfamiliar with intrammural sports structures and procedures:

1. First and foremost, what information should be the focus? Trying to ascertain what these schools percentage of participation is, or what their recruitment activities involve, or just "what's their secret?" Some information they will be more forthcoming with than others I assume, but when I contact the heads of these programs I want to sound competent.

2. What would you (Jeff and Carla) cosider optimal and/or acceptable for UD's program as opposed to what is happenning currently? In the proposal we mentioned 70% to 90% increase but I wasn't sure if you meant in total students participating, or in participation of students already enrolled. I ask because if the school's programs I've chosen are similar or comparable to UD's level of participation than the search becomes more intensive.

3. I suspect there are sports that achieve better participation than others. Should we narrow our report to, say, better participatin in field hockey and tennis, or just the intrammural sports programs in general. Targeting specific areas may be a better option because I'm sure these programs are huge with thousands of participants. They are bound to have varying degrees of interest from the student body.

Just some thoughts I had. I am going to start my research tonight and post any relevant information between tonight and tomorrw afternoon/evening. Obviously, any information provided would be much appreciated as it will make the research aspect of the project more streamlined. As far as meeting next Tuesday, I should be free so that sounds good. If I have any issues making it I shall certainly communicate with everyone well before then. Cheers!

Jus


 * __UPENN__**

From their Intramural Sports website, it appears that they offer flag football, singles tennis, golf, men and women's volleyball, and basketball in the fall. In the summer they do tennis doubles, soccer, Co-rec volleyball(?), squash, softball, and a tennis clinic(?). They require participants to form their own teams consisting of enough individuals to make a team in the sport of interest, plus two extras prior to tuning in the registration form (UD is similar?) A team member must attend an informational meeting before registration is accepted. Finally, "free agents" may sign up if they are withoug a team of their own. I will try and give them a call tomorrow to get some general information.

Temple has flag football, indoor and outdoor soccer, floor hockey, volleyball, high and low-comp basketball (competition?). Like UPENN, teams are chosen prior to registration, with an option of becoming a "free agent" if you do not have a team. Only staff, current students, and faculty are allowed to participate. They do not allow members of team sports to participate in any intramural sports offered. Participants are allowed to play more than one sport offered, but not for different leagues in the same sport (exception for co-rec teams; a male my play for an all male and co-rec team). There is a refundable $40 charge for registration ($80 for hi-comp basketball), but these are forfeited for fighting, not attending captain's meetings, or late entry. Equipment for each sport is provided bu the University, though participants can use there own if it meets requirements. There is a intramural phone number provided in the event of cancellations or delays.
 * __TEMPLE__**

11/10 Hey guys, I started my research on Rutgers. I called them today and they said someone would call me back but that never happened. So, I'm going to call again tomorrow. I found a bunch of information about them online and I think they have a really strong program so I really wanna talk to one of their department heads and get some participation figures. If you just compare their intramural program website against UD's its obvious. Some facts I've gotten from their website are the sports offered, some eligibility information, scheduling games, etc. So I'm gonna paste what I have below this. Its just a start and I'm going to research another school by tonight. Hopefully you guys, Jeff and Carla, got some information on Delaware's program so we can compare. Also, I might have a hard time meeting with you all Tuesday. I have work from 9:30-3 and then class from 4-7. I could meet wednesday afternoon if that works. Let me know.

Christine

__**Rutgers **__ Facts: -Fall IM sports: Basketball Flag Football Outdoor Soccer Tennis Volleyball -Winter: Wallyball Basketball Indoor Soccer Dodgeball Badminton Innertube Water Polo -Spring: Indoor Soccer Flag Football Softball Rollerhockey Outdoor Soccer

Typical system, create a team or be put into a team as a free agent (free agents play for free). Competitive and recreational teams. Men’s, women’s and co-ed. **Teams choose when they can play on the season schedule.**

Some important rules: students on intercollegiate sports teams are allowed to play in the intramural program, however they are eligible only under certain stipulations. Such stipulations limit the number of players allowed to play at one time. For example, if a Rutger’s basketball player wanted to play on a intramural basketball team with his friends, he would be allowed however, when he is on the court only 3 people from his team are allowed to play while the other team can still use 5. (Does this make sense?)

Rutger’s IDs are checked at each game, with no exceptions. Players will not allowed to play without one. Also, ALUM, faculty and students are allowed to participate in intramurals.

I thought this was important too: The university has one of the largest volunteer organizations in the country, Recreation Activities Crew (RAC). Student led, they plan events/trips (game nights, white water rafting, intramural tournaments, run/walk community service events, etc.) have input on the intramural programs, etc. They meet once a week and interact with professional staff and review past events and discuss the upcoming. * This isn't exactly related to the program but we could conclude in our report that an organization like this brings in membership and strengthens the intramural program.


 * Interview with Tony Goldston**

**1. What is the participation rate by registered members?n** 3 different categories that are calculated As of last fiscal year: 1. __Participation__: every person each time they play 37,800 2. __Participant__: each person each time they register 8,400 3. __Unique individual__ 4,481

**What do you think are the strength of the program as a whole?** UD intramural program has above average participation rate nation wide

**What do you think are the weaknesses of the program as a whole?** -Forfeits: bottom line -15% 2 or more forfeit rate -Implemented different plans each year to combat problem:

<span style="font: 13px/19px Arial; margin: 0px;">Previous years= Forfeit bond: created incentive not to forfeit because received money back <span style="font: 13px/19px Arial; margin: 0px;">Problem: all payments must go through university cashier office, refunds go through one individual (captain), complicated multistep reimbursement process, over 900 teams

<span style="font: 13px/19px Arial; margin: 0px;">Current= Fee based system, non refundable, amount depends on sport and number people <span style="font: 13px/19px Arial; margin: 0px;">-3 different prices dependent on cost to run games for the sport: 10, 15, or 25 <span style="font: 13px/19px Arial; margin: 0px;">-Prices kept low and reasonable <span style="font: 13px/19px Arial; margin: 0px;">Problem: No direct incentive to not forfeit

Hey guys its Jeff. I met with Carla today, Wed. 11/17 and I am going to put some stuff we went over in regard to our surveys we have conducted and the interviews we have conducted. Specifically, I am going to put the survey questions Carla and I used while surveying participants in the UD Intramural Sports Program. These answers are important to implement into our project to include based off other research as well.

SURVEY QUESTIONS

1. What is the biggest weakness of intramurals?

a) Forfeits b) Scheduling c) Payment Method

2. What is the main reason you as a registered participant would choose not to show up for a game, potentially resulting in your team forfeiting as a result?

a) HW/Exams/Projects b) Poor Weather c) Other

3. Under the current system, if the team your on forfeits a game that team becomes ineligible for the playoffs. Would you pay an additional fee to enable your team re-gains eligibility for the playoffs?

a) Yes b) No

5. Which of the penalties/consequences below would give you the most incentive not to forfeit a game?

a) Your team can continue to compete in regular season games, but you're unable to compete in the playoffs b) Your team is ineligible for playoffs, but by paying a fee your team can can re-gain playoff eligibility c) Your team is kicked out of the league altogether

This is a short list of the relevant survey questions for now. Carla and I are in the process of gathering the results from the survey's and interviews we have conducted, and using them in our paper. With the survey's, we intend to include graphs to show the percentage of responses to each particular question. The survey's were given to registered participants after we determined some methods that may be successful based on our other research.

We are meeting tomorrow (Thurs. 11/18 at 6pm) so we can further review these and edit our rough draft then.

**__Tony Goldston Interview__** **1.** **What is the participation rate by registered members?** ** 3 Categories of participation that is calculation. Each category is used for different administrative purposes. ** ** //Last fiscal year//: ** __Participation__- Every person each time they play =37,800 __Participant__- Each person each time they register for new sport = 8,400 __Unique individual__ = 4,481

**2.** **How does UD registration rate compare to nationwide averages?** ** · **** UD above average ** ** · **** There is no problem with lack of participants ** ** · **** Often have to make a limited number of teams because of financial and field space **

**3.** **What do you think are the strengths of UD Intramural Program**

** · **** Great enthusiasm and participation rate **

**4.** **What do you think are the weaknesses of UD Intramural Program**

** · **** Even with above average participation rate, forfeits are issues everywhere ** ** · **** When weather elements or students just don’t want to play that day arise teams forfeit and leave other team and referees stranded ** ** · **** Currently implemented is a system where can inform us ahead of time if your team can not make the scheduled game, this is beneficial because we can inform other team not to show. But, still leaves other team with no game to play which they paid for **

**5.** **What are some of the current and past payment options?** **//Previous://** ** __Forfeit bond:__ ** ** 50$ if came to all scheduled games ** ** 25$ deducted if miss one scheduled game ** ** Not refunded if miss more than 2 scheduled games ** **Strengths:**** Financial incentive to attend all scheduled games ** **Weaknesses:**** financial nightmare, over 900 teams a year to keep track of, must pay through UD cashier through one individual (captain of team), captain is refunded and must inform and refund their team members, large percentage of captains NEVER came and picked up refund even after multiple emails ** **//Current//:** ** __Comprehensive fee based system:__ ** ** Onetime payment of $10, $15, $20 ** ** Price determined by cost to run sport and number of people who play ** **Strengths:** ** No financial logistics burdens, keep cost low ** **Weaknesses:** ** No real incentive to come to all scheduled games ** ** *Thus far into 2010-2011 academic calendar forfeits are occurring more frequently than previous years **

**6.** **Is there a class worth credits for referees?** ** · **** Yes in spring, average about 20 student referees divided between the spring sports ** **Beneficial?** ** § **** For the most part. Good opportunity to get students involved, don’t have to pay them for time, run into problems with an equal number of referees for each sport. **

** Current Registered Intramural Member Survey ** 1. What is the biggest weakness of intramurals? a) Forfeits b) Scheduling c) Payment Method 2. What is the main reason you as a registered participant would choose not to show up for a game, potentially resulting in your team forfeiting as a result?  a) HW/Exams/Projects b) Poor Weather c) Other _ 3. Under the current system, if the team your on forfeits a game that team becomes ineligible for the playoffs. Would you pay an additional fee to enable your team re-gains eligibility for the playoffs? a) Yes b) No  4. Which of the penalties/consequences below would give you the most incentive not to forfeit a game? a) Your team can continue to compete in regular season games, but you're unable to compete in the playoffs b) Your team is ineligible for playoffs, but by paying a fee your team can can re-gain playoff eligibility c) Your team is kicked out of the league altogether d) Other _

**Data**


 * **Category** || **Description** || **Total** ||
 * Participation || Every person each time they play || 37,800 ||
 * Participant || Each person each time they register for new sport || 8,400 ||
 * Unique individual ||  || 4,481 ||

**Preliminary Ideas:**

__Recommendations/Findings:__ § Creates individual financial incentive § Not through captain § No forfeit bond so financial logistics not demanding Still remains incentive to play because if forfeit get fined if still wish to continue playing
 * 1) Register on intramural website
 * 2) Pay through student individual student account
 * 1) Charged small fee if forfeit in order to enter back into league

Hey guys. I'm about to meet with Justin but I'm just going to post what I have so far so I can edit and such from the wiki rather than through word. I kinda just went the direction I thought I should go with it. Let me know what you guys think. Also, I found a way to get some of the numbers I have left blank on my table, but I won't be able to get them until next week so I am going to have to leave them blank when we submit the rough draft to Dr. Penna. Sorry. - Christine


 * ** School ** || ** University of Delaware ** || ** Virginia Tech ** || ** Rutgers University ** ||
 * ** NCAA Division ** || 1 || 1 || 1 ||
 * ** # Students (Undergrads & Grads) ** || 19,500 || 28,000 || 48,000 ||
 * ** # Registrants ** || 4,481 || +13,000 ||  ||
 * ** Participation Rate ** ||  ||   ||   ||

The above table illustrates the facts and figures of various universities we believe are comparable to the University of Delaware. It can be concluded that Virginia Tech has one of the highest participation rates among our division.

Virginia Tech’s intramural program offers the standard intramural leagues and general rules and guidelines that most programs utilize. However, different from the University of Delaware, they have compounded a point system into their program. The point system provides more incentive for teams and individuals to participate in the intramural program. The points are awarded based on the various levels of activity, scheduling, sportsmanship, etc. Conversely, negative points are also applied to particular teams and individuals for negative actions, such as forfeits, misconduct, not attending meetings, etc. The award for the team or individual with the most points per each division is to have their names engraved on a well-respected trophy in display in the front of the Department of Recreational Sports.

We suggest the University of Delaware’s program apply a similar point system to their intramural program. However, our research has suggested the same type of prize will not be as effective in improving participation among current registrants nor in recruiting new players to participate for your university. We recommend a reward with greater flexibility and monetary value.

Rutgers University’s intramural program is not a point-based system. However, they have newly added incentives to increase participation rates among students living in on-campus student housing. “Super floors” was designed to increase competition and participation by awarding the dorm or apartment floor with the highest participation rate. The prize is awarded to every team or individual player on the floor who has participated in at least 50% of the games of one or more intramural sports leagues. The players are given vouchers to be redeemed for two concert tickets to the Tweeter Center for the concert of their choice.

Our recommendation is to compound the strengths of the above university intramural programs.

11-20

Hey guys this is what I've gotten so far. Will continue to attempt to contact UPENN's program to get some additional info. If not, I may use another school for the final draft.


 * ** College ** || ** University of Delaware ** || ** Temple ** || ** University of Pennsylvania ** ||
 * ** Division ** || I-AA || I-A || I-AA ||
 * ** Total enrollment ** || 19,500 || 27,047 || 9,768 ||
 * ** Intramural enrollment ** || 4,481 || 15,000 || ? ||

As shown above, Temple achieves over 50% of student body enrollment into their intramural programs. According to Raymond DeStephanis, intramural sports coordinator, the biggest issue facing their program is not a lack of participation but a lack of space. Their program has some notable differences in the current UD program; Temple’s $40 fee per team, no ID requirement, the core rules and guidelines are essentially the same. What accounts for the enthusiasm gap? It is our belief that the //reputation// Temple’s intramural program has as an outstanding way to meet new associates, interact with current friends, and get into shape is what is accounting for the high participation rates. Whether this is due to coordination or culture remains to be seen and is a question for further study. As a result, we suggest promoting the benefits of University of Delaware’s intramural sports program in a similar fashion to improve on participation rates. This can be initiated by improving the website to have more of an aesthetic appeal, emphasizing that not being associated to the university’s varsity teams does not detract from the enjoyment and comradery of team sports, and finally focusing on the change in fees implemented recently. These coupled with the suggestions mentioned from Rutgers and Virginia Tech will in our estimation substantially improve levels of participation. <span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Results on University of Pennsylvania’s intramural participation are inconclusive at this time.

<span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Hey guys, <span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">I got a lot of good information from Virginia Tech. I added some of that into my part. Let me know what you think. I think we should also add some recommendations about which intramural sports/activities are most popular and help with overall participation. I have a lot of information regarding forfeit rates and default rates of particular sports for VT. Carla also looked at this information and we think maybe we should recommend the UD program add some one day tournaments/contests because they have good participation. Anyway maybe we can all meet Sunday to talk and finish things up. Tttul.

University Fact Sheet 2009-2010


 * ** School ** || ** University of Delaware ** || ** Virginia Tech ** || ** Rutgers University ** ||
 * ** NCAA Division ** || 1 || 1 || 1 ||
 * ** # Students (Undergrads & Grads) ** || 19,500 || 28,000 || 48,000 ||
 * ** # Registrants ** || 4,481 || 8,589 ||  ||
 * ** Participation Rate ** || 22% || 30% ||  ||

The above table illustrates the facts and figures of various universities we believe are comparable to the University of Delaware. It can be concluded that Virginia Tech has one of the highest participation rates among our division.

Virginia Tech’s intramural program offers the standard intramural leagues and the general rules and guidelines that most programs are based on. However, different from the University of Delaware, they have implemented a point system into their program. The point system provides more incentive for teams and individuals to participate in the intramural program. The points are awarded based on the various levels of activity, forfeits, scheduling, sportsmanship, and attendance at meetings. Conversely, negative points are also applied to particular teams and individuals for negative actions, such as forfeits and not attending captain’s meetings. The award for the team or individual with the most points per each division is to have their names engraved on a well-respected trophy in display in the front of the Department of Recreational Sports as well as various specialty awards which are awarded at the Intramural Sports Annual Award Ceremony.

We suggest the University of Delaware’s program apply a similar point system to their intramural program. However, our research has suggested the same type of prize will not be as effective in improving participation among current registrants nor in recruiting new players to participate for your university. We recommend a reward with greater flexibility and monetary value.

Rutgers University’s intramural program is not a point-based system. However, they have newly added incentives to increase participation rates among students living in on-campus student housing. “Super floors” was designed to increase competition and participation by awarding the dorm or apartment floor with the highest participation rate. The prize is awarded to every team or individual player on the floor who has participated in at least 50% of the games of one or more intramural sports leagues. The players are given vouchers to be redeemed for two concert tickets to the Tweeter Center for the concert of their choice.

This system is effective however does not give incentive for off-campus participants to join the intramural program nor does it encourage ongoing participation for registrants of off-campus housing. So in addition to a similar program as Rutger’s, we recommend the University of Delaware re-construct the financial requirements of the intramural team members.

Virginia Tech uses a more aggressive approach to encourage teams to participate in all scheduled games. Their program requires a $30.00 to $45.00 registration fee for all team sports, excluding team bowling which is considerably more expensive at $70.00. Included in every registration fee is a $20.00 forfeit bond account. Therefore if the registration fee for 5-on-5 men’s basketball is $45.00, $20.00 of the $45.00 may be refunded to the team at the end of the season if they did not forfeit or default any of their scheduled games. However, if a team is to forfeit a game or default two games, the $20.00 will not be refunded. In addition, if the team would like to remain in the league and avoid being replaced by a team on the waiting list, they must pay a $20.00 reinstatement fee within two business days of the incident.

According to our research, this system is more effective than the University of Delaware’s current system. During the 2009-2010 intramural seasons, Virginia Tech had an average forfeit rate of about 8% for team sports and 5% for dual/single sports. Although this seems only slightly lower than the national average of about 15%, Virginia Tech also has higher overall participation at 30% versus the University of Delaware at 22%. Therefore, we suggest your program implement a similar forfeit bond and reinstatement fee requirement.

Due to the past difficulties your program has experienced of returning forfeit bonds to team members, we suggest the money be refunded through each team member’s student account.

Recommendations:
 * Here I think we should just summarize and bullet our recommendations to make it more concise and easier for the reader**

Analysis:

Virginia Tech
 * Virginia Tech’s intramural program offers the standard intramural leagues and the general rules and guidelines that most programs are based on. However, different from the University of Delaware, they have implemented a point system into their program. The point system provides more incentive for teams and individuals to participate in the intramural program. The points are awarded based on the various levels of activity, forfeits, scheduling, sportsmanship, and attendance at meetings. Conversely, negative points are also applied to particular teams and individuals for negative actions, such as forfeits and not attending captain’s meetings. The award for the team or individual with the most points per each division is to have their names engraved on a well-respected trophy in display in the front of the Department of Recreational Sports as well as various specialty awards which are awarded at the Intramural Sports Annual Award Ceremony.**


 * Virginia Tech uses a more aggressive approach to encourage teams to participate in all scheduled games. Their program requires a $30.00 to $45.00 registration fee for all team sports, excluding team bowling which is considerably more expensive at $70.00. Included in every registration fee is a $20.00 forfeit bond account. Therefore if the registration fee for 5-on-5 men’s basketball is $45.00, $20.00 of the $45.00 may be refunded to the team at the end of the season if they did not forfeit or default any of their scheduled games. However, if a team is to forfeit a game or default two games, the $20.00 will not be refunded. In addition, if the team would like to remain in the league and avoid being replaced by a team on the waiting list, they must pay a $20.00 reinstatement fee within two business days of the incident.**


 * According to our research, this system is more effective than the University of Delaware’s current system. During the 2009-2010 intramural seasons, Virginia Tech had an average forfeit rate of about 8% for team sports and 5% for dual/single sports. Although this seems only slightly lower than the national average of about 15%, Virginia Tech also has higher overall participation at 30% versus the University of Delaware at 22%. Therefore, we suggest your program implement a similar forfeit bond and reinstatement fee requirement.**

Rutgers University
 * Rutgers University’s intramural program is not a point-based system. However, they have newly added incentives to increase participation rates among students living in on-campus student housing. “Super floors” was designed to increase competition and participation by awarding the dorm or apartment floor with the highest participation rate. The prize is awarded to every team or individual player on the floor who has participated in at least 50% of the games of one or more intramural sports leagues. The players are given vouchers to be redeemed for two concert tickets to the Tweeter Center for the concert of their choice.**


 * This system is effective however does not offer incentive for off-campus participants to join the intramural program nor does it encourage ongoing participation for registrants of off-campus housing. So in addition to a similar program as Rutger’s,** we recommend the University of Delaware re-construct the financial requirements of the intramural team members.


 * -Hey guys its Jeff. Please see below some changes and updates to the abstract and introduction for our final draft. Carla is going to copy and paste this into a word document in which we will be using to submit the final paper. There are a few grammatical errors to fix probably, but it is an overall updated version of them.**


 * Carla, let me know if you have any questions.**


 * Also, I do not think it is on our internal deadlines but if everyone could possibly meet on** Tues., Dec 7th **it would be a good idea to clear out any last minute suggestions, ideas, or changes. Let me know what times work for everyone.**


 * Thanks.**
 * -Jeff**


 * Abstract **


 * This purpose of this report is to provide the University of Delaware Intramural Program with a recommendation to solve the program’s current difficulty with lack of commitment among registered members. The program seeks to stay aligned with their mission to provide fun and competitive opportunities for all students to compete against others in the University community. However, this is compromised when teams do not show up for their scheduled games. **


 * Strategic Approach Consulting began to research this problem by understanding the current intramural program and what might be causing the reoccurring problem of teams forfeiting their scheduled games. We discovered that there are several factors causing this problem to persist. **
 * First there must be incentive for the teams to show up consistently. The easiest incentive would be a bond. However, associated with the bond is the problem of the team as a whole paying one bond. Associated with this is the concern of only one team member, the captain, receiving the money back if the team does not forfeit. Because it is only one individual receiving the money, he or she may fail to return the money to the other members. **


 * While beginning to research the problem, our group needed to understand how and why previous intramural systems have failed or succeeded in having consistent attendance among its members. This entailed researching schools similar to UD such as Vermont, Virginia Tech, Temple and Rutgers to determine how successful their intramural programs have been in regard to having a strong commitment. Once we were able to figure out what has worked or not worked in previous years at other schools, we could compare them to the current intramural system at UD. Now, as we began to understand the problem at UD, our group had a stronger overall knowledge of how intramural systems are coordinated. **


 * Based on our research we suggest that the University of Delaware Intramural Program base their registration and fee system on the individual. This will be done through the Universities UDSIS online student payment system. The program will return to the former method of forfeit bond system, however the incentive not to forfeit will be placed on each individual, not the team as a whole. This will be accomplished by each person individually paying his or her own separate forfeit bond to participate (via UDSIS student account), and only receiving the when the season ends if the team does not forfeit any games. When an individual has his or her own money tied to a commitment, and he or she knows it is in his or her control to receive that money back, there is a much greater incentive to commit. Furthermore, there will be a system in place in which a team who must forfeit will be permitted to enter back into the league following a penalty fee. This will again encourage teams not to initially forfeit, but if it does occur there is still an opportunity to competitively participate in the league throughout the entire season. **

Introduction


 * The purpose of this report is to provide the UD Intramural Sports Program with an effective, efficient, and successful method to increase the participation rate among its members. **


 * Tony Goldston, head of the UD Intramural Sports Program, has consistently been faced with the challenge of getting registered participants to have a full commitment to attending scheduled games. Our team of consultants at Strategic Approach Consulting conducted research, complied in this report, which examines the problems the program faces in greater detail. The research was then analyzed by our team, in order to create successful methods that will offer students incentives to attend all their scheduled games, ultimately increasing the commitment among participants. **


 * To avoid as many forfeits as possible, the UD Intramural Program has tried implementing several different team registration methods. One method that failed last year was using a system similar to a “forfeit bond”. The idea behind this method is as follows: **
 * · When a person registers his or her team, a $50 bond in the name of the team captain is placed prior to the start of the season to officially register the team. If the team was successful in attending every game without a forfeit, the $50 bond was re-funded to the captain. **


 * From our interview with Tony Goldston, UD Intramural Coordinator, we found the “forfeit bond” method ran into problems associated with who actually gets the money when it was eventually refunded. For instance, when a captain is refunded the $50.00, it is unknown to many of the team members that this money is being returned. This would result in members of each team being unaware that money was ever returned, and the captain could keep the entire $50.00. Because not all team members were aware of this reimbursement policy, the system failed to serve its purpose of creating an incentive for participants to attend all of their scheduled games throughout the season. Additionally, Tony explained that upon the termination of the school year, nearly 50% of bonds were not retrieved at all. This clearly showed that if captain’s were not even aware that they could go receive their money back, then other members were definitely not aware of this policy. *****TONY GOLDSTON (need to cite source here)** *


 * Due to the problems of the “forfeit bond” based system, the UD Intramural Sports Program has implemented a different registration policy: **
 * · When registering a team, the captain makes a NON-REFUNDABLE payment for his or her team. Based on the demands of the sport, number of team members, and number of teams, the set price varies. For instance, Goldston explained during the interview the ranges of amounts outlined below for a few particular sports. **

1. 3 vs. 3 Basketball ** - $10 ** 2. 11 vs. 11 Soccer ** - $25 ** 3. 5 vs. 5 Basketball ** - $15 **


 * Goldston explained that the range of amounts was based on the logic that each person amounted to $3. For example, in 3 vs. 3 basketball, the $10 fee is approximately broken down to $3 per person. Similarly, 5 vs. 5 basketball is broken down the same way. For a sport the size of 11 vs. 11 soccer, a maximum price of $25 is set. This $25 maximum is the highest amount a team has to pay under this system. **


 * Goldston clarified that the $25 maximum was chosen because it allows the program to breakeven after covering its expenses. These expenses include supplying equipment, locations to play, and providing paid referees for each game. The program does not have a revenue account, so the goal has no incentive to have any additional money left over. More specifically, the main goal is to ensure there is enough money to run the events for the program. **


 * CITE GOLDSTON again*****

Hey guys... what time are we meeting tomorrow, 12/7? -Christine