Global Networking Groups (Rotarian Action Groups and Rotary Fellowships)

Following is a brief chronological summary of the history of Global Networking Groups (a board defined set of entities encompassing both Rotary Fellowships and Rotarian Action Groups).  This chronology is specifically focused on the RI Board’s evolving definition of the purpose of Global Networking Groups and related policies. 

1928: The first fellowship, Esperanto World Fellowship of Rotarians, is founded. 

1947: The Yachting Fellowship of Rotarians is organized, and has remained the longest continuously operated fellowship to date. 

1955: The Yachting Fellowship draws publicity by participating in the golden    anniversary convention of Rotary in Chicago. 

1966: In Decision 168 (January), the RI Board acknowledges the value of fellowships and officially encourages Rotarians to associate themselves with such groups for the purpose of “furthering acquaintance and fellowship.”  This decision also sets the precedent for later Board policies for fellowships by requiring that fellowships’ activities remain consistent with the ideals of Rotary and that the fellowships maintain financial and administrative autonomy. 

1971: Rotary Fellowships, previously operating under the influence of District Recreational Activities Committees, become known as the World Fellowship Activities program (Decision 102, January 1971). 

1993:  In Decision 77 (October), the World Fellowship Activities program is combined with the International Vocational Contact Groups Program to become the Rotary Recreational and Vocational Fellowships program (RRVF). The program encourages Rotarians “with a common interest in worthwhile recreational or avocational activities, or within the same business, professional, or vocational field, to associate themselves in groups.” 

1999: Several issue and project-oriented groups apply for recognition as RRVFs.  Concerned that the general public and other Rotarians might think that these groups represent the official policy or position of RI, or that the issue they promote is approved by the RI Board, the Board asserts in Decision 66 (Aug.) that “the program shall not be used to promote issues, projects or other organizations.”  As a result, the recognition of the Population and Development Fellowship is discontinued, and other proposed issue-oriented groups are denied recognition. 

2001: In Decision 394 (June), the Board denies a proposal to authorize the inclusion of special interest fellowships in Rotary Recreational and Vocational Fellowships, but agrees to modify the program to include health and medical issue-oriented fellowships under the new name Rotary Fellowships (effective 1 January 2002). 

2003: In Decision 381 (May), the Board broadened the scope of the Rotary Fellowships program to include any group “sharing" a common interest in a specific worthwhile activity which advances the Object of Rotary” (RCP section 43.060.6).  The Population and Development Fellowship, along with several other issue-oriented groups, are subsequently recognized in Decision 85 (October). 

In Decision 85 (October), the Board amended the fellowships’ policy to require that all fellowships be chaired by an active Rotarian.  The Board further agreed that fellowships should be required to indemnify RI from any liability arising from their activities and require that they purchase appropriate liability insurance. 

2004:  In Decision 257 (June), the RI Board modified its policy requiring that fellowships obtain liability insurance, and instead asking that fellowships assess whether such insurance is needed and obtain it accordingly.  The Board also asked that a Board Committee to Review Rotary Fellowships be appointed during 2004-05. 

2005:  In Decision 205 (March), the Board rescinded its requirement that all fellowships indemnify RI.  The Board also encouraged fellowships to notify the general secretary prior to soliciting funds in excess of US$25,000. 

In Decision 208 (March), the Board reviewed a proposal from then Directors John Eberhard and Sushil Gupta to create a new program for “Rotary Service Affiliates.”  The Board decided to appoint an ad hoc committee to review this proposal and report back at its June 2005 meeting. 

In Decision 302 (June), the Board reviewed the report of the ad hoc committee and created Rotarian Action Groups (RAGs).  The Board decided to pair RAGs with Rotary Fellowships under the umbrella entity Global Networking Groups, as these are membership organizations for individual Rotarians and not programs operated by Rotary clubs and districts.  The Board further decided that Rotary Fellowships should return to their original focus on recreational and vocational interests.  The Board created additional policy for the groups, including the requirement that they report annually, be encouraged to incorporate, and are prohibited from soliciting funds on their websites. 

In Decision 78 (November), the Board identified criteria for terminating Global Networking Groups. 

2006:  In Decision 157 (February), the Board requested that a Rotarian Action Group Committee be appointed and deferred consideration of all new RAG proposals to its November 2006 meeting.   

In Decision 75 (November), the Board lowered the dollar amount of total gross receipts or expenditures requiring an independent financial review from US$100,000 to US$25,000 per year and required all RAGs to adopt standard bylaws.  The Board modified program requirements so that all RAGs must achieve a membership of 100 or more; draw membership from a minimum of ten countries and three zones; and regularly undertake international service projects.  Approved groups that do not meet this criteria will be considered provisional for a period not to exceed two years, after which they must meet these requirements, including undertaking a minimum of one international service project, or be terminated, unless granted a waiver by the Board. This decision also required RAGs to provide the general secretary with an advance copy of any non-Rotary grant applications in excess of US$25,000 and a copy of any agreements executed with non-Rotary parties and organizations. 

2007:  In Decision 159 (February), the Board modified the cooperative relationships policy that applies to RAGs so that they may not contact or solicit any organizations on the “no contact list,” as defined in Article 35.010.1., for the purpose of obtaining funds or cooperation for their projects without the express written consent of the RI president in consultation with the trustee chairman. 

In Decision 160 (February), the Board agreed to allow RAGs to list projects seeking financial support on their websites, with notification to the general secretary. 

In Decision 69 (November), the Board adopted significant policy changes for RAGs. These included:

• A triennial review of each RAG by the Rotarian Action Groups Committee
• Changes to the financial reporting to allow groups to use an audit committee instead of a paid financial professional
• When appointed, resource groups should facilitate the activities of relevant action groups

Also in Decision 69 (November), there was an increased expectation for performance of groups, including expanding its individual membership base and increasing the number of districts and countries in which projects are undertaken. 

2009:  In Decision 246 (June), the Board modified the circularization policy as it applies to RAGs, limiting groups to communications with their own membership only. Additionally, groups may only solicit funds for membership dues on their websites. A moratorium on considering new RAG applications was placed until January 2010, while a joint committee reviewed the program. 

In Decision 40 (November), the Board adopted provisions for a RAGs pilot project, and appointed a RAGs Pilot Ad-Hoc Committee (“joint committee”) to develop criteria. 

In Decision 41 (November), the Board extended the moratorium on considering new RAG applications until the June 2010 meeting. 

2010:  In Decision 141 (January), the Board referred the RAGs Pilot Ad-Hoc Committee (“joint committee”) recommendations for reconsideration and report to the Board at its June 2010 meeting. 

In Decision 215 (June), the Board referred the RAGs Pilot Ad-Hoc Committee (“joint committee”) recommendations to the 2010-11 RI RAGs Committee for further study and report to the Board at its November 2010 meeting.   

In Decision 216 (June), the Board again extended the moratorium on considering new RAG applications until the November 2010 meeting. 

2011:  In Decision 60 (November), the Board approved in concept the RAGs Committee’s proposal for the future of the Rotarian Action Groups program and requested the general secretary to update the Rotary Code of Policies section on RAGs accordingly for review at the Board’s January 2011 meeting. 

In Decision 137 (January), the Board adopted significant policy changes for RAGs.  These included the following:

• RAGs were now expected to provide assistance and support to clubs, districts, and multidistrict groups in planning and implementing humanitarian service projects (RAGs were no longer expected to plan and implement projects on their own).
• RAGs were now allowed to initiate contact with district governors and may contact clubs with the permission of the district governor.  RI staff was asked to coordinate an annual mailing asking each district governor-elect to indicate which specific RAGs, if any, may contact their clubs. 
• RAGs were allowed to solicit funds from individuals and/or organizations, provided that donations are made directly to a Rotary club, district, or multidistrict for a specific project; The Rotary Foundation; or a separate implementing organization working with Rotary clubs on a project.  However, RAGs were not allowed to collect or retain solicited funds under any circumstances, with the exception of membership dues or administrative grants.  RAGs were not allowed to solicit funds from their websites in the form of an electronic donation.
• Corresponding revisions to the standard bylaws for RAGs were also approved by the Board.

In Decision 138 (January), several new proposed RAGs were considered for recognition by the Board, ending the moratorium. 

In Decision 88 (September), the Board adopted significant policy changes for RAGs.  These included the following:

• RAG membership now open to all family members of Rotarians, not just spouses

• Rescinded the policy mandating that RI staff coordinate an annual mailing to contact district governors on an annual basis to request these permissions on behalf of all RAGs (RAGs are still obligated to renew their club communication permissions annually with the change in district leadership through direct contact with each class of governors)
• The policy restriction mandating that RAG dues be spent only on specifically defined administrative functions was eliminated.
• RAGs were now allowed to collect and retain up to US$25,000 in donations for remission to eligible project.
• RAGs were now allowed to solicit donations from their websites, pursuant to the $25,000 collection threshold.

In Trustee Decision 26, the Trustees made a formal gesture of cooperation with RAGs, citing the following ways that RAGs are encouraged to work with the foundation:

• serve as members of their respective areas of focus stakeholder groups
• act as resources to clubs and districts in planning projects in their respective areas of focus
• assist the general secretary in identifying and working with potential (TRF) strategic partners
• utilize term gifts to fund club and district projects in the areas of focus
• recruit members with technical expertise to join the TRF cadre of technical advisors