University of Maryland Policy and Procedures on the Naming of Facilities and Programs

The naming of a facility or program is one of the highest honors an individual or organization can receive from a university. The University of Maryland (“the University”) feels great responsibility to ensure that such recognition honors its history, values, and central mission as a land grant institution, and aligns with its goals of achieving excellence in teaching, research, and public service within a supportive, respectful, and inclusive environment that fosters the free and open exchange of ideas. 

The University encourages opportunities for the naming of its facilities and programs through significant philanthropy or by honoring scholars and other distinguished individuals who are preeminent in their field of endeavor and/or have contributed meaningfully to the University. Any such naming must undergo a high level of consideration and due diligence to ensure that the name comports with the purpose and mission of the University. The University is governed by the University System of Maryland (USM) Policy on the Naming of Facilities and Programs (VI-4.00). 

No naming shall be permitted for any entity or individual whose public image, products, or services may conflict with the University’s purpose and mission.

1. “Benefactor” means an individual(s) who contributes financially to the University.
2. “Facility” means planned and existing University buildings of all types; major new additions to existing buildings; institution grounds and athletic facilities; and all major outdoor areas including roads, plazas, entrances, gates, and landscape features such as quadrangles, gardens, lakes, fountains, and fields.
3. “Honorific Naming” means naming a Facility or a Program to honor scholars and other distinguished individuals who are preeminent in their field of endeavor and/or have contributed meaningfully to the University.
4. “Namesake” means the individual for whom a Facility or Program may be named.
5. “Naming” means the act of honoring an individual or entity by placing their name on a University Facility or Program.
6. “Landmark Building” is a Facility on the main University campus that has historical or cultural significance to the University.
7. “Philanthropic Naming” means Naming a Facility or a Program for a Benefactor who underwrites the cost or the partial cost of a University Facility or contributes financially to the Program being named.
8. “Program” means Colleges, Schools, departments, centers, institutes, and academic programs, including those that are online or virtual.
9. “Useful Life” means the estimated lifespan of a Facility in terms of the utility and purpose for which it was established or acquired.

1. Interior spaces within Facilities (laboratories, classrooms, practice rooms, lecture halls, etc.); minor landscape or architectural elements such as benches, desks, or sidewalk bricks; fellowships; and endowed chairs are not covered by this Policy. These may be named separately from the Facility in which they are located to recognize:
   1. A Benefactor, corporation, or foundation who wish to underwrite the cost or partial cost of a defined portion of the Facility; or
   2. An individual who has made substantial scholarly or service contributions to the University or to higher education in general.
2. The University of Maryland Policy on Endowed Faculty Chairs and Professorships (IX-6.00[A]) covers Naming endowed positions. 
3. This Policy does not apply to academic program proposals that would name or rename Programs based on the academic discipline or field rather than for Philanthropic or Honorific purposes. Such proposals should be submitted and considered under the existing Programs, Curricula, and Courses (PCC) process administered by the Office of Academic Planning & Programs.

1. The authority to name University Facilities and Programs rests with the Board of Regents of the USM, upon the recommendation of the President of the University.
2. All discussions and negotiations related to Philanthropic and Honorific Namings must be kept confidential in alignment with Section VII of the USM Policy, which requires that no public announcement be made prior to Board of Regents approval.
3. Prior to making a determination on whether to support a Philanthropic or Honorific Naming proposal and put it forward to the Board of Regents for consideration, the President may receive advice from University committees as defined in Section V of this Policy.
4. Requests for Philanthropic and Honorific Namings of Facilities and Programs require the submission of a formal proposal to the responsible official, as noted in sections IV.H.1 and 2.
5. Proposals must be submitted with sufficient time to permit an initial evaluation by the President or their designee, who must authorize any planned negotiations with a potential donor or honoree’s family.
6. The procedures for submitting a Naming proposal or a name removal proposal, and the associated review processes are specified in Sections V and VII of this Policy.
7. Guidelines for Facilities and Program Naming are set forth below.
   1. University Facilities are generally named after counties, municipalities, and bodies of water in the State of Maryland. Such Namings must be reviewed by the Facilities Naming Committee under the procedures indicated in V.B.1 of this Policy.
   2. Namings may only be considered for individuals, corporations, and foundations that are consistent with the mission and purpose of the University.
   3. Facilities and Programs that are to be named for individuals should be named in honor of scholars and other distinguished individuals who are preeminent in their field of endeavor. University Facilities may also be named for foundations and corporations who by service, mission, scholarship, or major gift have made substantial contributions to the University, or to higher education in general.
      1. Individuals after whom Facilities and Programs are named should have the highest personal integrity that aligns with the University’s values and a majority of the following characteristics, at a minimum:
         1. Honorable public service;
         2. Significant positive contributions to society;
         3. Contributions to the University of Maryland and/or to the State; or
         4. Known to the University community.
      2. Foundations and corporations after which Facilities and Programs are to be named must exemplify the following attributes, at a minimum:
         1. History of high integrity of officers;
         2. Appropriate corporate mission;
         3. Contributions to the University; and
         4. Familiarity of the corporation at least to the impacted portion of the University community.
      3. A corporate name may be assigned only if the entity has undergone careful scrutiny by the University to ensure that such a Naming will not demean the academic endeavors or the campus at large.
      4. When corporate names are considered for Facilities, the propriety of the name in a public and educational context should be considered. If a naming opportunity is being considered for a set period of time (naming rights to an athletic field, for example), the cost of installing and removing the name should be a consideration, and plans accounting for those costs should be included in the naming proposal.
   4. No campus Facility or Program will be named for individuals employed by or formally affiliated with the USM or the State of Maryland, unless and until one year has passed since the individual’s USM or State employment or affiliation has ceased. Exceptions will be considered under the following circumstances:
      1. If an individual has completed 10 years of service to UMD and is currently serving in a position of reduced authority (e.g., from institution president to faculty status).
      2. If there are health issues or special family circumstances.
   5. Individuals, corporations, and foundations after whom Facilities or Programs are named who later are found to violate the high standards indicated in Section IV.G.3.a-d of this Policy may have their names removed from such, based on the guidelines defined in Section VI of this Policy.
8. Considerations for Philanthropic Namings
   1. Philanthropic Namings of Facilities must be overseen by the Vice President for University Relations.
      1. A Facility may only be named for or by a Benefactor, a corporation, or a foundation, if they contribute a significant portion of its costs for construction or renovation.
      2. Philanthropic Namings of Facilities shall normally only be considered in association with a gift to the University or to an affiliated foundation when the present value of the gift is a minimum of 15 percent of the estimated cost to construct or substantially renovate the facility. Maintenance and endowment funds should be considered as part of the gift for the purpose of these calculations.
      3. The Naming of Landmark Buildings shall generally require a higher percentage of investment.
      4. The Philanthropic gift should be made in cash or by means of a fully executed gift agreement, provided however, that if in the form of a pledge, it should be paid in full within five years.
      5. Gifts made in the form of an irrevocable trust or bequest, provided that the donor is age 75 or older (including but not limited to a charitable remainder trust, a pooled income fund, a charitable gift annuity, a deferred pledge agreement/estate note, or a contract to make a will), shall generally not be accepted for the purpose of Naming a new University facility for which contributions from private sources are needed to pay construction costs. Such a deferred gift, however, may support the Naming of an existing facility if there is no current need of funds for renovating or expanding the structure. If the gift is a bequest, there must be a cash or by means of a documented pledge backing up the bequest.
   2. Philanthropic Namings of Programs must be overseen by the Senior Vice President and Provost, in consultation with the Vice President for University Relations.
      1. Philanthropic Namings of Programs may only be considered if the administrative unit head(s) and the faculty of the Program have been consulted confidentially as part of the process, and the administrative unit head(s) and a majority of the faculty agree to move forward with a formal proposal on the Program Naming.
      2. Consideration of all Philanthropic and Honorific Program Naming proposals should include an assessment of the long-term impact of the Naming on the mission of the Program and whether it is possible that the Program’s mission may evolve over time to the extent where the proposed name would no longer be relevant.
      3. The named gift levels for Programs will be established on a case-by-case basis.
      4. Endowed gifts are strongly encouraged. Generally, the endowment established through the gift should generate 10 to 20 percent of the unit’s operating budget on an annual basis, depending on the size of the unit.
      5. The Philanthropic gift should be made in cash or by means of a fully executed gift agreement, provided however that if in the form of a pledge, it should be paid in full within five years.
9. Considerations for Honorific Namings
   1. Honorific Namings of Programs:
      1. Must be overseen by the Senior Vice President and Provost in consultation with the administrative unit head(s) of the Program.
      2. May only be considered if the administrative unit head(s) and the faculty of the Program have been consulted confidentially as part of the process, and the administrative unit head(s) and a majority of the faculty have agreed to move forward with a formal proposal on the Program Naming.
      3. Although significant philanthropy made over a donor’s lifetime may constitute a valid rationale for an Honorific Naming, Honorific Namings should not be used to circumvent the requirements of gift-related Naming policies.
      4. Consideration of all Philanthropic and Honorific Program Naming proposals should include an assessment of the long-term impact of the Naming on the mission of the Program and whether it is possible that the Program’s mission may evolve over time to the extent where the proposed name would no longer be relevant.
   2. Honorific Namings of Facilities:
      1. Must be overseen by the Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer in consultation with the administrative unit head(s) of the Facility.
      2. The Facility naming proposal will be reviewed by the Facility Naming Committee.
      3. Although significant philanthropy made over a donor’s lifetime may constitute a valid rationale for an Honorific Naming, Honorific Namings should not be used to circumvent the requirements of gift-related Naming policies.

1. Requests for the Philanthropic or Honorific Naming of Facilities and Programs require the submission of a formal proposal to the responsible official.
   1. The proposal should include the Namesake’s name and relationship to the University, if applicable.
   2. A biographical profile of the Namesake should be provided.
   3. The proposal must contain a report demonstrating that the Namesake’s background has been thoroughly considered; that the Naming honors and aligns with the values and mission of the University; and that any controversies, if they exist, have been examined and judged to be immaterial to the Naming.
   4. The proposed name of the Facility or Program and, if applicable, the current name of the Facility or Program should be noted.
   5. For Philanthropic Namings, the proposal must include the gift amount and terms, including but not limited to any costs associated with the gift and a copy of the gift contract and/or pledge agreement, if applicable.
   6. Proposals must include the overall cost of the Facility construction or renovation or the overall budget of the Program to be supported. If the gift represents partial or total funding of the construction, remodeling, or renovation, the following information must be included:
      1. Relationship of the project to the University's long-range plans;
      2. Source and status of capital budget funds needed in addition to the gift.
      3. A timetable for project implementation; and
      4. Operating budget implications, and sources of funds.
   7. For Honorific Namings, the proposal must provide a clear rationale for the request, including:
      1. A description of the honoree’s accomplishments and contributions to the University or USM, or the State of Maryland;
      2. If applicable, how the Naming will further the mission of the Program;
      3. How the Naming will reflect positively on the University and/or the USM; and
      4. If applicable, a justification for an exception to the provisions defined in Section IV.G.4 of this Policy.
2. The review of proposals requesting the Naming of Facilities and the Naming of Programs will be handled in separate but parallel processes.
   1. Facilities Naming Procedures
      1. Philanthropic or Honorific Facilities Naming proposals should be prepared by the Vice President for University Relations and the Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer respectively and directed to the Facilities Naming Committee.
      2. The Facilities Naming Committee is responsible for reviewing all proposals requesting the Naming of University Facilities, including Philanthropic and Honorific Namings, and making a recommendation to the President.
         1. The membership of the Facilities Naming Committee includes:
            1. The Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer (Chair);
            2. The Senior Vice President and Provost or designee;
            3. The Vice President for University Relations or designee;
            4. The Vice President for Diversity and Inclusion or designee;
            5. The Assistant President and Chief of Staff or designee;
            6. The Vice President for Student Affairs or designee;
            7. The Executive Director of Government Relations or designee;
            8. The Dean of the School of Architecture or designee;
            9. The Dean of another College or School, appointed by the Senior Vice President and Provost or designee; and,
            10. Two faculty, one student, and one staff representative, selected in consultation with the University Senate.
      3. The President shall take the recommendation of the Facilities Naming Committee into consideration before making a final determination on whether to recommend the Philanthropic or Honorific Facility Naming to the Board of Regents for its consideration and approval.
      4. In the event that a unique fundraising opportunity for a Facilities Naming requires an expedited decision, the President shall consult with the Vice President for University Relations, the Senior Vice President and Provost, and the Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer (as Chair of the Facilities Naming Committee) prior to making a recommendation to the Board of Regents.
         1. In such instances, the President’s action shall be explained to the Facilities Naming Committee at its next meeting.
   2. Program Naming Procedures
      1. All Philanthropic and Honorific Program Naming proposals should be prepared by the Senior Vice President and Provost in consultation with the administrative unit head(s) of the Program, and with the Vice President for University Relations in the case of philanthropic namings and directed to the Program Naming Committee.
         1. All Program Naming proposals must have the endorsement of a majority of the faculty of the Program and its administrative unit head(s) prior to submission to the Senior Vice President and Provost.
            1. Curricular changes or academically related name changes per section III.C. associated with Program Naming proposals must also be submitted for review through the defined Programs, Curricula, & Courses (PCC) processes overseen by the Office of Academic Programs & Planning.
      2. The Senior Vice President and Provost will conduct an initial review of the proposal to determine whether to initiate the formal review process.
         1. The Senior Vice President and Provost may consult with the Academic Planning Advisory Committee (APAC) during the initial review of proposals for Philanthropic and Honorific Namings of Programs.
         2. The Senior Vice President and Provost, in consultation with the administrative unit head(s) of the Program to be named, will determine whether a formal review of the proposal by the Program Naming Committee should be initiated.
      3. The Program Naming Committee will have responsibility for evaluating all formal Philanthropic and Honorific Program Naming proposals and making a timely recommendation to the President.
         1. The membership of the Program Naming Committee includes:
            1. The Dean for Undergraduate Studies and/or Dean of the Graduate School as appropriate (Chair-appointed by the Senior Vice President and Provost);
            2. The Dean of the relevant College/School of the program naming proposal;
            3. The Vice President for University Relations or designee;
            4. The Executive Director of Government Relations or designee;
            5. The Vice President for Diversity and Inclusion or designee;
            6. The Assistant President and Chief of Staff or designee;
            7. The Senate PCC Committee chair;
            8. A student (appointed by Senate Leadership);
            9. A staff member (appointed by Senate Leadership);
            10. A faculty member (appointed by Senate Leadership); and
            11. The University Archivist
         2. The deliberations of the Program Naming Committee will be held in closed session in order to maintain confidentiality, as required by the USM Policy.
         3. The Program Naming Committee will review the Program Naming proposal and consider whether it meets the guidelines for Namings identified in Section IV of this Policy. The Program Naming Committee will make a timely recommendation on whether the Philanthropic or Honorific Program Naming proposal meets the requirements of this Policy in a memo to the President. Program Naming proposals that require associated curricular changes to the Program must also be submitted for review through the defined Programs, Curricula, & Courses (PCC) processes overseen by the Office of Academic Programs & Planning.
         4. The President will take the recommendations of the Program Naming Committee into consideration before making a final determination on whether to recommend the Philanthropic or Honorific Program Naming to the Board of Regents for its consideration and approval.

1. Guidelines
   1. The authority to remove a name from a Facility or Program lies with the Board of Regents of the USM, upon the recommendation of the President of the University.
   2. If at any time the University determines that the continued Naming of a Facility or Program may compromise the University’s integrity or reputation, the University may amend or remove the name, upon approval by the President and Board of Regents and notification of the donor, if applicable.
   3. In the case of philanthropic naming, the University reserves the right to remove names from Facilities and Programs when the gift remains unpaid beyond the terms of the gift agreement. Should this occur, the Vice President for University Relations may recommend an area of the facility or seek an alternative naming opportunity appropriate to the value of the gift received.
   4. The removal of a name should be rare, and those making the request should understand that their case must be compelling and well-researched.
   5. The removal of a name should not erase the University’s history. Where possible, education about and reinterpretation of the name may be a reasonable alternative to name removal, in order for the University community to deepen its understanding about its history.
2. Considerations for Name Removal Requests
   1. The scholarly historical evidence supporting the request should be compelling and should satisfy one or more of the following criteria:
      1. Following the Naming recognition, the Namesake was found to have committed a serious violation of a state or federal law;
      2. The Namesake was found to have exhibited offensive behavior that was central to the Namesake’s career, public persona, or life as a whole or it was central to the corporation’s/foundation’s mission or public reputation;
      3. Allegations of offensive behavior are supported by documentary evidence that demonstrates both the extent and intentionality of a Namesake’s actions;
      4. Retaining the name demonstrably jeopardizes the University’s integrity and materially impedes its mission of teaching, research, and public engagement;
      5. Retaining the name significantly contributes to an environment that excludes some members of the University community from opportunities to learn, thrive, and succeed; and/or
      6. Removing the name would not stifle viewpoint diversity or fail to acknowledge the historical complexity or holistic contributions of the individual to the University or the public.
   2. Those submitting name removal requests should consider whether any of the following elements exist in the specific case that they are raising, and should consider the impact of the presence of those elements on the strength of the case for removal:
      1. If the Namesake’s offensive behavior or viewpoints were conventional at their time and other aspects of the Namesake’s life and work are especially noteworthy to the University or the greater community; and/or
      2. Despite the evidence of objectionable behavior or views, there is also evidence of a significant level of evolution or moderation of the Namesake’s behavior or views over their lifetime.
   3. Procedures for and elements associated with requests to remove a name from a Facility or Program are specified below in Section VII of this Policy.

1. Requests for the removal of a name from a Facility or Program can be submitted to the Office of the President by any member of the campus community including faculty, staff, students, and alumni.
2. Name removal requests should include a letter providing the rationale for the request that addresses the following:
   1. The process by which the original Naming took place and what was known at that time about the Namesake, to the extent that such information is available;
   2. Clearly documented research about the prevalence and persistence of the Namesake’s objectionable behavior, including the centrality of the offensive behavior to the Namesake’s life as a whole and whether the behavior was consistent with conventions of the time;
   3. The past and present effects of the Namesake’s behavior, including whether the behavior caused hurt to individuals or groups in the past that undermine the ability of those individuals or groups to feel a sense of belonging to the University community;
   4. The Namesake’s relationship to the University and what contributions the Namesake made to the University;
   5. The voices and views of more than one constituency of the University; and
   6. Any possibilities for mitigation and interpretation.
3. Name removal requests must be supported by the major constituencies of the campus community (faculty, staff, and students).
   1. Name removal requests require signatures in support of the request from at least 2% of two (2) of the major constituencies of the current campus community (faculty, staff, and students).
   2. The signature requirement will be facilitated through the University’s petition platform and current members of the campus community will be verified through the University’s authentication service.
   3. Name removal requests will undergo an initial review to ensure that they meet the required thresholds for further consideration.
4. Review of Name Removal Requests
   1. The Naming Committee associated with the removal request (i.e., facility or program) together with the University Archivist will conduct an initial review of the name removal request, reviewing the letter and petition to consider whether it meets the considerations in Section VI.B and the procedures defined in Section VII of this Policy, to determine whether it should be studied further.
   2. If the associated Naming Committee determines that the request should be forwarded for further study, the President will form an ad hoc Study Committee for a formal review of the name removal request.
      1. The membership of the Study Committee will include faculty, staff, students, and alumni appointed by the President, some of whom will be selected from University Senate nominations. The University Archivist and a person (faculty or staff) with scholarly expertise about the subject will also be members of the Study Committee.
      2. The Study Committee will be charged with conducting a review of the name removal request and providing the President with an impartial analysis that includes reasons for removing the name, reasons for retaining the name, and, if appropriate, possible ways of acknowledging controversies if the name is retained.
      3. The Study Committee may invite comments from interested members of the University community, as well as from the Namesake or their heirs.
      4. Where helpful, those on the Study Committee should take advantage of the knowledge, expertise, and methodologies of the social sciences, humanities, and other disciplines available at the University.
      5. The Study Committee must consistently weigh and balance relevant factors, taking into account the considerations listed in Section VI.B of this Policy. 
   3. Upon receipt and consideration of the Study Committee’s findings, the President will make the final determination of the appropriate action regarding the name removal request.
      1. If the President determines that removal of the name is appropriate, the President will submit a formal request to the Board of Regents for consideration of the name removal with a coinciding request to replace the name with a general name that aligns with the University’s standard practices for Naming Facilities and Programs identified in Section IV.G.1 of this Policy.
      2. If the President determines that the request to remove a name does not warrant a formal request to the Board of Regents, the President will provide a response to the requesting party explaining the decision.
      3. The President may also choose to add historical markers inside of buildings to illustrate the full history of the Namesake’s complete behavior as part of the decision process.
   4. Facilities and Programs that have undergone a name removal and been given a general name are eligible to be considered for a new Philanthropic or Honorific Naming through the Naming procedures defined in Section V of this Policy.

Replacement for:

Policy VI-4.00(A) University of Maryland Policy on the Naming of Facilities