Nonprofit Board Crisis

Nonprofit Board Policy: Pay-For-Success

What constitutes meaningful nonprofit board conversation?  I pose that meaningful nonprofit board conversation, (usually what goes on in a board meetingand/or board planning session informs and/or results in action around fiduciary and strategic policy, planning and evaluation.

One of the topics I believe should be on the table of many human service nonprofits: pay-for-success. PMany US state and federal legislators are considering payfor-success as an answer to both cost savings and accountability.  Here's a description from the Wall Street Journal:

Historically, providers of social services to at-risk and vulnerable populations have been paid for their efforts rather than for the outcomes they effect. But the past four House budgets constructed by Rep. Paul Ryan (R., Wis.) have emphasized measuring the impact of federal funds spent on education, food security, and other social needs. Such programs typically reimburse operators for meeting specific benchmarks in their efforts to keepclients out of prison or end homelessness. These policy innovations could help improve outcomes for at-risk populations while stewarding scarce federal dollars.

Federal job training programs are one place to look. Traditionally, such programs have focused on training job seekers independent of whether the training results in people getting and keeping a job, leaving few ways to measure the effectiveness ofthe approximately $18 billion the government spends every year to train those who need work.

In pay-for-success job training programs, however, market forces are applied to the process of calibrating employer needs and trainee education levels, matching trained applicants to employers with job openings, and providing supports to help ensure long-term success on the job. The programs typically work by making a portion of a provider’s reimbursement contingent on meeting an initial benchmark—usually job placement in a sector for which the employee was trained—and paying the remainder of the fee when a second benchmark, such as continued employment for a full year, is met. The Australian Department of Employment reported this summer that the cost of placing jobseekers has plummeted from $16,000 to $3,500 per trainee, even as the number of trainees getting and keeping jobs has doubled.

A consensus is also developing in the GOP around an accountable, efficient approach to poverty alleviation. Rep. Ryan has visited nonprofits around the country helping those caught in the cycle of poverty and dependency, and he recently proposed a plan to address endemic poverty. Language in the recent Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, championed by Rep.Susan Brooks (R., Ind.) and Sen. Rob Portman (R., Ohio), allows governors to use as much as 10% of their federal job training funds for these types of pay-for-performance, outcome-based programs.

Incoming House Budget Chairman Tom Price has said that he wants the GOP budget to give “the greatest amount of opportunity to the greatest number of Americans.” Incorporating policy guidance in the budget resolution to build and test pay-for-success models would send a message.

Social programs have a contract to keep with those who fund them and those they serve. Pay-for-success policies update the conservative lexicon to re-emphasize focus on outcomes–and empathy. By incorporating such strategies into the next budget, Republicans could improve the economic prospects of those Americans who need help the most—and improve their own prospects for 2016.

Juleanna Glover is a corporate consultant and Republican policy and communications adviser. She is an adviser to America Forward, a nonprofit that advocates accountability in government spending on social programs.  She is on Twitter: @juleannaglover. 

But, while pay-for-success may be the right strategy for the government, nonprofit boards must really examine their core values and mission as well as business model to discern how pay-for-success would affect the institution and their clients.  Perhaps a pay-for-success task force should be created to understand all the issues and impact and be called upon to lead a board conversation that results in a clear direction with parameters.  And, once ready to adopt, imagine the many and varied internal policies, practices, training, and /reporting/evaluation activities that will need be put in place to achieve the pay-for-success goal.  Note, pay-for-success may not be right for every nonprofit.

Nonprofit Board Drama

The fodder for fiction writers and the movies, It is not really unusual to have some drama embedded in a nonprofit board's doings.  Usually this stuff is behind the scene and never advances to the public's sight.  Usually, a good board chair can keep the drama from getting out of hand.  Well, this is not the story for the Devon Horse Show (in the Philadelphia area). Nope, the drama if fresh but actually dates back maybe to the 100-year founding of the organization.  Never resolved but certainy in the throws of some attempt to resolve now.  But really, I couldn't make up the following Philadelphia Inquirer story.  Read and weep and recongnize that some of the basic rules of negotiation have been ignored: separate the problem from people; look for mutual interests (aka mission).  And maybe, they shouldn't have tried to have these conversations alone -- way too many personalities in the room.

Whew!  Here's the story:

 

JUSTINE MCDANIEL, INQUIRER STAFF WRITER

POSTED: Sunday, December 28, 2014, 1:09 AM

 

 

 

The abrupt ouster last week of the new president and chairman of the Devon Horse Show had volunteers and supporters spinning.

Was it a hostile takeover, or was it democracy in action?

"I really would like to get some sort of better explanation," said Mary Talbutt, a show volunteer and lifelong horse rider.

MORE COVERAGE

• Ousted Devon prez: 'Hostile takeover'

The emergency vote in a hastily called and confidential meeting Monday marked another twist in a year of unusual upheaval for the century-old Main Line institution. It also brought to light age-old fissures between the two factions of the nonprofit: the horse show and the country fair, which each draw thousands annually to the Lancaster Avenue fairgrounds.

Monday's gathering in a hotel conference room near the site was called by nine board members affiliated with the country fair who gave the other members five days' notice. After nearly two hours of private deliberation, the board announced that president Sarah Coxe Lange and chairman Henry Lafayette Collins III had been replaced.

Coxe Lange, of Malvern, whose great-great-grandfather was among the founders of the horse show, had taken office just months earlier with pledges of stability and more transparency for the nonprofit. Her predecessor, Wade McDevitt, retired amid allegations of back-door negotiations to build a shopping center on property next to the horse show site.

The long-running event benefiting Bryn Mawr Hospital is a high-society happening, famed for fantastic equestrian competition and fabulous hats. It's also family-friendly, complete with a country fair that includes food and merchants.

Pledging change, Coxe Lange cut the size of the board and established an endowment for the show. This year, the horse show foundation had an 11 percent increase in donations, and the group gave Bryn Mawr Hospital the first installment of a $2 million pledge, Coxe Lange said in an end-of-year note to supporters.

She said she was working to get an easement for the property to protect its land - an issue that she says may have sparked internal opposition and the plans to unseat her.

As news of the planned vote spread before Monday's meeting, supporters of Coxe Lange flooded Devon's offices with e-mails and letters of support.

"It's really a shame because I think [Coxe Lange] was so qualified and brought a lot of new energy to that group," said one letter writer, Bill Tickner of Paoli, who said he had not missed a show in 45 years, since he was 4. Coxe Lange and Collins were already up for reelection at an annual meeting next month, so the need for an emergency meeting perplexed them. Neither attended.

"Because there is this rush, one begins to think, 'Well, what else is going on that we don't know?' and so that leads to all sorts of conspiracy theories," Collins said Monday.

Board members were tight-lipped after the vote, but in a statement, they declared the election routine.

The new chairman, Wayne Grafton, said he and the new president, Richard O'Donnell, "want everyone to know what is going on," but he declined to discuss the meeting, which he called a board matter.

"We're not going backwards. That is water over the dam," said Grafton, of West Grove, Chester County.

After the meeting raised suspicion among Devon spectators and supporters, rumors seemed to center on the potential for the sale of the horse show grounds.

But the new leadership sought to quash that speculation.

"Devon is here. It will be on the Devon show grounds. There's never been a discussion to move it from its present facility," Grafton said Tuesday.

He and O'Donnell said they met with about 60 volunteers Tuesday and would continue to hold talks.

Volunteers such as Talbutt, who began attending the horse show as a child in the 1960s, said they were waiting for answers.

"It's not fair for us to be sitting here listening to rumors or reading conjecture," she said.

 

Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20141228_High-level_intrigue_at_Devon_Horse_Show.html#YkkI7fdTKXwusUBh.99

Nonprofit Executive Insubordination

One of THE most important fiduciary jobs of a nonprofit board is to hire, evaluate and if necessary, fire an executive director.  In the case of Theater J (Washington, DC), it was the Executive Director who fired Theater J's artistic director on the grounds of insubordination.  As this was an internal decision and presumably backed by the board (this may well be a task for the ED to fired the artistic director on whatever grounds but given the visibility of the position, I'm thinking it's unlikely that such a firing would take place without the theate's board at least being aware if not formally sanctioning action).

Insubordination, in my experience, is not a frequently used reason for dismisal and when applied, it is uusally with much though and documentation.  More importantly, when insubordination is use, again based on my experience, it's not based on one event.  So, it's not surprising that individuals who for one reason or another care about the status of an artistic director might well want to take efforts to reverse what has been done.  Me, I would consel that right or wrong, the deed has been done and moving-on is the next best step.  

Just the same, here's a Washington Post article that tells the story.

Another open letter protesting the firing of Theater J’s longtime artistic director, Ari Roth, is being circulated by a pair of Bay Area-based documentary film makers, Deborah Kaufman and Alan Snitow. Signed by 34 writers, theater artists, academics, musicians and community activists, the letter to the board of the DC Jewish Community Center characterizes Roth’s firing as an act of censorship and the circumstances surrounding it “a form of creeping McCarthyism.”

Roth was dismissed by the JCC’s chief executive, Carole Zawatsky last Thursday, the culmination of tensions in the center over Roth’s theater programming, some of it controversial for its implicit criticism of Israeli policies.

On Monday, more than 60 artistic directors of major theaters across the country sent out their own open letter, denouncing Roth’s firing. The names of more than 30 other artistic directors were added to that letter on Tuesday, pushing the total number of signatories over 90. The new names include a number of Roth’s Washington colleagues, among them Eric Schaeffer of Signature Theatre; Michael Dove of Forum Theatre; Deborah Randall of Venus Theatre; Ryan Rilette of Round House Theatre; W. Thompson Prewitt of WSC Avant Bard; Matt Ripa of Doorway Arts Ensemble; Mark Jaster and Sabrina Mandell of Happenstance Theatre and Thembi Duncan of African Continuum Theatre. Others joining the list also included Blake Robison of Cincinnati Playhouse in the Park; Peter DuBois of Boston’s Huntington Theatre Company and Ty Jones of the Classical Theatre of Harlem.

Among the well- known signers of Kaufman and Snitow’s letter, released on Tuesday, are actor Theodore Bikel, playwright Eve Ensler and writer Letty Cottin Pogrebin.

That letter and its signatories follow.

Dear Carole Zawatsky and Board of the DC Jewish Community Center,

We strongly protest the firing of Ari Roth.  We are outraged by the continuing censorship being imposed by the current DC JCC leadership on Theater J, internationally known as one of the most important American Jewish cultural institutions of our time. It must not be tolerated.

 

Nonprofit Is Business That's Just Not for Profit

Sometimes, Richard J. Cohen says, people are under the mistaken impression that nonprofits don't have to pay as much attention to the bottom line as their for-profit brethren in the corporate world.  One of my core philosophies is that a not-for-profit is a business," said Cohen, 67, chief executive of the Public Health Management Corp., the Philadelphia manager and operator of more than 350 public health programs. "It's just not for profit.  "I don't make money from it," he said. "We do it for another reason and we have to come out ahead."

So what I ask?  So what that a nonprofit has to act like a business and needs to watch its bottom line?  Yes, certainly.  As any fiduciary-minded board member must know, the nonprofit does not survive if it doesn't have enough money to pay its expenses.  But so-what?  Why does this Philadelpia Inquirer and many articles like it speak more about the "amazing" outcomes of the Public Health Management Corp.?  I of course am presuming that a nonprofit with over 300 employees produces something amazing.  And why wouldn't a CEO of such a nonprofit want outcomes to be THE story?  Certainly this too would be the question if I were a board member of such a nonprofit.  As a nonprofit, yes, I care about whether there's enough money to pursue mission but I care equally about what results I'm getting.  It's the results that are the reason I'm a nonprofit board member.  

 

 

 

Nonprofit Board Policy Matters

One o fthe responsibilities in a nonprofit board's tool box is policy.  Yes, those "decrees" but more appropriately, decisions that, made once, reduce the mount of time and energy often expended to consider this or that fiduciary issue multitudinously.  Policy decisions can range from big to little but at very minimum, they simplify board and staff efforts and at maximum, serve as a refernce for determining if actions by board and staff have been practiced the way board members believe they would want them practiced.  Policies reflect board member values.  Values represent what brings individuals to even be board members -- those essential beliefs and principles in the way the world should be and what is necessary to get there.  Mission statements, statements of expected outcome, are rooted in values.  Polices, at their best, reflect the essential values.

The following article about nonprofit's acceptance of non-cash gifts is a great example of nonprofits implementing policies that both reflect values and significantly reduce the annual if not conceivable monthly or daily conversations thatcould happen were there not policies in place.  Take for example the hospital that only accepts new toys based on a policy that is focused on reducing risk of germs (I'm not sure I buy the argument but this is a less arguable rationale for sure).  

Nonprofit board policy matters.  Here's the Chicago Times story:

Nonprofits prefer cash, but some donors have other ideas

By Christopher SnowbeckStar Tribune (MinneapolisMINNEAPOLIS Nonprofits usually get cash donations, but some gifts could be found wrapped under a Christmas tree at least, a really big one.

 

The Minneapolis-based Allina Health System last year received about $20,000 in donated sports equipment.

 

A donor gave the Minneapolis Institute of Arts a mobility scooter worth about $2,500, while the Rochester-based Mayo Clinic scored a Town Car valued at $17,000.

 

At Carleton College in Northfield, donors gave a number of items described as "historical treasures," including letters from Civil War generals and a painting of Thomas Jefferson. The University of St. Thomas received more than $1 million in art work.

 

The disclosure of these and other "noncash contributions" come from an obscure filing that some nonprofits make each year with the Internal Revenue Service. For some nonprofits, the value of donated goods can run into the millions of dollars in a given year.

From gift cards and coffee grounds to clothing and household goods, the contributions beg the question: What do nonprofits do with all this stuff?

"It's kept among the fleet cars at Mayo Jacksonville," Elaine Eberhart, associate chair for gift planning at Mayo Clinic, said of the Town Car. "Mayo personnel are driving it around Jacksonville now, to make trips around town for business purposes."

"A large number of our visitors are seniors, so it provides them mobility," Mary Mortenson of the Minneapolis Institute of Arts said of the scooter. "We actually have one of our docents who uses the scooter when she does her tours."

Cash gifts are easier for nonprofits to use, charitable groups say. But in some cases, a nonprofit will take a noncash gift that fits with its mission, or can be sold to generate financial support.

"It's harder to process physical gifts," said Matt Viola, senior program analyst with Charity Navigator, which evaluates nonprofits for donors.

Each year, nonprofits file financial information with the Internal Revenue Service, and the forms were adjusted about five years ago so that charities provide more detail about noncash giving, said John Pratt, executive director of the Minnesota Council of Nonprofits. The IRS wants to make sure that neither charities nor their donors are inflating the value of noncash gifts.

"Cash is the most common," Pratt said. "Usually, it's a subset of nonprofits that receive the noncash donations. The larger the organization, the more likely they are to have a gift acceptance policy."

Children's Hospitals and Clinics of Minnesota, for example, often hears from people who want to donate toys to kids in the hospital, particularly during the holidays. But the hospital only accepts toys that are newly purchased, due to concerns about possible infection risk, said Annie Waters, the director of annual giving.

The hospital also doesn't take toy guns or violent video games, Waters said.

"While we love getting the financial donations, because it gives us a lot of flexibility, there are people in our community who want to have an experience of giving something," Waters said. "It just seems to maybe feel a little more tangible for some people."

At the University of St. Thomas, the art work was primarily a collection of 249 works of art from a single donor, said spokesman Jim Winterer. They're being used by art history students who are studying to become curators, he said.

A couple of years ago, St. Thomas received nearly $26,000 in gift cards that were then used in a fundraiser to create a scholarship, Winterer said. During the 12-month period ending June 2013, the university received a pledge of commercial real estate in California with a value of more than $18 million.

The real estate will come to St. Thomas upon the donor's death, Winterer said, adding that real estate gifts usually are sold.

At St. Olaf College in Northfield, an alumnus donated a 16-foot Smoker Craft fishing boat and trailer with a value of about $2,000. It's used in biology classes, so faculty and students can gather water and plankton samples among other research tasks, said Kari VanDerVeen, a spokeswoman for the college.

Across town at Carleton, the portrait of Thomas Jefferson came with an etching of the former president, and an undisclosed item with his signature related to the Second Continental Congress.

"All of these gifts of real property paintings, photographs, jewelry, maps, special books those are all used in our academic program," said Gayle McJunkin, associate vice president for external relations. "We need to be able to use those gifts in our academic mission."

 

At Allina, spokesman David Kanihan said the sporting goods included skis, snowboard equipment and lift tickets for a sports and recreation program at Courage Kenny Rehabilitation Institute.

Allina also received nearly $12,000 worth of donated medical equipment that included a commode and wheelchairs.

"Many of these miscellaneous contributions of equipment (medically related or otherwise) are donated by patients and their families when they no longer have a use for it," Kanihan wrote in an email.

Taken as a whole, the value of noncash donations can add up to some real money. At the Mayo Clinic, for example, the gifts in 2013 had a value of more than $13 million.

During the 12-month period ending June 2013, the Minnesota Historical Society received 1,312 gifts of historical artifacts, according to the group's IRS filing, but the value is listed as "N/A."

"It's hard for us to put a dollar amount on that," said Brian Szott, head of collections and curator of art at the Historical Society. "The vast majority of our collection each year is through donations from individuals or organizations. It's the backbone of our collection."

 

(c)2014 Star Tribune (Minneapolis)

Nonprofit Sustainability and Promotion

There's a nice piece in the New York Times about how the new Hi-Line (elevated once train tracks) Park has gotten into retailing both as a way to generate revenues from branded offerings (e.g. t-shirts and socks) but also to promote the organization's work -- a basic win:win.  

And the article does a good job of hilighting the challenges and maybe not-so-flush benefits from retail efforts although there is a positive bottom line experienced by the Hi-line.  Of course the lessons are clear recognizing that adding retail enterprises does require wearing a different "thinking hat" and operating outside the mission box.  For instance, the Hi-line is essentially a park and the people doing the work are really good gardners -- not retailers.  

At the same time, other nonprofits, not necessarily in the parks business, could onsider entering into revenue making markets without a full-blown retail enterprise.  I believe, surpsingly and consistent with the need to brand the organization and promote key learnings, that primary and behavioral health organizations might be in very intersting position, with the help of saavy volunteer business people to start a line of "message-focused", logo emblazened apparel that could be sold in traditional local retail outlets.  

Perhaps a good idea with a reminder, don't let a revenue idea get in the way of the core mission-related work.

Nonproift Effectiveness

An Airforce ieutenant colonel has posed that effective nonproits are effective not because of their leadership (paid and nonpaid) but because of their bureauacracy: payroll clerks and fundraisers and, especially, liaisons to thestakeholders who keep them in business.  parent volunteers and “charter partners” — often churches — who for instance in the case of boy scouts, host and support troops.  This hypotheses gives me real pause in a number of places.  Like, for instance, are nonprofits without an infrastructure (aka bureacracy) least likely to be effective?  And, what does this mean for the leadership: do they not make as much of or any difference?  Overal, I think there may be something true in this proposal.

Matthew Atkins was a lieutenant colonel in the Air Force, on his way to full colonel, with 20 years of intelligence and counter-terrorism experience. He was frustrated. Time and again, he had watched the U.S. military take out leaders of al-Qaeda and other terror cells. And time and again, he had watched those cells regroup.

Atkins thought there might be a better way. He wanted to, in his words, “achieve truly disruptive effects on terror cells.” There is one place in America, above all others, where would-be disruptors flock. Atkins went there, to Silicon Valley, to study for a year on a fellowship at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution. He set up interviews with dozens of CEOs and venture capitalists. He read up on how successful terror groups organize themselves. He developed a theory on how to truly disrupt terrorists, and he published a research paper on it.

His breakthrough insight was that the best terror cells work a lot like a big nonprofit group. Like the Boy Scouts of America.

From studying the scouts, he determined the best way to stop terrorists is to target their bureaucrats – not top leaders.

“The reason I like the Boy Scouts,” Atkins said in an interview, “is they face a lot of the same management challenges that al-Qaeda does.”

He’s serious. Both groups have a lot of motivated but relatively unskilled volunteers, he writes in his paper, “Boy Scouts, Bureaucracy, and Counternetwork Targeting.” Their desired goals can be hard to quantify, especially in the eyes of their donors. “Perhaps the most intriguing similarity,” he writes, “has been a shared dependence on a very complicated relationship with a variety of constituencies or stakeholders.”

Terror cells have been most successful when they have employed a bureaucracy that would be at home in the Boy Scouts, complete with payroll clerks and fundraisers and, especially, liaisons to those stakeholders who keep them in business. Terrorists need a steady stream of money and fighters and equipment, just like the Boy Scouts need parent volunteers and “charter partners” — often churches — who host and support local scout troops.

In the late 1990s, when it successfully bombed the USS Cole, al-Qaeda’s bureaucracy was fairly top-down. It’s evolved since then — it still has leaders, but it now uses a more hybrid structure that diffuses more power through the organization, in order to ensure the loss of a top leader won’t cripple the whole operation. (Atkins said the Islamic State also employs a highly effective hybrid structure. In the paper, he also compares early al-Qaeda to a venture capital firm: “al-Qaeda was originally conceived as a ‘base’ or foundation where Usama bin Laden could serve as a CEO of sorts, gathering and funding creative ideas…”)

Instead of going after terror leaders, Atkins argues, America should target the members of the terror group who nurture its connections — to donors and supporters, and within the flattened leadership structure. This, again, is like the Boy Scouts: If he wanted to gum up their operation, Atkins said, he’d target fundraisers, lobbyists and local leaders who have a lot of pull with churches who support the group. Not the Boy Scout president, who just happens to be a former defense secretary.

“Killing bin Laden was big, symbolically,” Atkins said. “But continually wiping out accountants and No. 3 guys and operations guys and public affairs guys is a lot more effective.”

Atkins’ paper argues strongly for a shift in counterterrorsim strategy along those lines — a better algorithm, so to speak, for targeting the more valuable bad guys. In the interview, he acknowledged how hard that shift might be to make, from a practical standpoint.

In an actual war zone, like Afghanistan, it’s easier to pick out and go after the more valuable, lower-profile terrorists, Atkins said. It’s harder when you’re targeting terrorists in North Africa, Yemen, Mali or Somalia, where almost every strike requires White House sign-off.

When you’re taking your requests all the way to the president, he said, it’s tough to justify going after an accountant.

Nonprofit Accountability

When nonprofit boards won't be accountale, it is on governments to hold them accountable passing and enforcing legislation that changes the terms so behavior must change.  The following Philly.com article can provide the launching pad for US similar action regarding sport overseeing bodies (aka, NFL).  

Reuters

POSTED: Friday, December 12, 2014, 10:11 AM

BERNE, Dec 12 (Reuters) - Swiss lawmakers passed a bill on Friday that would subject sports officials -- such as the head of soccer's governing body, FIFA, and the International Olympic Committee -- to more financial scrutiny by banks in Switzerland. 

Switzerland is responding to years of corruption allegations with a set of laws that have become known as "Lex FIFA", which aim to tighten oversight of the approximately 60 sporting bodies based here. 

Swiss lawmakers voted 128 to 62 in favour of revising a broader bill designed to fight money laundering, based on guidelines set up by the intergovernmental Financial Action Task Force (FATF). 

The bill now includes wording saying FIFA head Sepp Blatter and other sports executives, such as International Olympic Committee President Thomas Bach, should be treated as "politically exposed persons" - a term justice officials use to define those in positions that could be abused to launder money. 

MORE COVERAGE

• More soccer coverage from The Goalkeeper
• Buy Philadelphia Union gear
• UEFA Champions League TV schedule
• English Premier League TV schedule

Bach, who on Monday pushed through sweeping reforms of Olympic bidding, said he welcomed the measures "wholeheartedly." 

The IOC will audit its accounts to higher standards than legally required of the organization and will provide a yearly finance report, including the allowance policy for all IOC members, Bach said. 

FIFA said it supports government efforts to tackle corruption but didn't comment specifically on the bill, which now goes to Swiss government to be written into law. 

The bill increases financial scrutiny of sports officials by necessity, because Switzerland's banks are legally required to ensure funds are not of suspicious origin before they accept them. 

The broader money-laundering guidelines aim to keep Switzerland, which is effectively doing away with banking secrecy, off FATF blacklists. 

Global corruption watchdog Transparency International welcomed the bill's passage. But it said Switzerland should go a step further and make private corruption a criminal offense, to give prosecutors more leeway to crack down on wrong-doing in sport. 

The campaign to increase oversight of major sports bodies has been led since 2010 by lawmaker Roland Buechel, who says he is concerned that negative headlines around these organisations are tarnishing Switzerland's image. 

Sports bodies like the IOC and FIFA enjoy a privileged existence in Switzerland. As non-profit associations, they pay a far lower tax bill than private-sector corporations. 

That legal status puts organizations such as FIFA, which posted nearly $1.4 billion in revenue last year, on an equal footing with community projects, for example.

(Reporting by Ruben Sprich in Berne, Katharina Bart and Caroline Copley in Zurich, Martina Depetris in Geneva, Editing by Angus MacSwan, Larry King)

 

 

Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/soccer/Swiss_government_passes_anti-corruption_FIFA_law.html#XkYlixXwH22RoVP5.99

Nonprofit Board Policy

Accoridng to the New York Times, one more area for nonprofit accountability (and doing no harm) has been added to the list of practices that can help donors determine whether a nonprofit of their choice should be supported: fossi fuels.  Before waxing a little about the movement this is a fine time to remind boards that one of the core tools they have in exercising their fiduciary responsibility and ensurning nonharmful behavior in the pursuit of mission is the development and enforcement of policy.  

The poicy realm at question with the topic of fossil fuels is investments, responsible investing.  If you, a nonprofit board, has investments anywhere, the folks who care much about the use and abuse of fossil fuels want you to ensure you are not investing in the companies that make their living off of abusing the earth (which I'm thinking we are all, directly and indirectly a party-to to some degree).  Disinvestment is the name of the game and the watchdog that will help you can also inform donors whether you have invested.

So...nonprofit boards listen up!  You have the responsibility to determine how your assets should be invested.  You do not need to sit around and go through every possible investment.  You can make a policy broad and narrow enough to inform your staff and investment people.  But such a decision is on your shoulders.  If you want to do no harm, investment policy is one more area where you can make a difference.

Nonprofit Board Continues to Do Harm

I continue to believe that if a nonprofit has but one value, that value should be that "it will do no harm".

While I've spoken of national sports organizations before and certainly as entities that do not appear to embrace the value of doing no harm, the opportunity to rail has risen again.  Today's focus is the NFL which not unlike it counterpart, the NCAA, appreciates making revenues off the back of its performers.  Free is always best but lowest wage possible is not far behind.

The New York Times "Coach" had a piece about professional league cheerleaders that certainly should raise eyebrows at the least and calls for change at the most.  The primary focus of the article was the Buffalo Bills Cheerleaders but the status of professional cheerleaders is clear -- free entertainment for the fans, for free.  Acceptable?  I think not.  Doing harm-absolutely.  And should football fans and others standby amused?  Absolutely not!

Admittedly there are many in America's working classes who are underpaid and undervalued at the cost of consumers who themselves don't make that much money (not exclusively.  So our grumpiness and call to action should not be limited to a particular class of worker is not compensated at all for their labor.  But the idea that a nonprofit should be so emboldened to host such an enterprise makes me upset and put forth once again the proposition that there are nonprofits who are not worthy of their nonprofit status and as such should be stripped of this privalege of doing for the public what the public may not be able to do for itself.  Should mega sports organizations like the NFL be permitted to operate tax free on the backs of individuals like the cheerleaders?  Absolutely not!