Prudence is the standard applied to assessing how a board has fulfilled its fiduciary duty. Basically, this standard asks the question: what would most "ordinary" folks (e.g. businesses, nonprofits, others) do facing a similar situation - in other words, what are the lines of what is acceptable behavior or response.
In a Washington Post opinion piece, the author argues that closing the cell door on the not-so-good Olympic doctor should be the beginning, not the end of accounting for what happened to the athletes abused by Nassar in particular and likely others given the pattern of Olympic officials. (PS, it is my opinion that jail for Nassar is a waste of public resources and not really a consequence for Nassar. Were I the judge, an alternative consequence would be to castrate Nassar such that what remains now in his memories cannot be enjoyed).
Anyway, I digress. While whatever is the appropriate consequence for Nassar, it still remains that 150 athletes later, there was a system failure. As the Opinion article writer noted:
Let’s put those pieces together — and understand why Nassar’s trial should be just the start of the investigation and not an end. His years of criminal sexual assaults on gymnasts could have happened only with the assistance of U.S. sports officials and coaches, such as Martha and Bela Karolyi and John Geddert, who let Nassar violate basic medical norms on their watch. It could have happened only because they were willfully blind to his “pelvic adjustments” on young women athletes, for which there was no good reason. It could have happened only because they failed to exercise the most basic, common, fundamental good sense in protecting children, allowing him to probe girls ungloved and sequester himself with them without any nurse present. Here is how negligent they were: The girls were required to see him in their hotel and dorm rooms at night. Alone. On their beds.
Prudence from management on up? I think not. I believe, like at Penn State, the conversation must continue to each of the higher levels at least to the US Gymnastics board and perhaps to the US Olympics organization where likely prudence (and past evidence suggests this to be true) has also not been a rule of thumb. And yes, there's the University of Michigan that was actually Nassar's employer.
Nonprofit boards are the surrogate "owners" of a nonprofit. It is on their watch that mission good and failure happens and accountability is central. At very minimum it's about policy and evaluation. The US Gymnastics board has failed. It must be held accountable along with all the related persons who were responsible each day.