In what circumstances would you support reorganization or closing?
 

Let me preface this by saying I don't speak for my organization; I'm just going to share my thoughts and ask for others'.

The DePauw situation made me think a little bit about the circumstances under which I think chapters should be closed or reorganized. All I come up with are financial insolvency or risk management/moral standards issues.

While I think it's okay for IHQs to put pressure on chapters to maximize membership size and to offer support to help them achieve the increase, I don't think the chapters should be re-organized or closed and brought back while former members are still on campus. And I don't think they should be closed until they are actually running in the red, not in anticipation of financial trouble. If a group can be small but stable, then, while I think GLOs should do what they can to make that chapter want to grow, they ought to be glad to have the chapter.

Basically, I think the GLO should have to decide if it's better not to have a particular chapter at all than to keep the members they have. The idea of dumping some of the girls you've got to change the reputation of the chapter shouldn't even be discussed.

As far as risk management or standards issues, I'd like to see them only revoke the membership of the guilty individuals, but if there was a pervasive or continual problem with a chapter, then I think revoking the charter is understandable.

What do you think? Especially those of you who have served the organization in a way that let you see the more businesslike side of things?

I don't think there is any hard and fast solution to when it is best to close a chapter. Having been involved on the collegiate and alumnae local and international levels, each and every situation is so unique. We lend the chapters resources, ensure regular touches and trainings and do as much as we can to ensure their long-term success. I think if there are a string of circumstances, that might impact a chapter closure. However, it also depends on the available resources to rehabilitate that chapter, as well.

The DePauw issue was not handled well, but I like to think this is atypical of the sorority in question, and of all sororities.

I do think if you're going to close a chapter, immediately reopening it is not a good solution. Like it or not, the chapter's reputation as an unsuccessful chapter is going to carry on campus and it needs time to go away from the campus consciousness.

There's nothing overtly wrong with cancelling a group of members who are not maintaining sorority standards, but it is foolish to think that these actions won't have repercussions or lead to multiple voluntary cancellations amongst other members. Even when only one or two people are laid off from a job, there are long-term and deep rifts within the company and the company's confidence is shaken-- the same is true within a student organization like a sorority. People are scared, start leaving, rumors begin swirling-- it's rarely a winning situation.

Like it or not, sororities are very much a business-- a non profit, but a business. I think we do the best we can, but mistakes happen and human nature happens.

-Risk management/safety issue: Repeated instances of dangerous activity, repeated alcohol/drug infractions, safety emergency.
-Hazing: Major hazing infraction or repeated hazing infractions.
-Financial loss: The fraternity cannot possibly support an ailing chapter anymore financially.
-Moral standards issue: Repeated standards infractions on a large scale.

I completely agree. If you really feel the need to take action against the chapter because it's struggling that badly, then it should be all or nothing. IMHO, if a chapter is so small that it can not support itself financially, then it's either time to step in and restructure or close it completely, especially if there is a house involved.

On the other hand though, what if a chapter is on a campus with no houses, where total might be 60 or so. At what point would it be time to step in? A chapter of 10 members could support itself financially, but would not be flourishing or reaching even close to its full potential. What should be done then?

I think they should leave it open.

If yoy have strong, comitted women who love their organization and sisters...when there's little financial issues involved...chapters with smaller numbers should be allowed to stay. Quality is always more important than quantity.

A chapter (the full chapter) should be closed only when the whole - as a charter - can no longer meet the standards and obligations as set forth by the fraternity/sorority as a whole.

Also, and from an NIC/IFC perspective, individual membership review may be necessary when certain members of the chapter may no longer be able to meet the standards and obligations set forth by the fraternity/sorority as a whole. Those that can - and do - meet the standards and obligations should not be punished for those who can not. Or will not as the case may be.

To be clear, individual membership review should be a last resort for any GLO and should never be taken lightly. But in many (most?) cases, and when possible, it seems like it might be advantageous to do so prior to closing the whole chapter. Again, I understand this isn't how most NPCs work. Just saying.

risk management, and hazing. I am a little leary of saying financial problems because if a chapter doesn't have a good financial advisor, it is really easy for even the "best" chapter to have problems with finances. Remember- the treasurer is usually only 20 years old and a full time college student.

I remember when I was in college and a sorority decided to close, the remaining "actives" were given alumnae status, however I believe that the national officers that worked on the closing helped the women form into an official "club" on campus. So while they were no longer a member of the WPA (the NPC org on campus), they still had club meetings and had activites as a group. The club ended up disbanding when the last alum graduated. basically they turned into a mini-alumnae chapter (since we were a small college town with no real alumnae chapters within an hour of us).
I was always impressed that the national officers helped them do this, rather than just dropping them cold (as we all know sometimes happens).

I think all the posts are good food for thought, but sometimes its not so cut and dry--especially when there is a house involved.

Having been involved in some of these decisions, I can tell you they are heart wrenching, especially at older or single letter chapters. Leadership does the best they can with the information they have--and that is all we should really expect.

I don't support immediate recolonizations or reorganizations ever, unless it can be shown that the chapter members are agreeing to it VOLUNTARILY. "Turn in your charter or we'll close you" is not voluntary. "Pay off your $6000 debt in 3 months or we'll close you" is not voluntary. "Triple your chapter size in a semester or we'll close you" is not voluntary. "We're all seniors and juniors and happy to go alum early because we're completely burnt out" is voluntary.

And if your group does do one of these - YOU NEED TO TREAT THOSE NEW ALUMS LIKE GOLD. Don't tell them to not wear their letters. Don't tell them to stay away from the house. Don't say you want them involved and then flip the script when you realize, duh, they really are going to participate! If this truly is a voluntary closing, the new alums will be GLAD to step back and not rush or do stuff like that. The "new" active chapter will have to learn their history and who their alums are sooner or later - to try and hide it from them by doing the above things is disrespectful to the new girls as well as the old.

Hazing, risk management, etc - these should be dealt with by expelling the individuals that did it. If it keeps happening after that, close it up.

And as far as numbers are concerned, if there's not a huge house to fill, if there are enough to operate the chapter, and they manage to stay at that size, it shouldn't be an issue. Keep it open. Not everyone wants to be in a big chapter.

In a perfect world, no chapter would ever be closed. Everyone's dues would be paid on time, everyone would be presentable every time she left the house, everyone would show spirit 24/7, no one would ever even dream of hazing, and everyone would have high moral standards.

We don't live there.

Sororities are becoming more of a business - the amount of litigation alone has raised the cost of each chapter & each GLO to almost prohibitive levels. That leaves the GLO putting more stress on each chapter to produce, however that GLO defines it. From what I hear, closing a "weak" chapter and recolonizing is becoming the wave of the future. In regards to DePauw, I'd be interested in knowing if the sorority involved would have lost their charter completely had the entire chapter been given alumnae status, or would the University have allowed the chapter to close and recolonize.

With all of this in mind, I think that the chapter ForeverRoses mentions handled the situation is by far the best I've ever seen or heard. Kudos to whichever GLO was involved in that!

I <3 You.

Doubtful, unless it's a "do or die" sort of school, and as we've seen here, that may not even be worth the effort. I doubt very much that my sorority will ever try an immediate recolonization again unless there are very special circumstances. And now that this practice has been brought to light on a nationwide basis, any group that tries it would just be foolish.

I think the university would have allowed a recolonization if it would have happened immediately (i.e. this spring) and if the women would have had their housing question taken care of by the national sorority and the Delta chapter house corp. This whole thing just showed a serious lack of planning.

Whenever it's in the best interest of the national organization or chapter to close/reorganize, I'm for it.

As to what constitutes that "best interest" standard, I'll know it when I see it.

In this exact way, having a review etc, a GLO would have to be crazy to try that again. To wait until the end of the school year, that would be a different story. I can name at least 5 GLOs who consider that policy.

Last year, one of our chapters was closed with a definite recolonization date set, with cooperation of the local Panhellenic. I feel that's the way any chapter closing/recolonization should be handled - unless there's a house or such involved. I honestly don't know how that could/should be handled.

And I agree - this specific example shows a definite lack of planning!

Given the amount of publicity on this story though - any group that tries to immediately do it will probably have a problem, even if they do wait until the end of the school year, unless the current members of the chapter come forward and say they're OK with it. People who haven't really been mentioned in this DePauw affair are the women who were given bids/accepted bids/were technically still pledging. I can't imagine what they must be going through.

Agreed about doing this in the coming year. They really shouldn't have even taken a new member class, if this was even considered at the time.

I wouldn't be at all surprised to see these "unwanted" women form a local, and for several others to jump on their bandwagon.

I think some groups do not want to do this because there could still be liability issues, according to the insurance companies--because if it looks, like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's a duck. If the group was entirely former collegiate members of a sorority and they were doing social and service activities as a group, then it is possible that someone may still consider that group affiliated, and, in our litigious society, if something were to happen, the sorority could be sued. What would be better would be to form a local alumnae association, keep it covered by the national insurance, and try to get members from other chapters to join.

agdsquirrelgirl gave an example of her campus, where no one is at total, although it appears that most are within ten of total. i would imagine that these chapters are not in trouble with their headquarters membership wise.
have any of these chapters ever been at total-have all of them been at total? it sounds like panhellenic council might want to review the stats in order to answer those questions. the campus may benefit from total being slightly lowered so that at least some of the chapters are at total. why keep a number that noone can reach, just because that is what is has been?

i do have to ask, since the chapters are so near total, why they did not hold an informal recruitment and reach total-especially the chapter who is one below total? out of 59 girls, someone in the chapter has to know a girl on campus who would love to join and would fit in.

there is one chapter on my daughters campus that is below total.the other chapters are way above. they participated in formal recruitment, got what my daughter says is a great pledge class(although they did not pledge quota), but they have not held any informal recruitment events to recruitment more members. they could conceivably reach total if they put forth a major effort , but they don't. while i don't think the chapter deserves to be closed, i think that they might benefit from a visit from a recruitment expert who could help them approach recruitment from a different angle.

i think that people get complacent or don't know how to operate outside the status quo. perhaps our international officers need to look at this and devise a plan and offer training for those chapters who consistently operate below total. the likelihood that the below total chapters will die off at some time significantly increases as the situation persists and the big get bigger while the small get smaller of maintain their small size. it would also behoove each international office to address the situation while the chapters lack a few members to meet total, before the downward spiral begins and playing catchup is almost out of the question.

But by that same token, you could put the liability on the university if it's all university students. All you would have to do would be to say in the constitution that it's an alum association that any alum member of ABC sorority can join if they live in the area. The fact that the only reason an alumna would live there is if she's an "early" alum and going to school still is not the fault of the sorority. To deny a group like this could be trouble too - then you get into things like an alumna has to have graduated from college, has to be 22 or over, etc. I'm pretty sure we all have an alum in an alum chapter somewhere or another who didn't graduate or is younger.

Many great ideas and posts were mentioned in this thread.

First, the DZ and DePaw situation was a fiasco for DZ and gives a black eye for all greeks looked at by outsiders.

Closing a chapter in a R M situation is often tenious. If a few members haze should the whole chapter be held accountable? No. If it is a continuing situation then should the whole chapter be closed? Yes.

Membership.

Who decides what is the total membership?
Most NIC want to have their chapters at least within 10% of all Greek membership of Fraterities. There has to be some limits as how low you can go as I have been told. (this brings up the reason why).
When visitations to chapters by paid HQ members, it cost the same for a 100 person chapter as it does for a 10 person chapter. So the per cost of getting the bang for the buck is a problem there. Where does a National spend the money to get its best worth? Numbers, yes, of course they are important. But are they that vital unless they are so low as to not be functional?

Money owed to Nationals?

Pay your bills, that is the life blood of any Greek Organization and makes it work!

Get in arrears and get into trouble.

Being a Greek National Organization is a Multi Million Dollar business and needs to be run as such. Each member and chapter is a share holder.

Today, many National Organizations are not flush with deep pockets. They are run on a strict budget and cuts have been coming for all of us.

Is there a difference between NIC and NPC being the two largest of the GLO's and thinking, yes there is. Should there be some change in thinkings, maybe.

Food for thought!:)

The sorority I was talking about that turned itself into a club- since I wasn't part of it, I'm not sure if they were an official alumnae association or not, but from a University standpoint, in order to have access to meeting rooms and other resources, they had to be a recognized as a "club" by campus life-- so that's what they were. (as for the policy of joining I believe they were technically open to all, but but who would want to join a club that was for alum XYZ members?)

tom:

"total is the allowable chapter size, as determined by the College Panhellenic, and includes both new members and initiated members," as quoted from the NPC green book. "it is determined after studying the current size of the chapters, the availability of potential members, the expected growth in college enrollment and the most desirable chapter size for the campus."

"total figures should be realistic to result in the majority of chapters reaching total chapter size. if all of the chapters are about the same size, a reasonable Total may be determined by dividing the total number of new members and initiated members by the number of chapters."

"reevaluation of the total chapter size may be desirable when the majority of chapters reach and/or exceed the established total, or when no chapter has reached the established total size in several years."

"RESOLVED, that college panhellenic councils prior to evaluation and/or changing total chapter size consult with the NPC area advisor who shall notify NPC delegates with chapter on the campus of this evaluation."

Since I have never personally been involved in this, does anyone know of a circumstance where a quick-turnaround reorganization or recolonization actually worked? It would seem to me that if a chapter lost it's charter it would take AT LEAST a year or two to get over the stigma of having lost it's charter (regardless of reason) and then I would think that it would take a major PR effort to get the ball rolling (which I can't see happening if you have disgruntled alum members walking around campus).

In a nutshell, I would think that a group would want to stay off campus for at least 3 years before even attempting to return. But what do I know?

but was agd on campus continously or did they take some time off and then came back on?

Sometimes you have to close up shop, allow all to go alumni and graduate, and start new - build the house rep from the ground up. Usually along with breaking ground or opening a new house.

Usually with a nationals rep on campus for a year.

A sorority reorganized recently at Ga Southern and from what I hear, is doing great! My daughter went through recruitment before the reorganization and said that they were the one group almost everyone cut the first day because the members were so unenthusiastic. You know how at a lot of rushes, the members sing and clap at each house as you're entering? She said the members just stood there and watched them silently as they entered.

I can see why the national office reorganized. On a campus like that, you don't have enough girls who are 'not your typical sorority girl' to fill the house and pay bills, etc. Either you're the type or if you aren't, you participate in the tons of other activities on that campus. It was simply a downward spiral for the chapter.

Thank you!

The main thing that sticks out with your post is within "reasonable numbers".

According to the last Greek Advisor at my Alma Mater where there are only three Sororities, they were not making quota so therefore no more would be allowed to present to come to campus. We have a campus of @ 6,500 people so there are bodies there fro recruitment.

Maybe that is why this quota thing has always been a problem with me!:mad:

quota is different than total.

quota is the maximum number of new members a chapter can pledge. to quote the green book again:

"quota is set each year during formal recruitment by vote of the college panhellenic council. npc recommends that in order to be flexible in quota setting one of the two quota methods outlined be used:

quota setting method 1

quota shall equal the number of women accepting at least one invitation to the first or second round of invitational events divided by the number of fraternity(womens) chapters.

example: registered number of pnms-350
#accepting first invitational event-300
# of NPC groups=6
300 divided by 6=50
quota will be 50"

which means that every chapter may pledge a maximum of 50 new members. each fraternity regardless of size, is entitled to pledge the full quota at any time during the year even if by doing so, the allowable total chapter size is exceeded and the formal recruitment period is over.

the alternative method (2) uses an average percentage of the women pledged during the last three years, divided by the number of fraternity chapters. quota equals the number of women registering and attending the first membership recruitment function, multiplied by the average %, divided by the number of chapters.

now i do know that some cpcs, to maximize the number of women the chapters can take, and thusly maximizing the odds that the remaining women will recieve a bid, will take the number of women who attended preference parties divided by the number of chapters as quota.

"reasonable Total" means a total that the majority will be able to achieve and sustain. in other words, if no chapter is a total, then cpc should not raise total-perhaps they should reevaluate and lower total. if all chapters are over total, then total should be raised, or cpc should think about inviting another sorority to come on to campus.

That's an issue with Panhellenic, but as far as what I wrote goes, that's the current situation.

Maybe I forgot to mention, but I thought I did...all hold COBs in the spring. However, again, retention rates are sometimes an issue...as well as girls that are under hours or are forced to leave.
On this campus, it is unlikely the groups will die out any time soon. I was just giving an example of chapters that are small in the first place because of the nature of Greek life here and because of the nature of the campus.
Chapters here endure the strain of year round recruiting...it's not really an issue of being complacent but of the PNM pool.

I cannot speak for them, but Kappa at Georgia Southern went through reorganization this fall (per vote of the chapter, I believe) and it's my understanding they're doing well.

our chapter at U Penn. reorganized back in 2005 I believe. They are doing well, despite some upset when it first happened. I belive it was only a year and a half or two full years of being gone before they recruited again.

We were on campus last semester. The existing collegians were given alumna status. There's a thread about it in the Recruitment forum. Two of our international officers went there in person and talked with the women who were being given alumna status. The women were strongly encouraged to immediatley be active alumnae and were given all of the options available to them to do that, including a Junior Circle, which is what we call our alumnae groups for women under 35. They were wonderful women who had been working very hard and they received recognition for that hard work. They were tired and hadn't had a great collegiate experience since they were struggling with numbers for a while.

This is the second Big 10 school where we've done this in the last 6 years. We also did it at the University of Michigan. That chapter is doing alright, but it has been a slower progression. They had their best recruitment year this year and are still building up numbers, but have shown a huge improvement. Different campuses yield different results.

At Michigan State, the Fraternity chose to not immediately recolonize for various reasons. We are renting that house out to either AOPi or ADPi (sorry, I can't remember which at the moment). We are behind Alpha Xi Delta for recolonization and recruitment is down all over the state due to our extremely poor economic situation, so it's difficult to estimate when that recolonization will happen. We are all pulling for it though. It's one of our earlier chapters.

The decision is based on so many factors that it's really hard to make a blanket rule. Campus climate, finances (especially when there is a house to consider), the general state of other NPCs on campus (you can note that several closed at Michigan State within a couple years of each other so that could be a factor), etc. I think a lot of it ends up being HOW it's done, not whether it is done. It is ALWAYS a heart wrenching decision as Heather pointed out earlier.

On the positive side, one of the chapters I oversee in PA (Lafayette) went from 12 to 43 members this year and we are so excited for them. They happened to find a large group of friends who were interested in joining a sorority together and all of them clicked. Since the initial group, those women have brought in more of their friends. On a campus where Total is 75, they will have a better chance to really compete in Formal Recruitment next fall with around 35 members returning to campus. With 12, it's simply overwhelming. We're very excited for them, but they worked hard and kept an open mind too. It has also been hard work for them to integrate so many newer members into the chapter but they are doing a great job.

but if seniors graduate in december or members drop due to hours, or grades or financial reasons and the chapter goes below total, the chapter could pledge new members (up to total) in the spring.

why have pnm numbers declined? has the female enrollment at your college declined?

i am not targeting your campus per se, because as i said i see this at my daughters campus(and other campuses)too. it is tiresome to feel that you are continually planning and holding recruitment events-you get burned out on recruitment. believe me i know! since no one on your campus is at total, it is not as big a deal right now. but i do think that panhellenic should re-evaluate the total figure and possibly lower it.

the chapter i advise went thru cob as a colony and i was with them as an advisor then. they had x amount of girls pledge the colony and our international office wanted us to maintain that number. girls would drop out and we would have to hold a series of recruitment events. they would pledge back up to the number they needed, a few more girls would drop out and we would have to hold some more events. even after the colony was installed as a chapter, they had some girls drop their membership , which put the chapter below total and we had to pledge back up to total. this went on for the first 2 years of their existance, but due to their hard work they have been over total their last two years. they are 4 years old.

now granted, there are only 2 npc sororities on campus and the campus enrollment is growing every year, but fgcu started out as a mainly commuter campus, there is no greek housing or suites or lodges, and both sororities overcame those obstacles. a third sorority will be coming on this fall.

the point i am trying to make is that when sororities first fall below total and do not get back up to total, and this is allowed to continue, they will find themselves falling farther and farther behind in the membership game, while the bigger sororities go that much more over total. then it becomes almost impossible for the smaller chapters to catch up.

Did the reorganization of Alpha Gamma Delta at Ohio State and the reorganization of Kappa at Ga. Southern involve girls going alum while they were still on campus and restarting with a colony picked by an extension team? I'm curious how it could go down so differently than DePauw.

Can you do a re-organization or re-colonization without making the current girls go alum? (I mean, it doesn't seem like the words allow for it, but why couldn't you, in fact, start with the girls you had, rather than from scratch, if they were still going to be on campus anyway?)

Weirdly, I can understand closing the chapter for four years to let everyone graduate and trying to colonize again with a new reputation, but I really hate the idea of dumping the girls that were just recruited in the last few years. It makes it about rejecting them as damaged goods, and that's really distasteful to me. How could it ever communicate anything other than, "If we could only get rid of you, then we can be really cool."

I'm not delusional about what incorporation mean in terms of shared responsibility and costs, but this rhetoric of being businesses is very unattractive. Sure, I know that since the GLOs are incorporated and have costs, members and chapters must meet their financial obligation to the organization. But it shouldn't become about maximizing the money in some way beyond the costs of operation.

I'm not busting on you, Honeychile, but if re-organizations become the wave of the future, national Greek life is done, in my opinion. No one joins a group to be at the mercy of IHQ. They know they are joining a national organization and expect IHQ to serve their needs in living out the sisterhood; they don't regard themselves as the pawns of the ladies at the top. It's also disgusting if you look back on any organization's history and ideals that it would come to that: opening and closing franchises because they weren't profitable enough. No thanks.

wow dee!! i love to hear stories like the osu agds. we alums know how hard it is to restructure/reorganize a chapter successfully-there are so many obstacles to overcome. i hope that they continue their successes!!

good luck to your other chapters(and everyone elses) who are going thru the process right now!

Here's my bad analogy: instead of saying we are businesses, I think we should look for a similarity with churches or charities. (And NO, I don't worship Alpha Gamma Delta)

These groups also have expenses and insurance and are often incorporated, but you'd never hear them say, "Well, membership at that location is low, so we're going to close it and start again. And we'll make sure that none of the old members come to the new place because we don't want the reputation to follow us." Instead, maybe they change leadership at the location and give the group support to make sure that it offers what people actually need to be successful and grow.

Now, I know that GLOs are really just social clubs; I'm not kidding myself that they're that spiritual or altruistic. But surely we offer something other than popularity and image to attract members. There's something at the heart of it, right? Tradition, values, support, community, something authentic, right?

ETA: I want to make it clear that I was working on composing my posts before I was able to read ADGee's. I didn't want anyone to think I was being critical of her efforts. I'm glad those chapters are doing well. I'm glad they looked out for the new alums.

Actually I know that in many areas, specifically Baltimore where I am from, there have been a number of parishes that have closed due to lack of membership. In some instances parishes have merged w/ others and both "structures" have been kept in use, but the parish communities have been united for #'s purposes sharing staff.
Also I know in many cities Fire houses have been closed for budget and population density reasons- like the churches not a popular move.

Oh, yeah, I understand that churches and charities close locations, but they don't change the status of the people who they served at the previous locations. They are welcome to remain active members of the merged locations.

And I think that with churches and charities, they do have to weigh the lose of the tradition and support of closing a parish or location in the total financial location. No one really expects to dump the current parishioners and come back in the exact same location.