According to the Washington Post, nonprofit (boards) tend not to seek prosecution when they (the nonprofits) are victims of theft or other wrongdoings against them Yes, they do go after the money they lost but they effectively tend not to seek public accountability. Apparently such failing on the part of these nonprofits puts other nonprofits at risk as there is then no public record of an individual's wrongdoing.
As I have been stating over these past few months, I believe that nonprofits should subscribe to a "new do harm" value. On the one hand, nonprofits (particularly nonprofit boards) seeking restitution and not public accountability does take-on a do no harm position which should be applauded. At the same time, it appears that the risk of harm to another nonprofit is introduced. Which is the greater good: not turning the other cheek or possibly, albeit indirectly, putting other nonprofits at risk?
At the very least, I would offer that nonprofit boards should definitely have a conversation about their position regarding "what next" when facing such a dilemna. Setting policy now would at least ensure the debate is held apart from the heated moment. Finally, nonprofit board members might want to recall that the standard (test) for fulfillment of the duty of care (one of the 3 fiduciary duties of a board and its members) is to ask the question: what have/would others facing a similar situation do.