Document Neo6x0qr2LV6jjxQg3bqGwZ5y

sufficient funds from project research to allow Industrial Hygiene Foundation to add several senior level, full-time staff members, which will provide much needed depth of coverage in key areas. These individuals have been identified and steps are now under way to attract them. In the face of growing Industrial HygieneFoundation programs, in order to help insure project completion and to avoid undue dependence on individuals at or near retirement age, such ad ditions are considered minimal and are mandatory. ' ~ Even with these and the evidence of a budget balanced well "in the black" for the second consecutive year and with every Evidence of rapidly growing pro ject support, we are faced with a potentially serious and harmful "credibility gap, " i. e., if Industrial Hygiene Foundation is_ industry's organization and if industry does consider its role of leadership in programs of Environmental and Occupational Health important, how can it allow the Foundation to depend so largely upon project support alone, with an annual "endowment" of less than $100, 000 per year? I have been asked this question by representatives of the U. S. Public Health Service, the U. S. Department of Labor, universities and private institutions, and, even more embarrassingly, the Foundation's staff asks itself the same question. I have given much thought to the need for an en dowment sufficient to allow the Foundation to continue its work for another 30+ years1 period but have had difficulty arriving at a defensible figure which would be considered adequate. For example, I took the $300 million a year figure, which the Frye Report stated industry is presently spending for its internal health programs, and came up with the estimate of $10 billion as a minimum which industry will have spent by the year 2000--with no way of knowing whether the expenditure was effective for the purpose intended. A 1% cost for research and management would amount to $100 million or $3+ million per year for 30 years. This would be a much larger sum than Industrial Hygiene Foundation's present endowment of less than $100, 000 per year, but in view of the magnitude of the nation's illness problem and of annual costs for group health insurance, sick absence and environmental health hazard control (which may well exceed 10% of a trillion dollar Gross National Product by 1975), the above suggested amount would not of itself be adequately convincing of industry's interest. For this reason, and in .view of the extensive demands on the time of the Foundation's staff and Board of the fund raising activities required to develop a broad sup port base, 1 have decided against recommending creation of such an endowment at this time. The possibility of using professional fund raising assistance was suggested but is considered to be unduly expensive and also perhaps inappropriate for Industrial Hygiene Foundation. Instead, the Foundation's Board plans to em bark on a program to increase annual income by broadening the base of the Foun dation's support in industry. There is no reason why the majority of companies in American Industry, who believe in the importance of the Foundation's mission, should not lend their support to that of the loyal few who are now providing leader- ship for industry in this area. Regardless of the amount of increased income which the membership drive produces, the doubling or tripling of the?Foundation's membership over a short period of time will graphically portray industry's genuine concern and effectively remove the one major barrier to Industrial Hygiene Foundation's progress which remains. 17