Just read the posting on corporate donations to archaeological sites and have several comments. From 1981 to 1989 I ran a project in northern New Jersey which focused on a site from the American Revolution. The vehicle for the work was a nonprofit set up locally. Although we had links to local universities such as Rutgers and ran field schools through them, the nonprofit was esentially autonomous. ALL of the funding for that project was derived from corporations and foundations. Of the over $400,000 raised, three quarters came from corporations. Our rationale for targeting businesses and foundations was twofold: we felt that corporations were under-utilized by archaeology and would therefore be more liable to give; and for a small nonprofit, the paperwork and administrative support required for corporate donations was far smaller than that required for federal or state grants. Most corporations (and foundations) wanted a short proposal and kept paperwork to a minimum. Reporting during and after the grant period was also minimal. Most funds were not earmarked for specific research or tasks, but could be used as needed. Some of the success of our fundraising efforts was due to our location. A significant number of corporate headquarters were located in our area. We found it useful to involve their employees in our work as volunteers and tried to portray ourselves as contributing to the general historical and cultural environment which made the area an attractive place to live. Whether or not they bought the arguments is hard to judge, but they did put up a lot of money. Heavy residential development in the area made developers a prime target for funding, and new businesses moving in behind the development (especially banks) were good targets. At least one bank actually used our project in its ads, and emphasized the historic quality of the region to potential home-buyers (read mortgage buyers and new accounts). Despite what I think was a pretty good success with corporations, there are some formidable obstacles to doing it successfully. First, relatively few corporations actually give. I don't have current figures, but out of about 2.3 million corporations in the US during 1988, only 35% gave to tax-exempt groups. Out of the allowable 10% of pre-tax profits whioch could be given in 1988, only 1.91% was actually contributed. I don't what the figures are now, but my sense is that giving has actaully been dropping. This means that networking and using contacts within the company are essential. Aside from that, companies seem most interested in "investing" rather than "giving." They don't seem to respond very well to hard luck stories, and they're most interested in research or activities which they think may increase profits, which use their products, or which in some way benefit their employees. This last area is generally the one where archaeology can make the greatest headway, using the appeal of the field and the potential PR value. We tried to hit those elements for all we were worth, and even arranged special tours and reenactments to coincide with the major openings for developers. I doubt that it sold many houses, but the developers perceived a value and contributed significantly as a result. I still think that corporate sources are under utilized for funding. It does require a lot of schmoozing, a lot of contacts, and an understanding that you're going to be turned down fairly frequently. Nevertheless, it can sometimes be very productive.