The story begins with developments that occurred in parallel universes. In 1962, at the New School for Social Research in New York City, the administration approved the formation of a self-governing group of retired public school teachers who wished to design and manage their own schedule of course offerings, providing faculty from within the membership. The new Institute for Retired Professionals, was immediately popular and grew to 200 members with a lengthy waiting list by the end of its first year. Despite its success, several years passed before similar groups sprang up elsewhere in the country.

In 1976, the IRP's founder, Hy Hirsch, hosted an informational meeting, inviting institutions interested in learning more about the IRP. That conference prompted further expansion of these Institutes for Learning in Retirement (ILRs) into half a dozen new host institutions, including Brooklyn College, Harvard and Duke. It was clear, however, that the gradual spread of the movement was not a cookie-cutter operation.

By 1985, about 50 programs had been established at colleges and universities, primarily on the east and west coasts. Henry Lipman, then director of the New School's IRP, and Sara Craven of Duke ILR, shared with leaders of other programs their desire to help people start their own learning-in-retirement groups. Dr. Kenneth E. Young, director of the American University Institute for Learning in Retirement, proposed the concept of the Institute Network. He suggested a central coordinating agency that would publish a directory of the existing Institutes and a newsletter, and provide start-up assistance for new groups through workshops and written materials.

Related Links: Find more information about us on the following pages: • FAQ's • LLI Overview • LLI Courses • Charter Programs

Meanwhile, in 1975, Elderhostel had been developing rapidly from its humble beginnings in New Hampshire. Older adults from near and far were invited to occupy the otherwise empty dorms at several college campuses and join in week-long programs taught by star faculty members featuring three mini-courses on a variety of subjects. Within its first five years, Elderhostel expanded into all 50 states. By 1985, its program sites numbered 950, all published in a hefty catalog to a mailing list of 500,000 mature learners.

While Lipman, Craven and Young conferred, Elderhostel's first and longtime president Bill Berkeley (who retired in 1997) was just becoming acquainted with the Institute concept. Berkeley liked the idea that constituents could enjoy longer-term learning opportunities in their own communities without the need for travel or overnight lodgings. Young felt that Elderhostel would be an appropriate organization to take on a leadership role in this effort and guided Berkeley's exploratory research.

Berkeley and his senior staff took turns visiting many Institute programs, striving to identify the common attributes which seemed most essential. Young urged them to present alternative models from which ILR instigators could choose the features best suited to their situation.

In getting to know different ILR programs, Elderhostel staff noted in an internal memorandum that There is a fierce loyalty to the local program and a deserved sense of pride in what has been created by the membership. How to work together to mutual benefit is the question.

Gradually, Berkeley became convinced that no other national organization was as well equipped as Elderhostel to lead the expansion of the ILR movement which he felt strongly would be of benefit to thousands of people. Elderhostel is the logical major player, he wrote, and we ought to offer our resources to this new and exciting educational movement for older adults. After a few unsuccessful attempts to attract foundation funding, Berkeley appealed to the Elderhostel Board to provide direct funding for the new project. Some critical assumptions were made about costs, revenue sources, and future growth. The plan called for the new venture to be breaking even within five years. Given the strong growth trends projected for Elderhostel, Berkeley felt comfortable in recommending the bold new initiative.

In June 1988, Elderhostel announced the creation of the Elderhostel Institute Network (EIN) to assist colleges, universities and older adults throughout the country to learn about and develop campus-based Institute programs.

A written plan for the Network cited Elderhostel's unique capacity to aid the growth of the Institute movement. The vision was that Elderhostel would provide an appropriate, experienced administrative base, sensitive to the need to encourage programmatic independence and distinctiveness, yet aggressive in pursuit of the opportunity to facilitate the rapid and substantial expansion of this exciting educational concept.

Berkeley appointed Jim Verschueren to be director of the Network, to be housed at the University of New Hampshire, near his home. Having been involved with Elderhostel for 13 years already, Verschueren brought to the new venture a thorough familiarity with Elderhostel's policies, structure and people. His first year was devoted to learning more about the existing Institutes and creating materials and workshops to help start new ones. He soon realized how essential it would be to have the participation of experienced ILRs as models and mentors for new groups. It seemed important to provide services useful to the mature groups as well as the new, specifically a newsletter and opportunities to meet and exchange ideas.

An Advisory Committee was established, made up of experienced ILR leaders and Elderhostel administrators. They settled on using the term Institute for Learning in Retirement or ILR as a generic term for the constituent groups, since several of the existing groups were using that name. Verschueren drafted a working definition of an ILR, and Henry Lipman made sure that social interaction was listed as an essential element. The other advisors agreed that the social component was indeed a major characteristic of the ILRsone which remedied the isolation of retirement and encouraged members to have a stake in their program.

Some programs which applied for Network affiliation did not match the working definition on all its points. The advisory committee believed, however, that a very broad definition of institutes should be adoptedevery effort should be made to be as inclusive as possible...peer learning is not possible at every institute, butmembership control over what is taught is possible everywhere. (Francis Meyers, a committee member from PLATO at UCLA, suggested the word input rather than control, framing a debate which continues to this day.)

A series of development workshops was launched as the primary vehicle for encouraging expansion of the Institute concept. The goal was to include sufficient how-to information so participants could begin organizing new ILRs immediately. To advertise the workshops, Elderhostel used its considerable mailing list of older adults and Elderhostel program coordinators at its sponsoring colleges and universities.

The basic workshop formula evolved, and Verschueren recruited and trained a cadre of two dozen volunteers to serve as presenters and, subsequently, as consultants to fledgling ILRs. The core of each workshop was a set of presentations of two or three different ILRs as models," describing their academic programs and the structural underpinnings and procedures of their organizations. An effort was always made to feature ILRs which contrasted with each other in terms of size, fees, type of community, or course leadership (i.e., whether peer leaders or professional faculty were used.) The message was always clear get local participants involved in designing their own organizations.

In Canada, Dr. Randy B. Swedburg of Concordia University (Montreal), supported by the Seniors Independence Program of the Canadian government, documented the varied features of existing educational programs for seniors. He was enthused about further expansion of ILRs, and since 1991, Elderhostel Canada (now called "Routes to Learning") has collaborated with the EIN office and given assistance to Canadian ILRs in their formative stages.

The Advisory Committee urged that training materials include realistic sample budgets, to ensure that, once established, Institutes would have a reasonable chance of sustaining themselves. They were concerned that organizers would be tempted to keep fees artificially low, to entice new members, and then face difficulties if higher fees were needed later on.

Even at this very early stage of the Network's formation, the issue arose as to whether the Network should give assistance to organizers of new LLs in a location where there may be competition with an established Institute. Nancy Sack of Harvard ILR was one advisor who encouraged a posture of aiding the development of new Institutes wherever they might be. The committee agreed, and the policy was adopted.

Convinced early on that the affiliate dues alone could never sustain the home office, Elderhostel's leadership approved the establishment of the Johnny Appleseed Fund, playing on the Network's underlying theme of seeding and nurturing new Institutes. In preparation for the first direct-mail fund drive, the EIN logo was created, depicting a hand planting a seedling which matures into a fruit-bearing appletree.

By 1993, the Network had grown to include 100 Institutes, most of them newly founded with Network assistance. An associate director (this author) was brought on, with a charge to develop further the menu of services to affiliate groups, in particular the newsletters, regional conferences, and experimental study travel programs. A Network staff of four was now working with volunteers from many parts of the country to provide useful consulting services to ILRs in their formative years.

In 1994, a 16-minute video was produced as a promotional tool. Entitled Institutes for Learning in Retirement," it featured cameo appearances by many ILR members explaining the core attributes of ILRs, especially the benefits that participation brings to them and their host institutions. A sequel video, on the mission and activities of EIN, was distributed free to all affiliates, urging its use as an orientation tool for new members and leaders.

The staff were often asked, Why not use the Elderhostel catalog to talk up the ILR concept"? The answer was the same then as now: the anticipation that it would generate more interest than could be handled adequately. Indeed, this rationality was supported by reader response to a 1996 article in The Elderhostel Insider, a newsletter for frequent hostelers." With circulation of a mere 75,000 (less than one-tenth the circulation of the Elderhostel catalog), the article drew more than 1,000 queries to the Network office.

Rather than stir more demand by promoting the idea to prospective ILR participants, it seemed wiser to prepare to meet the demand by directly persuading more institutions to sponsor ILRs. Both Verschueren and Associate Director, Mary Linnehan spoke regularly to audiences of college and university administrators, at the conferences of the American Society on Aging, the Association for Continuing Higher Education, the Association for Gerontology in Higher Education and the American Association of Community Colleges. The word was spread also by ILR members and staff of ILR-sponsoring institutions, presenting and networking at various professional gatherings.

In 1995, Jim Verschueren moved on to a new role at Elderhostel headquarters in Boston, and Mary Linnehan was promoted to the position of director. Staff continued experimenting to find the right mix of services to affiliate ILRs. Study travel programs were offered and well received. EIN also sponsored dozens of regional conferences during its first decade, all with exuberant attendees numbering from 20 to 230. But it was a continuing challenge to offer these programs at an acceptable price and still cover administrative costs.

By 1997, the number of affiliates exceeded 200, and the emphasis of EIN was shifting. With word-of-mouth publicity abounding, EIN's materials and mentors continued to help new ILRs spring up at a rate of 25 per year. Efforts now focused increasingly on an expanding menu of services for existing ILRs, which now included conferences, study travel programs, periodical newsletters, an annual survey and directory. On the Advisory Committee's recommendation, conference programs gave more attention to the needs of mature ILR organizations, featuring topics such as membership growth, space limitations, and differences between younger and elder members. A new email discussion group called EIN Forum also helped to meet those needs.

In July 1997, the EIN office was moved from Durham to join Elderhostel headquarters at 75 Federal Street in Boston. A new Elderhostel president, Steve Richards, came on board that fall as Bill Berkeley retired.

In the spring of 1998, the staff obtained Richards' support, and Elderhostel Board approval, for a study called EIN Future Search. The study aimed to assess both the costs and the value to ILRs of services provided by EIN, and to re-envision the best future relationship between Elderhostel and the ILRs. The very successful EIN*10 Conference, held in Washington D.C. in June of 1999, provided a rare opportunity for fruitful discussion and planning for the next Millennium. The members and leaders of the ILR movement are now sufficient in both numbers and conviction to build a self-reliant future, one that follows the ILR principles of member leadership and responsibility. To that end, EIN has become a dues-free, "virtual" organization, providing services from a special section of the Elderhostel web site.The ILR movement continues to have a viable advocate organization for the growth and a national/international voice.