This program became a huge success and Glennan followed it with other fund-raising efforts to finance CIT's rapid post-war expansion.
These efforts made it possible for Glennan to begin an aggressive development program on campus. During his tenure Case built twelve new buildings and remodelled virtually all the earlier buildings. He also increased CIT's programs and enhanced its reputation as a scientific and technical institution through reorganizations of the curricula and departments on campus, the creation of an Engineering Division without as much of the normal separation of the discipline into subfields as was usual elsewhere, the establishment of interdisciplinary research centers, and the expansion of the core undergraduate program emphasizing mathematics, physics, and chemistry. At the same time the enrollments increased, rising to 1,726 undergraduates and 879 graduate students in 1965-1966. Between 1947-1948 and 1965-1966 at Case, the institution grew rapidly in size, endowment, and prestige. Its budget rose from $1.95 to $14.9 million, its endowment more than doubled, and annual gifts and grants increased fifteen-fold. By almost any measure that could be applied to a college president, Glennan had been enormously successful in directing CIT's affairs.16
At the same time that Glennan was heading CIT in the late 1940s, he continued to take a strong interest in public service activities. In addition to a number of significant privately-organized civic activities in the Cleveland area, he was intensely interested in what was happening on the national scene. A moderate in politics who supported both Democratic and Republican candidates depending on the issues, he usually took a conservative stance toward larger questions of national importance. Two became immediately apparent during his early years at Case. First, he was an ardent "cold warrior," distrusting Stalin's Soviet regime and debating with others the propriety of the U.S. president treating the Russian leader the same way that he dealt with other heads of state. He also spoke up for the forceful prosecution of the war in Korea. "The lesson we are learning" in Korea, he confided to Rufus Day, a Cleveland community leader, in 1951, "is a costly one but I am hopeful that the results will be such as to make this nation so strong that attack by others is unthinkable. I am afraid that I am not at all optimistic about our ability to avoid war even though it may be delayed."17 He advocated building a formidable defense capability and constructing a powerful nuclear deterrent force as the best hopes for ensuring the nation's peace.