ACHA White Paper

An ad hoc committee of the American Catholic Historical Association was charged with examining the current structure of the Association, and asked to pay special attention to the role of the executive secretary/treasurer (hereafter ST) and the location of the ACHA’s offices. The committee—Mary Christine Athans, BVM (co-chair), Karen Kennelly (CSJ), Margaret McGuinness (co-chair), and Rodger Van Allen—read material that was sent to us detailing the current job description of the ST, and examined various documents relating to the Association’s financial situation. In addition, we invited current and former presidents and STs of the Association to express their thoughts on the questions facing the committee. The two co-chairs also conducted several follow-up interviews to solicit additional information and ideas.

We offer the following recommendations:

1. We question whether the ACHA can or should spend $43,500 for administrative salaries. (The ACHA currently consists of approximately 800 members; this means $53.60 of each membership is designated for salaries.) The simplest way to decrease this amount is to eliminate the salary designated for an administrative assistant. Since new and continuing members are increasingly able to join ACHA and receive information about annual and spring meetings through an electronic format, there is less and less need to produce mass mailings. (Registrations for the 2010 annual meeting of the American Historical Association, for instance, were processed entirely online.) An additional benefit to be gained from moving towards an electronic format is that it will allow the Association to become more environmentally responsible.

2. The ST should receive an annual salary. The current allocation of $12,000 is reasonable and fair compensation given the current job description. We assume ST’s will have other sources of income (i.e., faculty or administrative positions), and will not depend on ACHA for their primary means of support.

3. Because we are historians, not financial planners, we hesitate to offer any concrete suggestions concerning the Association’s investments. We do understand, however, that the ST is currently responsible for the collection of membership fees, as well as handling day-to-day financial responsibilities such as paying bills and depositing checks. He or she should be responsible for overseeing investments. We note that the ACHA has investments deposited with several very reputable financial corporations, and recommend that responsibilities related to investments be placed with professional investment planners. In addition, we believe it is inappropriate for the Finance Committee to consist solely of business faculty at CUA.

4. The job of the ST—as currently defined—should be divided into three categories: membership (including dues) and related tasks, annual and spring meetings, and ensuring that the webpage is maintained and up to date. We suggest that it be made clear that the ST should have access to administrative support and student assistants through his or her college or university.

5. As recommendations 1-4 suggest, the role of the ST is currently very complex. One solution to this—in addition to those offered above—is to separate the ST position into two: Secretary and Treasurer, with corresponding duties and compensation assigned as appropriate. Whether the position is divided or remains the work of one person, term limits should be set, and the Executive Council should consider electing rather than appointing the ST.

6.  We question the need for the Association’s offices to necessarily remain at CUA, and it is troubling to us that this is mandated by the Constitution. We recommend that the ACHA give prompt attention to changing the Constitution to provide greater flexibility in the location of its offices. If the position of ST were divided, for instance, this would allow the Secretary and Treasurer to be affiliated with different institutions.

7. Although the relationship between the ACHA and CHR was not part of this committee’s original charge, it became clear to us that this situation warrants further investigation. It is our opinion that, at present, CHR is draining the Association’s resources. The Review has approximately 1600 "subscribers," about 50% of these receive their copies as a part of their ACHA membership. The Association, however, pays CUA press full price for every copy of the journal sent to its members. We suggest that there are three possible ways to resolve this situation:

     a. Disassociate the ACHA from CHR and compensate CUA press for any material the Association places in the journal. An online newsletter could then be created that would be linked to the ACHA website.

     b. Disassociate the ACHA from CHR, but allow members to receive the journal for an additional fee. We caution, however, that this could raise the price of membership considerably. If membership if $60 annually, for instance, and CUA press decided to charge an additional $40 for CHR, that would increase one’s fee to $100 annually. A sliding membership scale, however, would make this option more feasible for at least some ACHA members.

It is our understanding that although CHR is accessible online through its affiliation with Project Muse, restrictions are placed concerning online access of current issues.

In addition, if the Association does terminate its relationship with CHR, officers of the Association should initiate a conversation with the CUA administration to set the terms by which the transition should proceed.
    

     c. Negotiate to place the CHR under the auspices of the ACHA, noting it will be published by CUA Press, or perhaps another press, should this not be resolved satisfactorily. We offer this as ONE possibility for the following reason: In the meeting of the ACHA Finance Committee on September 1, 2010, Father Paul Robichaud stated, "It’s our journal, but it is owned by CUA." Adam Dawkins replied, "That does not make any sense." We agree strongly with his observation. CUA Press seems to treat the ACHA as simply a guaranteed customer for a journal that would clearly not exist were it not for the contributions of ACHA members to its pages for nine decades. We assume as a legal question, the journal is owned by CUA. As a moral question, the journal is more properly the possession of those who have created and established it over many years, namely the ACHA.
    
     Should the ACHA decide to pursue this option, questions of staffing and printing will have to be addressed.

In conclusion, we thank all of those who assisted us in this process by asking questions, and providing insights that cannot be found simply by reviewing documents. We further hope that these recommendations will help the Association as it struggles to remain relevant in the very complicated and changing world.

Mary Christine Athans, BVM
Karen Kennelly, CSJ
Margaret McGuinness
Rodger Van Allen