CFC-50 Commission Inaugural Meeting


Can everybody hear
me on the phone? -Yes.
-Yeah. Excellent. Well, again I want to
thank everybody for coming. First of all for those
of you who traveled, welcome to beautiful
downtown Washington DC. It’s a great day to be in DC,
the weather is great, not too hot, not too humid. But we’ve got a lot
of work ahead of us, so I just want to go ahead
and dive right into this, but first a couple of
housekeeping rules. Please make sure you’ve
turned your cell phones off or put them on vibrate. I know a lot of
you are very busy and people are trying
to get a hold of you and the fact that you are
not available for an hour, it could cause some problem. So I just want to make
sure we keep things going. And I ask please just no
handing out of business cards, we are going to
introduce each other, so everybody is going to
have at the end of this contact list,
contact information. I just, you know, we want
you guys to collaborate but I want you sell in the
marketing to each other, okay? So we want to make
sure that we have at least that level
of understanding. So with that now I want to
just briefly introduce to you our distinguished co-chairs
who have opening remarks, but I just want to
do a quick brief bio. Let me first introduce
Beverly Byron. Beverly Byron was a
democrat US Congresswoman, from the great state of
Maryland from 1979 to 1993. Born in Baltimore, Maryland, she attended National Cathedral
School for Girls in D.C. She was serving Congress on the
House Armed Service Committee, and House Select Committee
on Aging, so welcome Beverly. Tom Davis,
also to my left, won a seat on the House of
Representatives in 1994. He was selected in 2002 as a National Republican
Congressional Committee and he also served in 2002 as a House Committee on
Government Reform, so welcome. He now serves as a
Director at Deloitte. So with that I wanted
to give Beverly a chance to maybe give us some
quick opening remarks and then we’ll start. Let me first of all say that I have worked with John
Berry for a 100 years. It was much more fun
when he was at the zoo but he is not there any longer and so when John called I
hummed and hawed and I said yes, what do you want me to do,
so here I am. Excellent, thanks a lot. Well let me say John, I’d do
anything for John Berry too and I am not, you go
from one zoo to another just [inaudible] not in the OPM
but I am just talking about the government and everything
sometimes Congress and the Zoo that Beverly and
I were a part of I… I am not going back there. I am just proud to say, I think in both of our
cases we were proud to leave Congress undefeated
and unindicted and that’s… but I was Chairman of
Government Reform Committee which of course
oversees Civil Service. A lot of h innovations there, I think I was able to
sponsor legislation, but more importantly, we have a combined
federal campaign now that needs some help and we’ve tried to assemble
here as broad based a group as we could with some of the
best minds in the business to help us up the
contribution level. I had a transparency and
seen some of the other things that you see in your
preliminary sheets. A lot of the work here, it
could be done by subcommittees. If you are not comfortable
with your subcommittee, if you think maybe you could
be more useful somewhere else, you know, get with
Keith afterwards and we want to use you where
you can best be utilized, but I think what we are
doing here is important work and we look… we really
appreciate your participating. Thanks, thanks a lot Tom. As I said before I want to really thank
you all for participating. I am not sure how many of
you actually got my letter, cringed when you got the
letter, or notification but I was really,
really, really happy that you’ve accepted the
invitation to be part of this. And as Director Berry said
when we were in New Orleans, when he wanted to
standup this committee, this is our 50th anniversary and for those of you who have
been in the business a long time you know what
that really means. You understand that this… you had a lot of twists and
turns in terms of the CFC, how it’s changed and what it
still really means to people, but everybody here at this table
understands that we’ve had a massive decline in
participation rate and there is no silver
bullet I don’t think, and I think there is will be a
lot of discussions about that, but I think we hope, and
certainly Director Berry hopes that with all the thinking here
and with all the expertise that we’ll be able to
find a solution to that amongst other things. Almost every week,
I hear about either an earthquake or a flood or in
Joplin, Missouri the tornado that basically
tore that town up, so there is certainly
a need for CFC. There is certainly a
need for philanthropy. There is certainly a
need for volunteerism and so that’s what we are here
to do today is try to figure out what is the course of action
for the next 50 years, and I think we’d
be able to do that. So I just wanted to start
with that brief introduction and talk about what my expectations
are looking a little bit, but I want to hear from you first of you all
here in the room, I just want to give everybody
a sense of who you are, how you participate in CFC now. So just quickly a minute or
two just give me your name, where are you from, how you’re associated with CFC
and what’s your expectations are for the commission and I am actually going
to start to my left and then we’ll go to the phones. Melissa. I’m Melissa [inaudible]. I’ve been working with CFC
for about 12 years now, [inaudible] foundation,
a non-profit and we to have seen,
you know, decline and so I’m really
excited to be here to be able to work with you guys
to see what we can do to help get people into the [inaudible]. Thank you. Hi, I’m [inaudible] Graham. I am a Post Manager. I’m with United
States Postal Service and I have been
working [inaudible] with CFC for five years
and a member [inaudible] solved some of the issues of the
Postal Service transition and [inaudible] Thank you. My name is Patrick [inaudible] from Association
Management Company, a private sector company. It specializes in
providing marketing and administrative support services
for non-profit peer groups. And more specifically for
Combined Federal Campaign [inaudible] the federal
aid groups [inaudible], we represent the 17
national federations and seven local federations
across the country. I have been involved with
campaigns since 1986. I was involved with the
legislation of 1987 [inaudible]. I have served as the
campaign manager for the CFC in St. Louis,
San Francisco and Los Angeles for several years. And my perspective is
that all of clients are largely Board of directors who run these
federal-aided groups. A great majority of them
are federal employees or retired federal employees
and I have watched [inaudible] and intelligence and hearing these volunteers
[inaudible]campaign through the [inaudible] years
I’m involved with the CFC and wanted to [inaudible]. Thank you Patrick. My name is Marcus Glasgow. I am the Director of the
Ohio River Valley CFC in Cincinnati, Ohio. It also represents large
parts of rural north and north eastern Kentucky
and south eastern Indiana and I am with the PCFO
Federated Campaign Stewards, headquartered in Indiana…
Indianapolis, Indiana. Hi, I am Mike Esser. I’m the Assistant Inspector
General for Audits, OPM. I have been here at
OPM for about 20 years. My first assignment as an
auditor was to do the CFC audit and my office does CFC
audits I am responsible for so [inaudible] audit
a 20 year period and hopefully I can
share some of that. Great thanks. I am Art Taylor. I am the Head of the BBB
Wise Giving Alliance which is an organization
that evaluates charities in relation to 20
accountability standards. We publish reports in hopes
that we can deal with service to individuals who are making
contributions to charities. We have a program at
the national scale that evaluates
national charities and many local Better
Business Bureaus also evaluate charities
on a local basis. So we are there to sort
of stand and put it on and create information
[inaudible]. Thanks Art. Yes I am here with the United States Department
of Agriculture. Last year I was the
campaign manager at USDA and had the privilege of running
a very successful campaign [inaudible] Department of
Preservation perspective and along with myself many
of us [inaudible] who will be walking out the door the next few years we do need
to motivate and activate the new employees of the
younger generation, part of the privileged
[inaudible]. I’m Joseph Beaudoin from the National Active Retired
Federal Employees Association. I just don’t know why I am here
because we don’t deal with CFC. [inaudible] I like his honesty,
thank you sir. I am Marshall Strauss. I am President of Federation Humans &
Civil Rights organization and also Head of the
Collaboration of Federation involving a dozen federation, representing about 450
national and local charities called the Workplace
Giving Alliance. I am here representing
charities, but I want to start by thanking
all the donors in the room and [inaudible] donors, too much of the dialogue about
CFC than I am involved with is how do we more effectively
hunt the donor and I am delighted that the
charter of this commission and composition
of this commission because perhaps we
can have a dialogue about what’s nearly an
interest to the governor and how does the campaign serve
the interest of the governor, we charities will come
along very happily. My name Beverly Jackson, I am with Social
Security Administration. I am part of a
small field office which did have some
great participation. Of course I hope we can get
more dollars in their group. I am almost like Joseph, I’m… I don’t almost
know why I am here, but I hope that I can be of
some help and make CFC better. I’ve always been a
contributor to CFC. I am here because
I work for an agency where you see a lot
of different things, people went through retirement,
people that have [inaudible], it’s easy for me to say hey, I want give to CFC in
every way that I can, so hope I can help. Excellent, thank you. I am Jean Brown and
I know why I am here. I am the Director of Chicago [inaudible] $4 million
Campaign in Chicago and I have been very
vocal over the last year of what we would
you do to drive down the administrative cost to CFC so that more of the
donation dollars get directly to the charity. Thanks Jean. Hi, I am Ted Carmen,
I am the Assistant… I am Assistant to
Secretary Shinseki, The Department of
Veteran Affairs and I work to build
relationship with non-profits and help them find ways to work
with our staff through our VA. Thanks Ted. [inaudible] I am from the Department
of Health, CFC campaign with [inaudible] overseas. I also provide
policy [inaudible]. And things I am looking
[inaudible] in this short time that we have, this [inaudible] in the department and also [inaudible]. Thanks. I am Barbara Daggett. I work for Catholic Charity USA as their ethics
compliance Officer. We have about 162
active members and 1700 affiliates
and associates and the CFC monies that
our organization receives, we filter that back
out to our agencies so that they can
provide services, those [inaudible] we appreciate
very much all the donations that come in from our any
of the Federal Reserves. Hi! My name is [inaudible]. I am Park Ranger at [inaudible] Cincinnati
Steamboat National Monument and I am a three-year
campaign coordinator and have doubled my
money every year, so I am looking forward
to maybe contributing some of tips for
doubling, tripling the donations [inaudible] Excellent. Thank you. Hi I am Carl
[inaudible] this group. First is I’m the President
and CEO [inaudible] which is a Federation of
the Maryland [inaudible], we run campaigning since 1989 and I think I am also
wearing a hat of sharing into my Federal
Camping Foundation which is a voluntary
group made up of Federation representatives
and Federal employees and we do a couple of
key things for the CFC. We run annual workshops
now workshop, and we hold a monthly
meeting with PM that allows the stakeholders
from around the country to hear what’s going on
with the campaign and we also do a few other
things with CFC Today website and all the board members
from the foundation, [inaudible] Commission,
Marshall Strauss [inaudible] so congratulations. And I am delighted
to be here I think there is a lot of ways for
CFC can a be a group of… I like to see, one thing I’d love to see for friends up there who want to see
retirees included in the program [inaudible] ways to improve processing and
eligibility rules. Thank you. Good afternoon,
my name is [inaudible]. I’m a Director of
Strategic Issues at US government accountability
office which is the [inaudible]. GAO works with
Federal organizations, Federal agencies help them
identify what’s working, what’s not, we had to
operate more cost effectively so I’m working
through [inaudible]. Ken Berger, I am from
Charity Navigator, we are a website and our
mission is [inaudible] donor advocates and
watch all over charities. We have a website where we
evaluate thousands of charities throughout the United States. We break them on the scale
conservative zero to four stars, developed three million users and we have been
sort of an outsider occasionally making some
observations on the CFC and it’s really a
honor and privilege now to be on the
inside [inaudible]. I hope we can help to drive more money to high
performing non-profits, with concerns about overhead,
not just for the camping but also for those
charities as well so far. Thank Ken. Good afternoon,
my name [inaudible] and I am one of the individuals
doing a couple of categories. I am representing Community
Health Charities of New England who is [inaudible] and I am also the
Director of the [inaudible] Federal
Campaign in Connecticut. I’ve only been in this
capacity for two years and it has been tremendous
learning experience for me. So I am very excited to
be part of this group, such a diverse group of
individuals with so much talent. I hope that we can
take some really fresh and real approaches. Excellent, thank you. All right I am Diana Peters. I represent camp
assistant [inaudible]. We raise and train service
dogs in St. Louis area. We are a small local group
that’s why I am here I think. I have been on groundfloor
to combine Federal campaigns since we were founded,
I’m one of the founding members 13 years ago. First place I visited it
was social security office, being the first one I trained, so I’ve been to a
lot of the places, I run out a little
individual campaign and last year I visited 25
sites speaking [inaudible], so it’s a very,
its an honor. Thank you. Excellent, thank you. We will finish of with
Tony who joined us. Yeah, Tony [inaudible]
personal management. I will be staffing
the commissions I really look forward to start,
facilitate great ideas and make sure those turn
into great images. Excellent, so as everybody could see there
is a wide group of individuals with varying backgrounds
here from oversight to representing federations to actual developing family
charities and watched our group, so I think we’ll have
a lot of good dialogue. We will have a lot of
different perspective, but I really want to
talk a little bit about the charter and my
expectations in the timeline. I know for Tom’s sake we got
a little short window here so we still got a lot
of things to get done, but I am going to try to put
this on speed dial a little bit. He is saying that because
I parked at a meter… Last thing you want to do
is get a DC ticket, right? About five or four, so
can’t afford some money. So, with that in mind, I just want to kind of draw
your attention to my expectation and I think they are pretty
much the same as in the charter, but I will be even
more personal with it. I have a six-month old and so my lens is a
little different now that it was seven months ago. So 50th year in the
charitable business, in the workplace giving program I wanted to be
here for her, okay. So if we can do that, if we can come up with
suggestions or recommendations to the director to do that, you will have fulfilled my
wildest expectations. Now, will it be different,
I hope so because the world
will be different, but I think the needs
will be the same. You will still have,
you know, droughts, you will still have brush fires,
we’ll still have emergencies, we’ll still have disease so I think all of
the contributions in last year was
over 280 million go to those efforts and so I
really hope we can do that. And lastly let me make sure
I tie back and thanks Tom to get back to the folks
that are on the phone, I think there is at least
three or four of the members who couldn’t make
it into town, that I’d like for them
to introduce themselves. -Hello.
-Yes. Can you hear me? Hi, my name is [inaudible], I am with United
[inaudible] Texas. We are the PCFO and I have been with our
organization for 18 years and coordinating the combined
[inaudible] campaign in our area for about 15 or so years and it’s my pleasure to be
sitting on this committee, I’m sorry was unable
to join you today. No problem, thank you. You’re welcome. Hello. Hello. My name is Xavier “Lew” Lewis. I am the Director of the
Heart of Alabama Combined Federal Campaign in
Montgomery, Alabama. We cover 29 Alabama counties and I’m glad we are seeing that the CFC continues
its success in the future. I wanted to be a
part of this group and also I’m sorry I
couldn’t make it today, we had our first
day off, thank you. Excellent thank you. Next? Hi, my name is Jane Armstrong, and I’m with the USDA
Food and Nutrient Service in the Denver
office [inaudible]. I’m also a member of the
Denver Chapter [inaudible] for the communications here. We’ve got about 150
other federal employees in the Denver Metro area and my experience
so far with CFC is very, very short
and fresh I guess. I’ve only been a
federal employee for about year-and-a-half
and last year I started with the [inaudible] program, so I’m very excited to be here
and hope I can [inaudible] different perspective
to the campaign. Excellent, thank you. Anyone else on the phone? Great! Tom, I’m going to ask you
to distribute these real quick and [inaudible]. I’m just going to talk very
quickly about the timeline that’s outlined
here in the charter. This commission is scheduled
to sunset March 31st and so as you can see that’s
a very short window for us to get a lot of things
done and accomplished, and one of the ways that
I felt that we could do that was to break-up
into sub-committees and talk about and
handle subjects that are associated with
those sub-committee topics. Now, I’ll give you some
topics that we can… that you can talk
about and research, but I don’t want you
to limit it to that, because I want you to be
able to bring your creativity and your problems and expertise to the committee,
sub-committee, groups, so when you bring solutions back to the larger
group when we meet, you know, it won’t be things that OPM said
you needed to study or OPM said you need to look at, does that make sense? So what I’m passing around
to you is sort of a list of, based on some of the bios
that we got from people, why you were selected. We picked some folks from small
charities, large charities, large campaigns,
small campaigns, military; we have
expertise there, we have watchdog groups, we have
a lot of varying backgrounds and so we took a wild guess, for lack of a better word, to try to figure out the subject areas that
we wanted to talk about or to have researched, you know how could we get it all
done in a short period of time. So, hopefully you all
have gotten that already and I do want, as Tom mentioned, I do want to hear
back from you about the sub-committee
element of this and how you feel about it and how effective
you think we can be and be able to conquer a
lot of issues very quickly. It falls along four streams. Two of the things that
Director Barry and I talk about probably the most
with this program is accountability
and transparency and lot of times you will
see those in the same context. Here we’re actually trying
to split those out a little bit and you will see
on the sheet that the accountability
piece of this, and Tom and I were talking
about it just a little bit here before the meeting, was a lot of the money or pretty
much all the money goes through agency payroll process. And for those of you who have been in this
business for a while, you know that you can
spend a lot of time trying to chase down dollars in
our federal payroll processing. Sometimes they
don’t get it right, it goes to the wrong
campaigns and so you call us. For the first time
this year we asked OMB to actually put
in their bulletin a set of procedures that
the OIGS to actually go out and test payroll
office transactions related specifically to CFC. Prior to this year
it had never been done and we literally had millions of
millions of dollars circulating, going to the wrong place, so it’s a very heady problem. So, that’s just
one of the things in the accountability area. Accessibility, I think it
pretty much speaks for itself, but I know we definitely
have talked about technology, a couple of you have
mentioned it already, how come we be nimble enough to be able to have technology
work better for us. A lot of technology is new. Just because you’ve
been on the Facebook and you have 600 friends, it doesn’t mean it’s
old technology, you know, so that’s just sort of
where we’re trying to go with the accessibility part, how do we access people
who really don’t, they don’t even have
landlines at home. So you know I have a landline but if it were up to my
wife we probably wouldn’t. So everything is done
on cell phones, iPads, other technology
wireless communication, so how can we tap
into those things? Transparency, this is near and
dear to Director Barry’s heart, how can we push more
information out faster? When the campaign ends
normally in December, sometimes it pushes
into January, you know how come we get that
feedback out to everybody what our results are? Right now it takes
two-and-a-half months. We got to be faster than that. We got to be a lot more nimble. So we need to be
able to find out and do we have any
kind of dashboard to say what the health
of the program is? I don’t have any
performance markers. I don’t have any
performance indicators. So those are some of
the things that I think hopefully those
sub-committee members will be able to
tackle and talk about. Affordability, you know I
think this comes up every year. I certainly get calls
from the Washington, Federal Times
asking for data on, how much the campaign cost, it’s very important. So, again those are just
topics underneath that. I think Lou said it also
about campaign boundaries, how can we lift those? Are there things
that we can do? Are there suggestions,
best practices, models in the industry that
we can bring to the program? So those are just some of
the topic items that I thought we could probably at least
just throw out on a table into these little four tranches,
but it’s not limited to that. But also understand that we
have a limited amount of time and so what I did was in the
spreadsheet that you have, I have four people
highlighted in green. I am sorry, we don’t… I don’t have that
email to those of us who we were not able
to be there with you. There is… yeah, Lilly they should have
been if you don’t have it we’ll make sure
you get one ASAP. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Lilly’s on affordability. I was going to say
isn’t [inaudible] she is. Oh yeah. Lilly, you’re affordability. Okay. Okay. Great. How about [inaudible]? Lou you’re accountability. Thank you. and Jen is on accessibility. Okay, thank you. So I think the only
person who hasn’t dialed is Major Ricky Armstrong. So we’ll make sure we get
that information to him. So, those are the
high level pieces that we thought we could attack, at least we thought
we could attack in a six-month period of time and then some of the
sub-topics underneath those. The folks that are
highlighted in green, I have as my key
sub-committee member, meaning that they will work
closely with all the members and the group that
they are assigning to, to try to make sure
things stay on track and log changes from the topics
that we have already outlined, and additions and deletes. So if the sub-committee
determines together that, hey you know I think that this thing isn’t something
that we should talk about, I think that person needs to
say okay well why and why not. And try to kind
of steer things, make sure they stay on track. Then the other topic that
I wanted to talk about is the sub-committee
meeting schedule. Now, I have an idea in my mind but I’m going to throw
it out to you all, is because I’ve probably
been talking way too much, you can tell because
I’m getting dry mouth, but I’d really like to know what is a sufficient
communication tool back to me, because I’m going to sit on
all the sub-committee meetings. So, that means that I
have four sub-committees, right, plus the
larger commission that I have to attend, it’s mandatory that I attend. So I need to make sure
that I work with Tony to make sure that we
schedule it properly so that everybody
and every group gets the right
amount of attention, and we have a schedule that we
believe we can keep up. Do you think on
the sub-committees, they could be done
mostly telephonically? Absolutely, that was going to be the next
point I wanted to make, thanks Tom. So obviously we are not
expecting to fly people into Washington or
our next destination for the sub-committee meetings and I’m assuming that
we could probably have those sub-committee
meetings every other week. The interesting thing is the
sub-committees are small enough that they should
be able to operate, you’ve got six or
seven people on that as opposed to a larger group that you got to
dovetail schedules. Absolutely! And just a clarification, our emails going back and forth, are those all under FOIA, as members go back
and forth in this? Have you made a determination
on that yet to look at it? That is a good question,
I will find out for sure, but my first gander
is probably yes, since this is a public forum. We want to put
everybody on warning because you’re casual on these
things sometimes. Correct. No, that’s a good
point and we’ll make… we’ll square that one too Tony
about emails and FOIA, thank you. Is that satisfactory everybody,
does that seem to work for you? Yes. -I see most people are…
-I see some yes… are under that criteria
to start with, so. So the concept of
sub-committee and I have talked to some
of you already on this. Does this make sense given
that we have six months to get a report to
Director Berry? It’s well underway. Okay, I see a majority
nod, okay, okay. So again the next steps
would be to send out something with the
meeting schedule, so I’m going to ask my
key sub-committee member to get back to me on a
schedule that makes sense. I know we had talked about,
as federal employees, we tend to have
a lot of meetings on Tuesday through Thursday and very few on
Monday and Friday, okay, and the fact that
we’re in the campaign season, many of you very, very busy. I can certainly understand that, because you’re trying to
get personal things done, you’re trying to get
professional things done, you’re trying to get
campaigning things done, it’s a lot of work. So I really, really
appreciate your time. So… but I’m going
to be flexible and Mondays and
Fridays are in, okay? I maybe calling in
from somewhere, you might hear you know my
daughter in the background or the dog, but you know I will be
president and accounted for. Does that make sense? As long as it’s
acceptable from us also? Okay, all right, touche. We’ll just have a mute
rule on the conference call. So does that makes
sense to everybody? Is there any dissenting views? It’s okay. Keith what might be helpful
is before that first meeting is we can from here try to generate gist
from the GAO report, just some issues that your
committee could address and then you put
your thinking caps on and you can add or
subtract from that, but just to kind of
give you a platform that you can look at in
terms of the kind of issues we want to address
and you can… then the sub-committees
will have… Yeah. You’ll have full license to do
whatever you want with that, but kind of get you
thinking in one direction. We really… I think Beverly
and I are both really impressed with the level of talent
and diversity you have here, in this room in commitment. And made the time commitment! Yeah. It’s a good group. -Much appreciated.
-Keith, I have three questions that before we even
get started is, what has the increase been
of people needing your funds? What has the fall
off been on the funds that you have been dealing with
for the last several years? And then over here, somebody has a scoring of different
individuals and groups, how do we score? [inaudible] We’re honestly here,
we are above board… [inaudible] We don’t score you. I mean but our
feedback has been that within the campaign
there are charities that are all of [inaudible], some are extremely efficient, some are extremely horrible. Yeah. And so the concern is that for the people who
participate in the campaign, they have tools
available for them to be able to [inaudible]. Could you pull together
a couple of key points, the five key points which are
really good and five pitfalls, so we… as we work along we don’t find
ourselves in the pitfalls? Sure. -I-And maybe to add balance,l. I know Art does
something similar, you mentioned that you have a
key list of components… Yeah. …that you track. We can certainly benefit
from having both views from your perspective on that. And one of the things I
mentioned earlier is that one of the first things I asked
for when I took over this job and it was only
about 18 months ago, it seems a little bit longer, but you know is there some
kind of metric scorecard for determining if
the program is healthy, it’s not healthy, it’s moving to a danger zone or it’s steady and we don’t
have anything like that. So that might be
something that helps, you know if we have
some sort of scorecard or some sort of metric
to gauge where we stand, whether it’s measured
from other industries, other giving campaigns
or something else. You know, it might
be interesting but I don’t survey
why people aren’t giving the same participation
as they had been in the past. We all know that has to
with an influx of new people who weren’t profit oriented
about getting to an end point or what we did, but it
would interesting to know some type of enabling survey
[inaudible], a campaign. I think if I was to give
the one most powerful thing that I would suggest you
do on an ongoing basis, it’s an ongoing
survey to get [inaudible], and the way to measure the
effectiveness for the people who have given is
what are their concerns. Their voice is one of
the most powerful ways that we can measure
the effectiveness or the lack of [inaudible] I think the other
thing is a lot of people well I used to give this amount, I can’t give that anymore
so I’m not going to give and we’ve got to
get that message out whatever you can give. Yes, I would [inaudible]
federal employee attitude survey every couple of years
and merit MSPB also, maybe something like that. The point is there’s
already a tool out there… It’s just a matter
of piggybacking some questions on to that and you can get you
know [inaudible]. One of the fundamental problems
is that a lot of surveys, invariably is there is
great tools out there, but often times they are
really not looked at or used [inaudible]. That’s just one of the problems, it’s great stuff,
you know use it. So what you’re saying is
the data is captured but nobody is really
evaluating it, making changes, pushing the information
back to managements, agencies, leadership to… okay, get quality change,
it’s very good. Cal? Well I mean I think
it’s important to note the most important
metric of all this [inaudible] concerned about is the
[inaudible] participation right, which has been an
absolute downward curve for almost 20 years as
the campaign has grown in terms of number of charities. The campaign has risen overall because the average
giving is going up, a lot of that is mathematical
to this smaller givers that are leaving [inaudible]. We’ve literally lost
1.5 million donors in the last eight years as well, 400,000 in the last decade. And so to your knowledge there
is no factoid behind that number to say because the attrition
rate of government, the sort of cyclical nature
of how government hires, doesn’t hire. I know we went through
these hiring reforms and changes in the 90s relating
to downsizing government. So do you all know if
any of those contributed or there is no… Well a lot of this in charity or
PCMO businesses in practice [inaudible] there a couple
of factors are clear, one is when the regulation
came in and [inaudible], very hard to get
75% [inaudible]. campaign without some
degree of [inaudible]. Okay. How did you… you made
the earlier argument that there is the number of
charities have risen, that the participation
rate has declined and there are a lot of
sort of the research about the paradox of
choices and too much choice actually creates the opposite
reaction of evil. And then there is various… from the survey, we know
that federal employees don’t see the
campaign as efficient, effective or accountable, those are the three things
[inaudible] that are missing. So what I expect to see then
in our sub-committee meetings is identifying these
sorts of issues, trying to wrap a cause to them and then some sort
of recommendation that deals with
the cause, right? [inaudible] Okay. Donna? You know I think it
would also helpful and certainly OPM is the
source of this information, [inaudible] we have
a base line on [inaudible], who our federal employees, what the demographics are of
our federal employee base, both civilian and military. That goes back to survey. So if we aren’t doing that we would have a baseline
that start now, right? And what are you trying to… what do you expect the
time is going to be in the next 5, 10, 15 years? We are looking today at a large
number of Federal employees that are retiring and we are turning
them over to you, and you are not part of us. So I think somehow we need
to get the hook on you. So we don’t lose them. And now you know why
you were invited. It only took 45 minutes. But again-and-again
we hear, well, our Federal workforce
is going to be decimated because so many retirees and the corporate memory
goes with the retirees and the corporate memory of the
Federal can’t fit in the fund. We don’t want to lose that. That’s a good point. I have a bit of a correlated
question here about [inaudible], sort of a two-part question. One is what access do we
have to OPM’s database and what we build to get
analytical support, the things the central
personal data file, because one of the things
I think will be very useful, with one based on
attitudinal survey to get people’s perspective
about behavioral pattern and why they decide to
participate and why they don’t, I think it will
be also very useful to get a demographic
and not just arrogant, what does the Federal
workforce look like. Because that OPM you
can go on the website and get that pretty
much right-away. I think it would be
fascinating if we can do this, and I think we can take the
actual participants over time, and compare that
to raise ethnicity, other types of demographic data, some central personal data file and we can very easily find
out who is participating, you know,
who is not participating. And from the demographic
perspective [inaudible] are people making higher incomes
more likely to participate, when do people
start dropping out, what is the race
and ethnic profile and that be groups
that might want to get more sort
of outreach more to. So if we can get, to be able to combine
those few databases and do a longitudinal study I think it would be just
very powerful analytics. Okay, thank you! Marshall! Some of us cheated and
actually talked among ourselves before the group convenes. Surprise! Surprise! And especially the
Inspector General’s office can [inaudible] quickly. But I’m going
to go back to something you were sort of driving
us towards earlier and it is exactly… the conversation
of the last five minutes is exactly the conversation I participated in
for too many years, because I also like
others around the room had been involved in
the CFC for years, which is how do we… we are not coming at it from a
donor-centric perspective. We are coming at it still
from the perspective of how do we get the
participation of… so that the charities
can raise more money. And I am the charity
world, so thank you, keep doing it, but I don’t think we
are going to crack the nut, I don’t think we’re actually
going to figure this out until we can somehow use
the data, the metrics, the tools that are
available to us to ask what do you
Federal employees want, why do you want the campaign? I’m delighted you
participate in the campaign but why do you
want the campaign? So Marshall what happens
if they say we don’t? Then we go away. Okay. I mean this, the hardest
thing for all of us who operate in this campaign to keep in mind is the
campaign belongs to the donors, and it’s extraordinarily easy
to slide away from that truth. And we spend our time
hunting the donor and what we need to figure out
is a way to have a dialogue and the break down that
you have is perfect. But we need to have
a way to have a dialogue that gets the donors to say,
well I want a way… I want the meetings to give
to the environmental community and sure I’ve got the Internet but I like having a vehicle where you bring these
screened charities that have some [inaudible] and then I can go down the list, I make this up, I don’t know that a
single Federal employee would speak those words,
I suspect they would. But somehow we have to
figure out a way to understand what the Federal
employees are looking for and then we can say, okay
we can give it to you. Got it, it makes sense. On like to be able to
expand on what he is saying you mentioned that we are
out there hunting the donor, I would guess before it
says hunting the donor. We are talking about look
at the metrics and seeing and I know there are PCFOs and Directors out
there that are sounding at the idea of being able to actually look
at meaningful data, and many times we
do our new surveys we end up with largely
anecdotal data, but at the same time it’s a very, very limited
realm of our own campaigns. If we could come up with
a… Market database. Consistent. Right, now we are consistent
across the country, across the Federal workforce who would be extremely,
extremely useful. Okay, very good. The data doesn’t exist and
you are not going to get. It’s the logical
thing to ask for. If I were a researcher
and not familiar with what you can think, that what
we’re asking for too. But the Federal privacy
act doesn’t allow us to have access to
that information. We don’t know at
the campaign level and OPM does not know
about the national level, who gets and who doesn’t because it’s not
recorded that way. I think we could create… I would imagine there is
database, I know we… there is [inaudible] and we have a
sense of the donors and if we can compare it to, then we can build…
and I think [inaudible], we have to look into
what or obviously [inaudible], I think reporting this
information in aggregate so long as not identifying any
individual that aggregate data, I hope they already
is doing that, so it’s just a matter
of climbing the part to donor database, but what we have,
we need, OPM [inaudible]. Well, let me just
facilitate a little bit because I mean this is the
exact kind of conversation that needs to happen. So everybody has
said the truth. You said what you wanted, you said what we don’t have, and now what, again cause effect
recommendation, so… We didn’t check that. We can’t get from official
sources from the databases. There are federations,
commercial, there are federations who
have surveyed their doings, and Marshall has dome
some statistical analysis of giving trends, most of them have been
demographics either. I have got demographics
for surveys that we’ve done for our
clients which represents, we don’t have the role in
[inaudible] of national Federal going back 20 years. So we know who
these people are, but we don’t know
who [inaudible] groups are, and what we don’t know from
those people who volunteer, answer the surveys
when we ask them, what’s your rank,
what’s your UGS, why did you get [inaudible]? Right. And, so maybe we could and I haven’t really been
looking in what are… what we know from our own
constituency marketing analysis and research together we can’t provide an entire… Data center. …universal picture
for the committee or we can give them
some indication of who these [inaudible] are and
why they have been [inaudible], sure. There is always a certain
expectation I think when you come into a program
that it has certain things. I certainly had
that expectation. And then you find
out that the truth, and then you try to figure out
what can you do to up the ante and I think that’s
what Director Barry has given us an
opportunity to do, is to take a look at this
thing beginning to end, make some recommendations, get something at him,
short wins, early wins, long-term strategy all
that, all that stuff and I think we can
do it with this group. I mean I don’t want
to belabor this but it seems to me is if you… a lot of these contributions
are online, most of them, if you could… voluntarily you could
may just check something if they want to do
and give you a sample, it may not be perfect, but you could institute
that moving forward. Give an idea. Yeah, we give you an idea,
would be voluntary, in that way you don’t run a
foul of all the privacy laws and that kind of stuff, exactly. On an ongoing basis,
simple and cheap. Right. It’s my political hat, that’s how we would
dewily in the old days. Absolutely. For all very good thoughts, and again I think, like I said, everybody is right at the table. I am going back to my
two original questions, how many charities have
we increased in number to include in the categories and what has the
dollar fall off been that has put us
into this position? I think we fluctuated
on total charities but I think we were encouraging, it kept right around about
25,000 trick charities. National and local. National and local. 25,000 national
and local charities. Correct, and again don’t
quote that actual number, but that’s in that
ballpark range from memory, and last year we raised
$281 million last year, the year before $282, some modicum below that in 2008 and some modicum
below that in 2007. So I think my last
statistics I looked at from 1998 to current we
were over 200,000 annually, 200 million annually
in donations collected pledged, pledged donations. So that’s a sizable number
that has been consistent. But we are starting
to see that for, whether it’s economic
reasons or otherwise. With the pledged amount
have we seen a drop off on those pledged amounts
not coming through? There is shrinkage. I don’t have this
percentage of the shrinkage but overall the total
dollars have been increasing up until last year. So right around the 280 million,
270 million range annually, from other people who have
perspectives longer than mine can certainly weigh in. [inaudible] has been
about 17% to 18%, it’s been consistent
for last five years, it happened [inaudible] it
was kind of like stabilized. And I look at shrinkage like accounts
receivables uncollected. That’s helpful. Yes. I mean we are not over the
brink yet, but… -it has b-Yeah.abilized. Right. Keith! Yes sir! Marshall again! Is it possible for
staff to brief this body with basic statistics
about the campaign? Because what I’m observing
is a tremendous unevenness of people facilitating
with the basic numbers and those of us who have
been even blessed or cursed with awareness of the numbers want everybody to be
at the same level. We can do that. So I think it would
help everybody. We can do that. I would add to that. If there are particular points
of legislative intervention or change or policy change
over the last 20 years or so, they may have impacted the
number of organizations in or out, that kind of thing
would be interesting. We can do that to
give you the timeline of executive order changes, legislative
changes and the like. And is there a difference… substantial difference
depending upon the region, geographic regions? You mean in terms of
donations, received, okay, budgets. Jean, I want to let you jump in. Thank you! When we talk about
unevenness of the number, I think it’s also important
to talk about labor costs. One of the reasons we may
have administrative cost as well is we’ve got
Federal employees helping out with their campaign. That’s going to go away
with [inaudible] volunteer but just going to change. So I think we need to
look very carefully at the number of hours that
are currently being logged, what we can expect
those numbers to be. We had a hard time getting
campaign executives in Chicago, that’s weird. And I’m sure there are different
levels of sophistication at each agency in terms of how they track
loaned executive time. So I don’t know if
you work with database or work reports or you capture
at cost accounting level. I’m not sure it’s
captured uniformly to say of the full
cost of the campaign including Federal employees
what’s the real cost? Can we ask for that? That would very heavy,
very useful number to have. Could be a suggestion,
could be a recommendation. And then I want
to end up with… Before we could do, probably a data collection and a geographic location
is going to apply. There’s been a
tremendous request over the last couple of
years and it’s been… and we’ve talked
about it [inaudible], because the campaigns are
geographically located, agencies across those lines don’t have a consolidated
figure [inaudible] as far as that donors give. And that’s something
that 1417 is probably the address [inaudible] there is certainly something
that [inaudible] are interested and I’m not sure
there is [inaudible]. And that you mentioned
the 1417 is our form, OPM’s form approved by OMB
to collect data on CFC. But of course there is an
inherent challenge there, OMB doesn’t want the form to
be too burdensome on the public, and so there are restrictions
that they will give it to OPM in terms of asking for
additional information, so I just want to
put that out there. What’s [inaudible] on that point
is some of you goes up 1417. I can see the value in that. How do you go,
what time is it because how do the people
hear and do you see that it is all top of my head, a whole bunch of field
offices of social security, partners are staying
if they are not seeing that it’s not happy
of that level, so again I haven’t
thought of that, that’s the next thing
to be added to that. Good! The other thing, was this
a huge point now about overall contribution
on an annual basis, I would challenge
as we’ll look at it from not only nominal value
but a real value perspective, that is what is the real
value of the campaign at the end of the campaign year, that is compared
to some base year because it’s real easy to say that the normal
value is going top. Right. I hypothesize that
the overall value, it can be [inaudible], going down minutely but
diminishing slowly over time only because we
have to consider the real versus
the nominal value. So you’re talking indexes and
inflation and cost of money and all that other good stuff. Yes sir. Well the account stuff. All right, okay. At this point, I really
do want to get to, since we know we are going to
have a sub-committee schedule and the key folks are
going to get with me on that schedule. We have to allow time for
questions from the public and any testimony
or presentations that want to be made. So hopefully you can hear
me Mary in the auditorium, if you have anything we
want to open that mic up and hopefully those questions
have been written on cards or it can be presented
pretty succinctly from there, if not, I think we are going
to allow Curtis the media, is that… Yes. Okay, so we will let the… I checked that there
are four people… there is one person here that
left who has a question. So George could you
disclose the question? Thank you listeners
for [inaudible], this is George, I am the Director of membership
for the United [inaudible]. I also served
as Campaign Director for the combined
Federal campaign for the national
cavalry for seven years. So I have some
experience and knowledge about the workings
on both sides of CFC. Currently OPM process for
making an application like a non-profit to
participate in CFC is done by paper application
requiring an instant signature. It’s [inaudible] initiative
on permitting online or digital applications. Thanks George! [inaudible] Go ahead. I think the answer is if anyone recognizes CFC
participation [inaudible] a long time Federal employee
has a history of CFC, a three time… any Federal workers do not
have an awareness of CFC and would be possible for OPM, the Federal departments
of agencies, HR departments to present CFC as
part of an on-boarding process. Having experience and going through various
agencies in the nation’s capital I have encountered
many Federal employees that have no clue what CFC
[inaudible] educated me. I feel if it could be
somebody who has an education and to help us
with participation. Third question, OPM’s employees
express online platform, which includes a module for CFC is not a universal
electronic platform used by many Federal
departments and agencies. Many Federal employees
would donate to charities through electronic giving versus
the paper-driven pledge form. If given the opportunity how can
guidelines be further relaxed to assist in the increase
of online giving? Thank you for letting me
share these questions. Yeah, yeah, and Tom we
have made a good point. We’re definitely going to have
the committees be involved in answering all
these questions, but just for the record Tom, for the first one OPM has
already begun design and development of
an online application for national and
international charities. So having said that
we obviously need to test to make sure
that it works properly and would do so with the pilot. So we hope to be
within weeks of knowing how close we are
to doing it for 2012, I have an inherent cutoff. If we can’t get confirmation
from our CIO’s office at that given time, it’s
going to be a 2013 pilot. So you are absolutely right, we should be pushing green, we should definitely
be trying to figure out how can we save paper. I don’t believe electronic
signatures are an obstacle here. We have been certainly working
with our general counsel to make sure that
that’s not a problem, and I agree with Tom. So some of these
other questions, we will definitely
get back to you as these subcommittees break out and start to address
employee express, new employee orientation, that certainly sounds
like a great idea. In fact, I know we’ve
talked about it here at OPM making it part of our
orientation process. I don’t know why
it’s not all ready. Any others, Mary? No. Was that a no? Yes. Yes, that sounds a no. Okay, all right. That was a no. Thank you! So Curtis is… -are we okay, immediate question
-Members of the meeting here do you have any questions? Nothing, no, so
we’ll be open later if you want to
address the questions. I have a question. Yes. You were just talking
about the electronic giving, I didn’t hear the
word ‘local charity’, were you going to include all
of the people, all the groups? Well what I was speaking of was the online
application process of, we’re doing a beta
test on nationals. Since OPM controls that process we’ve engaged in the business
requirements for that, for all of those groups. We hope that if
that’s successful we roll that out nationwide, that it could be
used as a benchmark for local business requirements. And I know I’ve gotten
some local organizations already say they have a tool, they’ve invested some things, so there may already be a
best practice for the locals. Are there any other
questions, comments? Wow, I said this would
take an hour, but… I think awareness is a
really big problem actually, I was in, I was in fact three years
before I didn’t lose it this way and then once [inaudible]. No, it’s awareness, it’s also just ease of
making a contribution, if you make it too bureaucratic
it just, you’ll lose a lot. There is a lot of things
I think out there that we tend to just go on
and do the same old and the world is changing
all around us electronically and everything else. That’s why it’s… I think you
can reinvigorate this process with a lot of new ideas and we appreciate the questions
that came earlier to Keith, I think they are all spot on. I guess what surprises me
more than anything else when I ask the question, how many charities
are we dealing with? And I am thinking of,
well substantial number. But when you say
25,000 charities, how do you identify
within 25,000, where your interest
and concern is? Right. I can speak from a
local perspective in running a campaign. When we generally… when we address our
donors in a local level, [inaudible] have
gone in five years and we give them a short list
along with our charity listing and say this is where a majority
of our dollars have gone in the past years. Many times, once we
do that [inaudible] open up the charity listing they
might [inaudible] 10 or 20s, but you know,
even that 10 or 20, we’ll say 20 names of
different charities, some thing is going
to get processed, clean water is going
to be a concern, the environment is
going to be a concern, and then it’s like, okay, then they’ll go and have a look and we may find something
else on the charity listing, but this is reality, this is reality out there
when you have great money because what I have
had situation is where I have employees like
this doesn’t have one. I am not an eye-candy
[inaudible], and the fear is you can
have that charity listing, they are not going [inaudible]. Their eyes glaze over. [inaudible]. Absolutely, it is, and that’s
another [inaudible] committee because we don’t
use [inaudible] but do you know there
is something different and everybody wants
their own copy. They realize the challenge,
they realize the challenge, I saw another comment
or hand, Shan! Yeah, I just want to add that because we are under
tight timeframe which I greatly appreciate and we have four
distinct sub-committees, is there a place where
you create place for what are called
parking lot issues, things that you
really can’t address, but need to address the
[inaudible] not urgent? [inaudible] Right, and Tony is
going to be helping me. We just kind of described and most of these are parking lot
things or discussion items and we are going to go back
and kind of re-raise those and won’t have that same process when we do our actual
sub-committee sessions, it will be lot fewer people
on a lot more focused areas, and then we can certainly
start to prioritize, okay, would this get
in as a recommendation to Director Barry Wood,
if not where would it fall, how it would be placed? Right. To that end also there
is [inaudible]design, will there be some way as we
[inaudible] or some here it is that will be checked
back on the progress of any other sub-committees
[inaudible]. Well, that’s
going to actually get into the intent
of the next steps because that’s what the
larger meeting is going to be. So… but before I get into that I saw
another hand, was it you Jean? I just wanted to say, in
social security, I use Google, I am not sure if we
invest a lot of money in infrastructure and that. And I think one of the reasons why we are losing a
lot of young donors is, people don’t want to
go to online giving, they are giving directly. They are giving directly because they are trying to
get more of their dollar, the donation dollar
directly to charity. And there is a cost
associated with running CFC, and the young donors know that they can just
google charity they want and then use PayPal or
their online banking, it gets directed to charity and I am not sure how
we can… [inaudible]. And what that does is
it gets an individual in their own community which has a more identity to that community as opposed
to one of the 25,000. Go ahead! You’re really building
donor confidence from several
different aspects and really I think they have
demonstrated the impact of the donor dollars to
use with the nonprofits as well as how it’s been
administered [inaudible], I mean that’s…
and donate a $1000, [inaudible] then got in their
administrative and fundraising cost out of that. So it’s really reaching the
people that they are serving. Right. You have the labor cost. So I mean we are
investing a lot of money in running this program, how much of this,
all of this energy is actually getting the share
that we are trying to serve? And that’s a good point
and I want to wrap on that, I’ll give you the
last stuff is that, I always challenge people
when I see or hear numbers $10 text to Haiti or
for 9/11, all weekend they ran a $10 to honor,
honor the victims, but do we know does $10 go
to that charity, does 15 cents, does $5, we don’t know, and I think one thing that
we have as a benefit is that people do know upfront, is it 15%, is it 26%,
that kind of thing. So I think there is a lot
of, I know, you are right, access is part of
it and it’s easy. But when it goes
through that pipeline and [inaudible]through
Verizon and everybody else who takes a piece of it, how much actually
goes to Haiti or to that effort that
they are donating to? So again things
to think about. I was just going to say that there is one thing we had cost
associated with the campaign but it’s a tough
thing to demonstrate what the value of
the campaign is. I would hope that part
of our responsibility is initially to
introduce to the donors and again look the
value of campaign, what additional measure of
significant value we provide through this campaign that would be just not
for the campaign. And I think if you
can do that then maybe some of the younger
people who do give directly or maybe give in other ways, I say, you know, I get this,
I understand [inaudible] just more advanced stage
to have a campaign because [inaudible] lot of people are going to
give through direct mail, [inaudible] process of contribution, serving a lot more contribution,
they had it run through, make their campaign like this. So I think we need
to really understand what the additional value
is of having this campaign, how it ranks with what
other meeting would be, and make that case. And I think the initial thing
was the collective effort. Yeah. Through this combined effort,
more is better than one. So through the combined
Federal campaign, through the collective efforts
of all Federal postal military, we can make positive change that we probably
couldn’t do individually. So on that note I’m going
to talk a little bit about the concept of when we bring
all this back together. The idea was that we have three
meetings, this was the first. So that means that we have at
least, two; two more, right, and that’s where
the sub-committees will bring their
recommendations and thoughts that we evaluate
them as a group. So if I look at my
timetables compass, it’s going to put me right
after Thanksgiving, early December to sort of have
another come together meeting and it typically is a little
chilly about that time, so we weren’t thinking
of having it here in DC. Are there any thoughts of where we could do is sort of
a mid-point in the country whether it’s South
of Kansas City… Florida isn’t the
middle of the country, but, no, I hear it. So we were thinking
maybe Texas that area. St. Antonio is a very nice. St. Antonio, I think
we’ve heard that before. New Orleans. In line with [inaudible]
Sustainability Challenge, I think that we should
look into something like GSAs Health Department Center, sharing all the major
cities across the country. That would save a lot of money,
and it’s easier for all of us. It’s important to be in a room, that’s why I’m here
today [inaudible]. We did that today, but [inaudible] for the
second meeting. Okay. Postal service is a wonderful
facility outside Oklahoma City, we can do it together. Okay. So why don’t we do
this for next step? Postal service can give me an
idea of how that would work. Oklahoma, and then I think
I heard not Florida, not Vegas but Texas. I tried. We acknowledge that,
I appreciate it. Just so that there is a more
central traveling point, because some of us
came pretty far, some of us decided
not to even come. You talked about a third meeting and you were talking about the
West Coast in the third meeting. I am talking about
the West Coast. Okay. I’m just… I’m sorry, but I will
also in the [inaudible]. Oh no, no, no
that’s on the table. That’s on the table. Postal is on the table and then I’m trying to offer
you all a third option of physically giving together, because I don’t
think there’s… as great as that is, I think this debate
and seeing each other and the postures is also
a communication tool, so just my thought. But I’m open to the
Commission members. I’m looking was cost-effective
way to get it done. Okay. So what we’ll do is we’ll
set up the criteria, find out some information specifically on
where it would be, and including
the GSA Telework option and we will send it back out to
you, maybe we would do a vote. Has it been helpful to
eyeball one another and get a feel of where
people are coming from as opposed to being
on the phone? -Yes.
-Yes. Yeah. Those of you that
are on the phone are comfortable with the fact
that you’ve gained a lot of information today? I don’t feel like I
had the opportunity where I don’t know the opportunity or
desire to jump in as much about how I been there,
but again that’s, you know, that’s just
my personal opinion. Particularly I had
a great dialogue, so that is really
interesting to listen it but I felt more
like I was looking as a part as opposed
to participate. Okay. I would agree with that, because sometimes it takes some aggressive chances
of [inaudible]. I think, I really do
appreciate the idea of doing some kind of call or maybe
having a compromise doing what on second meeting
in person again, so that you have a chance to meet the
sub-committees in persons again and then have our
third meeting perhaps on the phone might
be an idea too. It’s very valuable either
way on the phone or I imagine in person it
was very valuable. So I think we are going
win-win either way. And I agree with those
comments as well. The strong line I have
right now is about a 20 second delay between
the audio and the video. Oh! Okay. Good point, thanks Luke! Well, I think we had
a good first session, will everyday agree? -Yes.
-Okay. So I motion to adjourn. Okay. I get a second? All right. Thank you very much!
I really appreciate it. If you have any comments or
questions about your assignment please come see me.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *