If this is a College-wide financial challenge, why are athletics and the Hanover Country Club the only entities impacted by this announcement?

The entire institution is impacted by the current financial challenges, but most areas across the institution have not yet finalized their changes and are therefore not in a position to make any announcements. Regarding athletics and the country club, we felt an obligation, as difficult as this news is, to let affected student-athletes, staff, alumni, and community members know as quickly as possible when our course of action became clear.

How significant are the savings to be incurred by these changes?

The total annual operating savings related to these announcements will be well in excess of $2 million, with about one-third attributable to program eliminations, one-third to the closure of Hanover Country Club, and one-third to administrative restructuring and other cost-saving measures.

Where will the money saved go? What will it be used for?

The funds saved by the reductions will be used to alleviate Dartmouth’s budget deficit, which is projected to be $150 million through the fiscal year ending on June 30, 2021.

ATHLETICS REDUCTIONS

Can’t the budget reductions be addressed without eliminating varsity sports?

The athletics leadership team focused first on achieving as many reductions as possible through administrative restructuring and other cost-saving measures that would have minimal impact on students. However, given the magnitude of the challenge, coupled with the reduction in athletic recruits, the department faced a difficult choice between severely impairing the student-athlete experience and competitiveness across all varsity sports, or reducing the size of the varsity program to ensure a high-quality, competitive Division I athletic experience in the remaining sports. After deep deliberation including consultation with the Dartmouth Athletics Advisory Board (DAAB), we chose the latter option, which was then affirmed by President Philip J. Hanlon ’77 and the Dartmouth Board of Trustees.

Was the impact on student-athletes fully considered?

No one who dedicates their career to college athletics embraces a chance to eliminate athletic opportunities. We are saddened for our current student-athletes in the affected sports, but given Dartmouth’s small student body in relation to the other Ivy League schools and most other NCAA Division I institutions, the current challenges forced us to accept the reality that a leaner program will be more sustainable in the long run. As painful as this process is, it’s  necessary to ensure our ability to provide high-quality experiences for future generations of Big Green student-athletes, to reflect the College’s aspirations for excellence, and to enhance the Dartmouth community with opportunities to rally around common goals and take pride in inspirational performances.

Who decided which varsity sports would be discontinued?

Ultimately, the decision regarding which varsity sports to retain and which ones to discontinue was made by Director of Athletics and Recreation Harry Sheehy after careful deliberation. The process conducted with Harry's leadership team was thorough and analytical involving the consideration of many factors, as well as consultation with the Dartmouth Athletics Advisory Board (DAAB). The decisions were affirmed by College President Philip J. Hanlon ’77 and the Dartmouth Board of Trustees.

What factors did the athletics leadership team consider?

To determine which teams would be eliminated, Harry and his team established a series of factors to assess the experience of student-athletes and the contributions each team makes to the community. Any one or two factors alone would have produced different decisions, but Harry and his team embraced a comprehensive approach and considered the following:

• Ability to provide a high-quality student-athlete experience
• Community-building power
• History and tradition of success
• Potential for future success
• Resources needed to attract and retain coaches
• Institutional cost, overall and per athlete
• Quality of facilities in relation to our peers
• National participation at high school and college levels
• Dartmouth's geography and climate
• The level of investment required to ensure future competitive success in sports in which we are not now experiencing success

Do you plan to cut more teams?

No. There are no plans for any further reductions.

How long has athletics been working on this plan?

In response to requests from President Hanlon over the last several months to reduce the number of recruited athletes per entering class by 10% and to find budget savings, the athletics leadership team began considering a variety of options. In light of the increased budget pressure created by the COVID-19 pandemic, the full scope of the department’s financial challenges become clear. The team subsequently narrowed down the options to one proposal, which was recently approved by President Hanlon and the Board of Trustees.

Why weren’t the sports chosen in a more public, inclusive process?

It is totally understandable that some will ask why we didn’t consult with a broader constituency of alumni, student-athletes, and others in making these difficult decisions.  However, a wider process would have inevitably resulted in public disclosure of Dartmouth’s consideration of eliminating some teams, which would have put hundreds of additional student-athletes and staff through an excruciating period of uncertainty, would have risked the departure of talented coaches and student-athletes in any sports perceived to be under consideration, and would have handed our competitors terrific fodder for negative recruiting across all of our teams. The analysis was shared confidentially with the Dartmouth Athletics Advisory Board (DAAB) for their valuable feedback and insight, but the final decision was an administrative one.

How many student-athletes are affected by the elimination of the teams?

These five teams comprise approximately 110 student-athletes.

How many total positions are being eliminated in Athletics?

A total of 15 positions are being eliminated in Athletics, including eight coaching positions.

How about the timing and the manner in which the news was communicated?

There is no perfect time for difficult news of this nature, and while it is far from ideal to do it at a time when the decisions cannot be communicated in person to all those personally affected, we felt an obligation to inform the impacted parties as soon as the course of action became clear. Affected staff members were informed in small virtual settings. Given the number of student-athletes involved (well over 100), there was no practical alternative to informing them simultaneously in one large virtual setting. Had the news been communicated to student-athletes in smaller, more intimate virtual settings, word would inevitably have spread instantaneously through texting and social media from the first group, risking inaccuracy and misunderstanding. Athletics staff and other campus partners will be following up with impacted students individually and in smaller groups where appropriate.

Couldn’t the impacted staff and student-athletes have been given advance notice?

It is totally natural for affected staff and students to feel they were blindsided, and to feel frustrated that the news came without advance warning. But once the decision was made, there was simply nothing to be gained by being only partially forthcoming about what might happen, only to follow up later confirming what would happen. We appreciate the emotional pain this news will cause, but the practical reality is that the pain would have been no less severe if it was conveyed in stages, and we would have rightly been accused of being disingenuous if we had communicated that something might have happened when in fact we knew that it would take place.

What kind of support will be provided to the student-athletes in the discontinued sports?

We will do everything possible to support the student-athletes in the affected sports, whether they choose to stay at Dartmouth—and we hope they do—or transfer elsewhere.  Those who stay will remain eligible for Dartmouth Peak Performance (DP2) services including academic and career counseling, and Athletics staff will be conducting virtual meetings with the impacted teams next week about a variety of other support services.  Students wishing to transfer will be supported in that pursuit, and those interested in transferring to institutions for which the application deadline has passed will have the option of withdrawing from Dartmouth and taking the year off to pursue those options, without jeopardizing their ability to return to Dartmouth if they desire.

Is Dartmouth using COVID-19 as cover to make unnecessary cuts?

Even before the COVID-19 pandemic, Dartmouth was facing a number of urgent, high-cost capital projects including renovation of our aging residence halls, the modernization our campus energy system and an upgrade to our IT infrastructure. Every unit across the College has been asked to contribute in order to meet these campus-wide needs. The severe and sudden financial pressure created by the COVID-19 pandemic has simply accelerated our need to find savings across Dartmouth. The COVID-related institutional budget deficit, projected to be $150 million through the fiscal year ending on June 30, 2021, is forcing every school and division, including athletics, to make difficult decisions to adjust to this financial reality.

Will there be opportunities for these student-athletes to pursue their sports in other ways at Dartmouth?

Dartmouth already offers club sports in both golf and swimming, and interested former varsity athletes are welcome to join those clubs. Fortunately, unlike some club sports, the national governing bodies for club golf and swimming allow immediate eligibility for former varsity athletes. In the case of men’s lightweight rowing, the inherent safety risks preclude consideration of a club program in that sport. Lightweight rowers are, however, eligible to try out for the men’s heavyweight team if they wish, as a number of talented lightweight rowers have transitioned to rowing for the heavyweight crew over the years.

What about the incoming recruits in the discontinued sports?

Dartmouth’s admissions office will not only honor the admission of the incoming recruits but will also entertain gap year requests from those students without requiring the standard commitment to enroll the following year, thereby providing them with the flexibility to pursue other collegiate options in the meantime if they wish.

Why choose swimming and diving again after doing it less than 20 years ago?

We expect some will question our decision to eliminate swimming and diving in particular, in light of the fact that this same sport was eliminated in late 2002 and reinstated in early 2003. But when our recent analysis reached the same conclusion as 18 years ago, and we realized that our current swimmers and divers would be no more or less impacted than the student-athletes in any other sport chosen for elimination, it simply didn’t make sense to arbitrarily exempt swimming and diving from consideration.

Why not delay the sport eliminations for a year to allow student-athletes to explore other options?

The urgency of the Dartmouth’s budgetary challenges, dramatically increased by the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, does not afford us that option, and, even if it did, the potential for incoming recruits and other team members choosing not to enroll this year, along with the difficulty of retaining coaches in such a circumstance, would likely result in an extremely unsatisfactory experience. For this reason, colleges rarely announce sport eliminations well in advance of their discontinuation.

Do you expect online petitions demanding reinstatement of the impacted sports?

In today’s world, it would be surprising if there were no online petitions demanding reinstatement of the affected sports. However, while we will fully appreciate the passion and sentiment such efforts would represent, many thousands of signatures, organized email campaigns, and social media posts will not change the reality of the current circumstances, nor will they reveal anything we don’t already know—that we’ve made decisions that were unexpected, and that will impact the affected student-athletes’ Dartmouth experiences. We are already aware of those unfortunate consequences. As difficult as the decisions were, we made them knowing they are in the best interest of Dartmouth and the long term success of athletics.

Can alumni and others raise funds to save the impacted sports?

In a community as passionate and supportive as Dartmouth, we anticipate that some alumni, parents, and others will advocate fundraising campaigns to save these teams. Some may make very generous pledges in support of such efforts. However, even if financial resources were plentiful, these sports would exist without any admissions support opportunities, making the competitive playing field extremely lopsided. This would result in such a frustrating and unsatisfactory experience that it would be implausible to expect Division I caliber athletes to choose Dartmouth over other options, or to attract and retain qualified coaches to lead the programs in such a scenario.

By eliminating two women’s sports, will Dartmouth be in violation of Title IX?

Title IX requires that college athletics programs satisfy at least one prong of a three-pronged test. The most prominent of those prongs, referred to as “proportionality,” requires that the proportion of male and female athletes be similar to the proportion of male and female undergraduates. Because of the cancellation of sports in the spring and fall of 2020, the data for both 2019-20 and 2020-21 will be incomplete, but when the Dartmouth’s reduced roster of 30 varsity sports can fully compete again, the percentage of women among varsity athletes will be virtually identical to the percentage of women in the undergraduate student body, ensuring compliance with Title IX.

What does it mean that Dartmouth will have fewer athletic recruits?

Dartmouth greatly values its membership in the Ivy League, which is an NCAA Division I athletic conference.  To ensure adherence to the founding principle that student-athletes must be representative of their student bodies, the League regulates the admission of recruited athletes more stringently than any other Division I conference, including those that include Stanford, Duke, and Northwestern.  Within rigorous academic parameters, each varsity coach has the opportunity to support a limited number of candidates in the admissions process who possess exceptional athletic ability, with all final decisions made by the admissions office in the context of their holistic evaluations.  A smaller number of varsity teams will mean a smaller cohort of athletic recruits in each entering class, leaving more spaces for students with a variety of other strengths.

Not long ago, when President Hanlon was discussing the possibility of closing Hanover Country Club, he said the varsity golf teams would still be supported. What has changed?

At that time, neither the severity of the College’s budget challenges nor the extent of Dartmouth’s increased admissions selectivity were as apparent as they are now.  Those two factors have changed the overall picture substantially, requiring a reassessment.

Why are Athletics — and these teams, in particular — being asked to shoulder the burden of the institution’s financial troubles? What is the Administration doing for its part?
Within our community, the consequences of the pandemic-related economic downturn will be felt in many ways. Even before COVID-19, Dartmouth was facing a number of urgent academic and capital projects that required budget prioritization and reallocation. While our teaching and research mission continues, every division and department at Dartmouth is being asked to share in the sacrifices that current challenges require. Several months ago, as soon as the pandemic was upon us, President Hanlon voluntarily gave back 20% of his salary to Dartmouth, designating that all of it be put toward student financial aid. Similarly, members of the president’s senior leadership team voluntarily returned a percentage of their salaries, as well, both to support our students and to help Dartmouth through difficult times.

Dartmouth’s institution-wide finances are, without a doubt, facing both near- and long-term challenges. We anticipate demand for financial aid to continue to increase significantly over the next few months. We will most certainly see declines in some of our key revenue streams. And we expect our institutional investments to experience continued volatility and uncertainty. While we had built up reserve funds to cushion the immediate impacts of a recession, the magnitude of the financial shock is requiring us to take additional steps to meet the financial challenges we face.

Can’t a portion of Dartmouth’s endowment be used to fund these teams or help the institution get through the pandemic without having to make these cuts?

A common misconception of the endowment is that it is a rainy day fund. It is not. The investment and spending policies of the endowment are designed to balance the needs of current Dartmouth students with the needs of future generations of Dartmouth students. It is also highly restricted, with the vast majority of it dedicated to specific purposes. We cannot legally take a restricted fund and simply repurpose it to make up for shortfalls elsewhere in our budget. The endowment consists of funding that was provided to the institution over generations, designated for specific purposes. These funds cannot be used to address institution-wide operational funding deficits.

Why not make cuts across all teams instead of eliminating these teams entirely? Wouldn’t that be a more equitable approach?

The Athletics leadership team did, in fact, engage in a comprehensive process during which they prioritized options that would preserve the number of varsity athletic teams and spread reductions across all teams. However, given the scope of the challenge and the imperative to reduce in both recruiting and finances, it quickly became clear that many teams would eventually have markedly less depth on their rosters than their Ivy League opponents, putting all of those teams at a competitive disadvantage, and soon creating a situation in which it would be extremely difficult to attract and retain excellent coaches, or to recruit elite student-athletes. In short, spreading our reductions across many teams would have left us with a department full of programs destined to struggle, offering an unsatisfactory student-athlete experience with very little chance of competitive success. It was in the context of this sober realization that the only responsible choice was to reduce the number of varsity sports.

By citing the need to reshape incoming classes, are you somehow suggesting that the student-athletes on these teams aren’t strong students academically?

To the contrary, we recognize and are proud of the many ways in which Dartmouth student-athletes contribute to the life of our campus. Each and every Dartmouth student has earned their way in to an exceptionally talented class, both for their academic accomplishments and other pursuits, and we sincerely hope that every student impacted by these decisions stays at Dartmouth.

The initial announcement refers to the amazing levels of talent and accomplishment amongst the individuals applying to Dartmouth spanning a broad set of areas including the arts, athletics, entrepreneurship, research and service, just to name a few. As some may know, over the last several years, the number of applicants to Dartmouth has been trending upward and the yield has risen sharply. We are therefore admitting fewer students both as a percentage of total applicants and in raw numbers. During that same period, the number of recruited athletes has stayed the same. In shaping the incoming class, we aim to admit students spanning all of the areas of achievement mentioned above, among many others, which has become an increasing challenge given Dartmouth’s recent enrollment dynamics. We, therefore, decided to make a change.

Is it true that The Dartmouth reported that Harry Sheehy referred to student-athletes as “second-class citizens”?

Harry Sheehy did not refer to any Dartmouth student-athletes as second class citizens. In response to a previous question in the same article, he explained what would happen if the admissions reduction was spread across many teams, saying “Basically, half your program would then be Division III. And then the student-athlete experience goes right down the tubes.” In response to a later question, he was referring to this same phenomenon when he said “we weren’t willing to create second-class citizens in our department that weren’t able to compete on an Ivy League level.” To be clear, his reference to “second-class citizens” was in the context of what he was unwilling to create within Athletics.

When the swimming and diving teams were eliminated in late 2002 and reinstated in early 2003, wasn’t there an endowment set up by alumni to fund the program permanently?
In 2003, generous alumni and parents created what was known as the Glover Fund, which provided sufficient funds to support the program for 10 years. The Glover Fund was not an endowment fund. As with nearly all varsity sports at Dartmouth, there are a few endowment funds that support the swimming and diving teams, but they do not generate anywhere near enough annual income to fully support the program, even when combined with annual Friends donations from alumni and parents. In the Ivy League, the funding of nearly every varsity sport comes from a combination of institutional budget, endowment income, and annual giving. Without the institutional budget dollars, the teams cannot exist at the NCAA Division I level. And even if the programs were to receive sufficient funding at Dartmouth, it would not solve the challenge associated with admissions.

After varsity men’s and women’s swimming and diving was eliminated in late 2002, and then subsequently reinstated in early 2003 with the establishment of the Glover Fund, didn’t the College promise not to eliminate the sport again in the future?

No. An official College release stated in 2003 that the “restoration of the swimming and diving program places it on the same footing as all other intercollegiate programs.” Following this principle, swimming and diving was considered and evaluated alongside every other sport when the Athletics Department was faced with having to achieve its financial and recruitment reductions. In addition, materials relating to the 2003 reinstatement, including those memorializing the understanding between the College and those who led the effort to solicit contributions to the Glover Fund, expressly reserved the right of the Athletic Director and Senior Administration to make decisions about all intercollegiate athletic programs offered at Dartmouth. Consequently, the record does not support the contention that the reinstatement of the team in 2003 constituted a promise to preserve the status of swimming and diving in perpetuity.

HANOVER COUNTRY CLUB

How much money will be saved by closing the country club permanently?

In recent years, as costs of operating the golf club have risen and memberships have declined, Dartmouth has had to absorb annual operating deficits in the range of $500,000 to $700,000.  Those deficits are projected to swell to more than $1 million annually when deferred maintenance is included. Given the downward trend in the golf industry nationally, it is not realistic to expect these deficits to subside. As a result, we are no longer able to justify a deficit of this magnitude.

What are the deferred maintenance issues that would be so costly in the years ahead?

Structural engineers have determined that the bridge used for holes #6 and #18 must be replaced in the near future at a cost of about $2.5 million.  The irrigation pump station is in need of replacement and erosion control measures will need to be implemented, adding a combined cost of about $500,000.  Much of the grounds equipment is aging and failing, requiring replacement at a cost of about $1 million over the next five years.  All of these costs would need to be incurred just to keep the course operating as it currently exists, with each project further increasing the annual deficit.  None of these projects would improve the course in a way that would generate more revenue.

Does Dartmouth intend to sell the country club?

No.

What will happen to the golf course and country club land?

The property remains important to Dartmouth’s future. We are committed to providing public access to the adjacent Pine Park and, in the meantime through partnership with the town of Hanover, we will explore how to safely open the land for community recreational use. We will maintain the trails and pathways on the course proper so our varsity cross country teams can continue to train and compete there.

When Dartmouth announced in April that Hanover Country Club would be closed for the entire 2020 season, was it already known it would never reopen?

The decision to close the course for the 2020 season was made on the basis of public health concerns, and the magnitude and urgency of the College’s financial challenges were not yet fully understood. As the financial challenges have become more evident in the last several months, the institutional leadership has concluded that the College can no longer afford to absorb HCC’s annual operating deficits, especially in light of the deferred maintenance issues that would swell those deficits even further in the years ahead.

Has Dartmouth engaged professional consultants to advise on operational and facility improvements to make the course financially viable?

Yes, the College has engaged a variety of expert consultants over the years.  The National Golf Foundation’s Consulting Services have conducted studies in 1986, 2010, and 2013, and other professional consultants have been engaged in 2010 and 2013 as well.  Most of the studies have concluded that, for HCC to be more financially viable, significant investments would need to be made in a relocated clubhouse, adequate parking, and a variety of changes to the course to make it more appealing for a wider range of skill levels, including a reconfiguration that creates two nine-hole loops.  Many of the less costly recommendations have been implemented over the years, but the more recent studies acknowledge that, even with substantial investments, a declining golf market will make it difficult to achieve anything close to break-even status.  Indeed, the most recent report concluded that “any revenue gains would be marginal at best and almost certainly only be incremental on the ongoing operational side.”

Didn’t a committee just study HCC in 2018 and recommend keeping it open?

In 2018, the College formed a Golf Course Advisory Committee, chaired by faculty member and former Dartmouth golfer Charlie Wheelan ’88, and charged it with exploring several options ranging from status quo to closing the course.  The committee recommended soliciting alumni support for a relocated clubhouse and course improvements, and then engaging an outside entity to manage them, relieving the College of the financial responsibility.  However, informal discussions with potential golf management entities have revealed a lack of confidence in the profitability of the course, and therefore little interest in taking it on.

What does the closing of HCC have to do with the elimination of varsity teams?

Both decisions relate to the College’s significant financial challenges, but each decision was made independently.

Won’t the jobs being eliminated at HCC predominantly affect the lowest-paid, most vulnerable workers?

HCC’s union laborers are being absorbed by the College’s Facilities, Operations, and Management (FO&M) division, so they are not being laid off.

What happens to HCC memberships?  Are they being refunded?

Memberships for the 2020 season were refunded shortly after the announcement that the course would remain closed for the entire season.  Members have not made any payments for 2021 or beyond.