Blogs

As a generation of nonprofit leaders approaches retirement and the economic climate continues to stress financial resources, organizations in the social sector should shift their approaches to planning, governance and investment, according to a new report presented Tuesday, September 15. 

The findings of the report, Leadership New England, Essential Shifts for a Thriving Nonprofit Sector, were presented to about 100 directors, Board members, and staff representing a wide range of organizations that deliver basic needs, youth, health, education, arts, and other social programs in the New Haven region. 

“You are the heart of Greater New Haven. Consider this to be a report from your cardiologist,” said William W. Ginsberg, President and CEO of The Community Foundation for Greater New Haven, which funded the report along with Hartford Foundation for Public Giving, The Boston Foundation, Barr Foundation, and other foundations and charitable organizations in New England.

While nonprofits have proven to be resilient in the face of an economic downturn, many rely on operating models that are not sustainable, according to the report, based on surveys taken from 1200 nonprofit leaders and Board members throughout New England. 

The survey results show: leaders are overworked and stressed about cash flow; staff is underpaid and not given adequate professional development; and directors and Boards do not share an understanding of their roles and responsibilities.

A lack of planning for a new generation of leadership is one of the biggest issues facing the nonprofit sector, according to the report. Overall, more than half of the nonprofit leaders responding to the survey (53%) are 55 or older. In the New Haven region, 63% of the leaders are over 55.

Hez Norton, co-author of the report who presented its findings, said that executive directors don’t discuss succession planning because they are afraid of giving their Boards the false impression they want to leave. Likewise, Boards don’t raise the issue out of a fear of upsetting their directors.

“It’s a third rail conversation,” Norton said.

Norton proposed shifting the framework for the discussion away from succession planning, which focuses on an individual, and toward creating a sustainability plan that examines the vulnerabilities of the organization and its choices for the future. 

Other findings included shifting the vision of Board governance beyond short-term fundraising and investing in leadership development and high-quality staff. 

Shaye Roscoe, Executive Director of the Boys and Girls Club of the Lower Naugatuck Valley, said the findings resonated with her experience during a panel discussion following the presentation. Shortly after assuming her leadership role in 2013, Roscoe said she identified the need for a strategic plan and staff training and secured private funding to support the efforts. 

“That was a game changer for us,” Roscoe said. 

Andrew Eder, a philanthropist who has sat on many nonprofit Boards, said that better training is needed for Board members.

“Most Board members don’t know what their roles are. They don’t see staff as equals, which they are. It requires training,” Eder said.

The panel moderator, Shelly Saczynski, of United Illuminating Holdings and a Board member of The Community Foundation, concluded the event with The Foundation’s longstanding commitment to strengthening nonprofits in Greater New Haven.

“The Community Foundation believes in and will continue support capacity building, leadership training, and general operating funding for the important work of our local nonprofit organizations,” Saczynski said.

The following Wall Street Journal article is about a lot of topics in the nonprofit governance world. I thought framing my own thoughts around a nonprofit board's fiduciary duty of care to be one area of focus but beyond this subject is a rarely displayed "what can happen" when there's a new chair "in town" and when there are questions of competency (re paid staff) and transparency (financial and program) and the board's own fulfillment of its duty to provide complete oversight. Certainly I'm not the one to predict how this will all shake out (new exec?; new board members; changes in policy and practices?) but I'm hoping the article's authors will be able to follow-up and let us all know.

At the very minimum, it's heartening to watch so much passion, by board members, in play.
Allegations by the music hall’s chairman, Ronald Perelman, have sparked a boardroom dispute

By
GREGORY ZUCKERMAN and JENNIFER SMITH
Updated Sept. 16, 2015 7:52 p.m. ET

NEW YORK—A simmering clash between leaders of New York’s Carnegie Hall boiled over on Wednesday as financier Ronald O. Perelman, who recently became chairman of the hall’s board of trustees, accused the prestigious music institution’s executive director of improprieties and said the hall has operated with poor oversight.

The allegations include operating the hall with limited transparency and entering into “related-party transactions.” In such transactions, the individuals involved have a relationship prior to the deal.

Mr. Perelman said his criticisms, which he sent in an emailed letter to members of the Carnegie Hall board on Wednesday, were raised earlier in the summer and led to the brief suspension of the director, Clive Gillinson.

The claims have embroiled Carnegie Hall’s board, which includes some of the most powerful players in New York’s financial and cultural worlds.

Through a Carnegie Hall spokeswoman, Mr. Gillinson said: “In serving Carnegie Hall for 10 years, I am very proud of everything we have achieved together. I love the hall and everything it stands for, and will continue to give it my all.”

Mr. Perelman, who built a fortune with corporate acquisitions and investments, is no stranger to high-profile battles. The billionaire has sued investment bank Morgan Stanley, art megadealer Larry Gagosian and a key former business partner, among others.
ENLARGE
Chairman Ronald O. Perelman PHOTO: SHAHAR AZRAN/WIREIMAGE/GETTY IMAGES

Mr. Perelman’s letter, which was reviewed by The Wall Street Journal, serves notice that he may be prepared to bring the bare-knuckle tactics of a corporate raider into the genteel precinct of one of America’s most august cultural institutions. Such disputes generally are handled discreetly and kept out of public view, much as they usually are at orchestras, museums and other art organizations.

In the letter, Mr. Perelman, who succeeded philanthropist and former Citigroup Inc. leader Sanford I. Weill as chairman in February of this year, said he detected in the spring “a troubling lack of transparency and openness in the way Clive Gillinson was interacting with me and the Board.”

Mr. Weill couldn’t immediately be reached for comment on Wednesday.

Mr. Gillinson, a British cellist who joined the prestigious London Symphony Orchestra and rose up to become its managing director, has served as Carnegie Hall’s executive and artistic director for more than a decade.

“My concerns initially arose because of an inability to obtain a full picture of Carnegie Hall’s financial operations, especially as it related to profits and losses involving performances,” Mr. Perelman wrote. “I was told that such financial information was never shared with the Board or even the Chairman.”

Specifically, he continued, he was concerned about “the manner in which related-party transactions were being identified, vetted and approved.”

In the letter, Mr. Perelman said “issues arose” in Mr. Gillinson’s handling of the Warner Music Prize, something Mr. Perelman describes as a “related-party transaction.”

Established in 2014 to honor a promising young classical musician with a cash award of $100,000, the prize is presented in association with Carnegie Hall.

The prize was created with support from the family foundation of Len Blavatnik, the Warner Music Group owner who serves on hall’s board.

In Mr. Perelman’s letter, he said that “in light of various issues,” Mr. Gillinson was instructed to put the prize on hold. He went ahead and “executed a contract” for the prize, the letter said, “without the approval mandated by New York law.”

“These matters implicate Carnegie Hall’s obligations as a nonprofit organization and as a public trust,” according to Mr. Perelman’s letter.

Such lack of transparency, he said in the letter, fails to meet the standards of the New York State Nonprofit Revitalization Act, which mandates that board members take an active oversight role over staff action and, he wrote, “imposes greater restrictions and approvals in connection with related-party transactions.”

It wasn’t clear in the letter exactly what the related-party issue was.

On Aug. 18, Mr. Perelman and Edward Forst, the hall’s treasurer, suspended Mr. Gillinson, according to the letter, and called a meeting of Carnegie Hall’s executive committee. During the meeting, held the next day, Mr. Gillinson was reinstated by the executive committee, the letter said.

Emanuel Ax, a pianist who performs at Carnegie Hall and serves on its board, but not the executive committee, said the letter from Mr. Perelman was the first he had heard of the dispute.

“My contact with Clive has always been fantastic,” he said. “He’s a great guy. As far as I could tell, he was running everything wonderfully.”

Founded by Andrew Carnegie, the hall opened in 1891 and has since become a destination for top musicians and ensembles. Artists who have appeared there include Maria Callas, Jascha Heifetz and Gustav Mahler, as well as major orchestras and jazz musicians such asBillie Holiday and Miles Davis.

The hall was put up for sale in the mid-1950s and was saved from demolition when it was purchased by New York City in 1960 at the behest of the Committee to Save Carnegie Hall, led by violinist Isaac Stern, who later served as the venue’s president. Over the next few decades, its physical condition deteriorated to the point that “the bathrooms were leaking into the boxes,” Mr. Weill said earlier this year.

Mr. Perelman took the reins from Mr. Weill, who held the role of chairman of the hall since 1991. During Mr. Weill’s tenure, the famed music venue underwent a series of renovations and grew its endowment from $4 million in 1991 to $320 million. The hall also expanded its educational program and in 2003 opened Zankel Hall, a third auditorium that was previously used as a cinema.

The hall has embarked on a $125 million campaign to support its educational and performance offerings and develop digital initiatives.

—Pia Catton and Jennifer Maloney contributed to this article.

In one of those "render under Caesar" (check your New Testament for greater understanding) and what appears to be a NIMBY challenge, the Tampa officials are basically on-attack of a homeless shelter that by many standards, appears to be doing its job--providing shelter to the homeless of Tampa. But it's clear from the Tampa Tribune article, that not everyone is pleased with the job the Shelter is doing and for the moment, using the courts and law enforcement to solve their perception of the problem.

My takeaway from the article: what is the board's position on all this? I am of course presuming there is a board and that it plays some role like having at some point agreed to pursue a lawsuit. So if there is a board, how are they involved in supporting the work of the shelter? Have they established the policies that inform shelter related decisions (like standards for the physical space and the roles of volunteers)? Are they actively advocating/communicating with publicly elected officials over the issues? Are they communicating with the neighborhood folks who appear to be affected by the shelter activities. Re they offering or getting financial support?

There's a number of activities the board could be doing to address the shelter's challenges. These challenges should certainly not be on the lone shoulder of the founder/director.
Homeless charity to close by Tuesday

By Elizabeth Behrman | Tribune Staff
Published: September 3, 2015 | Updated: September 3, 2015 at 10:18 PM

TAMPA — A well-known homeless charity that filed a lawsuit resulting in the partial overturning of the city’s panhandling ban will be shut down by Tuesday, the charity’s founder and code enforcement officials said.

Code enforcement officials told Adolphus Parker, who founded Homeless Helping Homeless about seven years ago, that he has five days to clear out the homeless men and women from a makeshift shelter behind the non-profit’s headquarters at 106 E. Floribraska Ave.

“We’ve got to move everybody out of here, the office and everything has got to be shut down,” Parker said. “I don’t know how to pull this one off.”

Parker founded Homeless Helping Homeless in 2009. The non-profit organization offers beds to homeless people in multiple locations throughout the city and supplies showers, hygiene kits and about 3,000 meals each month. The charity’s homeless clients fill key staff positions.

Parker said code enforcement officials were called out to the Floribraska property while Tampa police were executing a search warrant there Wednesday morning.

According to the probable cause affidavit for the search warrant, investigators were looking for evidence that Parker and two of his employees were violating Florida statutes regarding towing and storing vehicles, scheming to defraud, failure to return leased vehicles and unlawful subleasing of motor vehicles.

While police were there, code enforcement officials determined the property is in violation of several zoning laws and that the makeshift homeless shelter behind the main building is “unfit for human habitation,” said city spokeswoman Christina Barker.

The city housing manager will work with the nonprofit to arrange assistance for the displaced occupants, she said. Including those in the main house, makeshift shelter and annex, 16 people will be without housing, Parker said.

Earlier this summer, the organization filed a federal lawsuit against the city arguing that its panhandling bans violate free speech rights and shut off a major source of revenue for the charity, which relies heavily on the private donations collected mostly through roadside solicitations. In June, the City Council voted to repeal part of the ordinance that banned solicitation on public roads.

The lawsuit is still pending.

Parker said he spoke with lawyers Thursday about filing a motion to suppress some of the evidence seized during the raid Wednesday because it relates to the ongoing lawsuit.

More than a dozen police cars were outside the charity’s headquarters Wednesday morning as investigators seized all electronics and tax and financial documents.

According to the search warrant, investigators were looking for evidence that Parker and two others were violating Florida statutes regarding towing, storing and leasing vehicles.

Parker said the only connection his title business and charity has to Cheap Towing is that the woman running the company is also one of his “heavily involved” volunteers.

“You can’t put that link together because there’s no connection other than she’s a volunteer,” he said.

The code enforcement violations just compounded his problems, Parker said.

The city said the storage units he had on the property were illegal, and he was also cited for operating a possible rooming house in a residential area.

Several months ago, zoning violations shut down the charity’s Bargain Center Thrift Store on Florida Avenue, which helped fund the emergency women’s shelter and transitional shelter, he said. He was forced to relocate beds to the Floribraska property, which he put in a temporary, covered structure behind the main building. He even built it on wheels to avoid further code violations, he said.

But that structure was deemed “unfit for human habitation,” the city said, prompting the order to vacate.

Jim McPike has been sleeping on one of the makeshift shelter’s 10 cots for a little more than two weeks.

“This place has helped me a lot; I feel bad about it being shut down,” said McPike, who is disabled. “I wasn’t really prepared for this.”

Staff Reporter Mark Wolfenbarger contributed to this report.

For a growing nonprofit with a small board, those interested summer students are a crucial revenue stream. And getting the Academy’s studios ready by the first day of the program was imperative.

“We don’t have board members donating $100,000,” said board chair Andre Tchelistcheff, an architect who led the renovation. “The school is financially viable.”

These three sentences in a Wall Street Journal article on the Gelsey Kirlkland Academy's new space and future highlights that having a well-healed board need not be the end-all for a nonprofit. It certainly helps however that the nonprofit's director has her own connections (from what I can glean) and that what the nonprofit offers, "prestigious dance instruction" attracts a paying student.

But with the departure of the director and a board that is not that well-healed. Should not more work be put into developing a board, say from the student's parents, that can be equally passionate and raise money?

Nonprofit sustainability planning is not for the faint of heart nor for the immediate. What might work well now might not work well in the future. There are variables to be considered. One of those variables is what board composition will help ensure a future.

Of course future is a goal that needs be established by the current board. But maybe it really doesn't matter that there might not be a future? Capable qualified and talented students who love what they do may be enough

Cheers to All!!!

The Fall will soon be upon us. Now what about a great tour to add to the brilliance of the autumnal sparkle of the trees in New Haven.

My recommendation is Mat Duman and his wonderful tour on the Gargoyles of Yale. He is an expert to the meaning and carving of this wonderful creatures adorning the University.

So, without further ado:

An Education in the Grotesque: The Gargoyles of Yale University
by Mathew Duman
info@yalegargoyles.com
www.yalegargoyles.com  

This tour is really wonderful - not to be missed!

All the best,

Patricia Illingworth, Curator

203.389.5403

p.b.i.Newhaven@att.net

Are you interested in serving a year with AmeriCorps as an AmeriCorps VISTA? Click here to apply to serve as an AmeriCorps VISTA (Volunteer in Service to America) Member with PAVE New Haven. Partnering to Advance Visions in Education (PAVE) is an AmeriCorps VISTA Project that aims to reduce the youth achievement gap in New Haven, CT. VISTA Members serve in 7 different non-profits, community organizations and the Mayor's Office to improve children's literacy outcomes, increase access to college-readiness programs and to strengthen wrap-around services available to our city's youth and their families. 

To learn more about AmeriCorps or PAVE, email awildes@aoascc.org 

Once again, nonprofit CEO salaries are in the news. This time the focus is not on the traditional nonprofits but the religious nonprofits and more specifically, pastors. And, as much as I must honestly grit my teeth to say this, given the focus, this salary "issues" is a subject the media loves to rattle about but if they want to point swords, they should be doing so at the boards who approve these salaries.

I remain a firm believer that the media would serve the taxpayer and donor best not by focusing on salaries (as insane as they may feel about "some" CEOs) and instead raise the questions about results. The question is not, is $800K an unfair salary, but, are the folks who support this salary, in the case of a faith practice, truly better off (using whatever measures apply)?

CEO salaries will for the most part never "feel" fair to the majority of folks who don't earn the level of pay nonprofit CEOs do. For many, these folks won't ever make this kind of money because that's the way the capitalistic system works. But CEOs, when they are great, can produce results and that's what the salaries pay for and that in turn is what we should be asking the media to tell us about.

Meanwhile, it's up to the boards to determine what's right for their institutions. And, it appears that for the ministers in the Graham category, $800K+ is what they feel is correct. Harrumph but so what!

So, from the Washington Post:

Why Franklin Graham’s salary raises eyebrows among Christian nonprofits

By Christine Wicker | Religion News Service August 18 at 5:42 PM

Franklin Graham’s annual compensation of $880,000, revealed in a Charlotte Observer story, has some worrying that too many top Christian nonprofit leaders as well as pastors are seeing themselves as CEOs instead of as God’s servants.

Graham, son of renowned evangelist Billy Graham, is head of Samaritan’s Purse, an international relief agency based in Boone, N.C.

“Basically they are saying if Satan pays well, God should pay better,” said Maria Dixon, a Southern Methodist University professor of corporate communications and public affairs. Dixon, a United Methodist Church deacon and a minister’s wife, specializes in studying and helping nonprofit religious organizations.

CEOs at the top 50 U.S. charities, including Samaritan’s Purse, earn in the $350,000 to $450,000 range, which makes Graham’s $622,000 salary from his aid organization alone about 40 percent to 50 percent higher than average, according to a Forbes story. He receives the rest of his $258,000 compensation as CEO of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association.

A spokesman for Franklin Graham said his compensation was determined by independent commissions that compared similar organizations’ top salaries. Graham was not available to answer questions.

By contrast, pastor salaries at the nation’s biggest Christian churches are much lower for all but a select number. Only 3 percent of churches with more than 1,600 people in attendance pay senior pastors more than $300,000, said Warren Bird, research director at Leadership Network. At the other extreme, a recent study by the National Association of Church Business Administration found that the average American pastor with a congregation of 300 people earns a salary of less than $28,000 a year.

In a 2011 comparison of megachurch pastors’ salaries, two senior pastors made $1 million and $1.1 million. Others were a fourth to less than half of that.

Among the exceptions: Southern Baptist the Rev. Ed Young, senior pastor at Fellowship Church in Grapevine, Texas, pulled in well over $1 million, according to a 2012 Dallas television news report. And in 2013, his last year as pastor at Seattle’s Mars Hill Church, the Rev. Mark Driscoll was drawing a $607,000 package, with a $150,000 raise promised.

Click here for more information!
The word “CEO” is often used when speaking of megachurch pastors who oversee multimillion-dollar budgets, manage media empires and publish best-selling books. “He could have been a CEO in any corporation in America” is an oft-repeated phrase among proud church members.

Pastors make sure well-heeled businesspeople are on their boards, said Jim Henderson, co-author of “Question Mark,” a new book tracing the downfall of Mars Hill’s Driscoll.

“These guys make phenomenal amounts of money. So when it comes time to set the pastor’s salary, what seems like an ungodly amount of money to the rest of us, seems normal to them,” Henderson said.

A prosperous church with business executives on its board might ask “How embarrassed would we be to pay our pastor a lot less than I make?” said historian Joel Carpenter, director of the Nagel Institute for the Study of World Christianity at Calvin College.

But donors to Christian charities may think differently.

Grant Wacker, author of “America’s Pastor: Billy Graham and the Shaping of a Nation,” said he had just read the Observer story about Franklin Graham’s compensation when he received a solicitation for money from Samaritan’s Purse.

Compensation in the mid- to high-six figures “is on the generous side for anyone who is asking for other people’s money,” the professor emeritus at Duke Divinity School said a bit wryly. “It’s eyebrow-raising.”

Mainstream evangelicals generally expect money they give to be used frugally, Wacker said. Big salaries come with questions.

“Does he live ostentatiously or does he give it away?” asked Wacker.

Franklin Graham, who is 63, has said he wants to make enough money to be able to work for free when he turns 70.

By contrast, California megachurch pastor Rick Warren has been giving away 90 percent of his income for years, as part of a strategy he calls “reverse tithing.”

Such outside comparisons are considered good practice for nonprofits, but the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability asks for more.

“Compensation-setting practices should be consistent with generally accepted biblical truths and practices,” according to its guidelines.

“It’s a moral issue particularly for a man of faith,” Pablo Eisenberg, a senior fellow at the Georgetown University Center for Public & Nonprofit Leadership, told the Observer. “And also you have to remember that (compensation is) partly paid for by the taxpayer. In a sense, we the taxpayers are subsidizing Frank Graham’s salary and his relatives who are paid.”

Nonprofits are governed by the federal nondistribution constraint, which specifies that in return for tax-exempt status, they will use donations for the good of clients and not distribute excessive amounts to those who oversee the organization, Dixon said.

“I don’t have a problem with people like Franklin making so much money as long as the janitor is making $60,000 to $80,000, a good living wage,” she said.

Not all of the big Christian charity CEOs are making huge salaries.

Lutheran Charities, a $21 billion organization, pays $181,858 to its highest-paid employee. At Cru, the college campus ministry, the highest salary is $150,787, according to Forbes magazine.

CEO Steve Stirling at MAP, a $349 million international Christian aid organization, made significantly more than his current $200,000 total compensation at other jobs, both for-profit and nonprofit.

“I did take a reduction in salary from my previous job,” he wrote from Ghana, where he is working this August.

Why? “Because MAP is a Christian organization, and I strongly believe in the mission.”

Copyright: For copyright information, please check with the distributor of this item, Religion News Service LLC

In my experience, nonprofit board composition is pretty homogenous - that is to say that I find that nonprofit boards tend not to stray in composition from the folks who first organized the organization. This would lead one to suggest that nonprofit board diversity doesn't matter that much. Possibly.

HP' which is going to be splitting into two corporations (same CEO on both boards) has announced that its boards "will comprise leaders with some of the most diverse backgrounds and professional experiences I’ve seen in my career".

The article suggests that Operation Push has had something to do with this plan and that may well be but no corporation does anything without its own best interests in mind. So, my question, why does such diversity matter to HP. The article does not provide much additional insight into incentives but I'm certainly open to hearing other's thoughts on the topic.

At the same time I propose that while nonprofit boards may be gender diverse and in my opinion not all that connected with those they serve, there may well be a lesson to be learned from the HP shift.

HP will have the most diverse tech boards in the US, say activists

LYANNE ALFARO

Aug. 14, 2015, 11:45 AM
Hewlett-Packard is preparing to diverge into two companies this November, but it can also claim a new achievement for diversity in the national tech workspace.

HP now has the "most diverse" boards in the US, according to the nonprofit Rainbow PUSH.

The HP boards, announced earlier this week, will feature a blend of original members and new hires. Four women and two people of color will be placed on each board, reported Fortune.

Rainbow PUSH is an organization focused on social change and has been urging technology companies across the country to hire underrepresented minorities.

The nonprofit has especially ramped up its efforts in the past year, meeting with tech behemoths across the country, including Apple and Google, to discuss their diversity numbers. A survey conducted by the group last fall found only three blacks and one Hispanic among the 189 board members from 20 technology companies examined.

There were also "153 men and just 36 women. Eleven (over half) have all-white Boards," Reverend Jesse Jackson, who is spearheading Rainbow PUSH, said in a press release. He later added, "Certainly there is a long way to go."

Last March, the nonprofit met with HP at its shareholder meeting to talk about its numbers.

"We challenged them — and the tech industry — to confront the virtual exclusion of women and people of color in the tech industry," Rev. Jackson said. "HP committed to make demonstrable strides in expanding diversity and inclusion."

At HP Enterprise, Leslie A. Brun from Sarr Group, and Pamela Carter, former president Cummins Distribution, are both people of color who will be joining. The board has 13 members in total, according to an HP press release. Heading the team will be Pat Russo, who became a part of the HP board in 2011.

The board at HP Inc. will include Stacy Brown-Philpot, chief operating officer at TaskRabbit, and Stacey Mobley, former senior vice president at DuPont. Twelve people will help oversee HP Inc., which focuses on the printer and PC businesses.

HP CEO Meg Whitman will sit on both boards and serve as chairwoman for HP Inc.

“The post-separation Boards for both Hewlett Packard Enterprise and HP Inc. comprise leaders with some of the most diverse backgrounds and professional experiences I’ve seen in my career,” Whitman said in HP's press release.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/hp-will-have-the-most-diverse-tech-boards-in-the-us-2015-8#ixzz3j4WN0Fqk

Apply to PAVE New Haven to #ServeaYear as an#AmeriCorps #VISTA!

Citywide Youth Coalition, Inc., Common Ground High School, Urban Farm, and Environmental Education Center, Higher Heights Youth Empowerment Programs, Inc., Agency on Aging of South Central ConnecticutVolunteer and Training Dept. and Solar Youth, Inc are all excepting applications!

AmeriCorps VISTA - Volunteers In Service To America. Apply at http://bit.ly/ApplyPAVE

Starting in early September the City of New Haven will offer a nine-week course in city government, New Haven Democracy School. The purpose of Democracy School is to turn residents into more effective advocates for their neighborhoods and communities by giving them a holistic picture of how city government really functions. Students will meet department heads and public safety officials, look deeper into the city's budget, tour the Emergency Operations Center, and network with other engaged residents from all over the city.

This is an invaluable opportunity to develop new tools for becoming a more effective activist and organizer in your community.

Here's an article about a previous version of Democracy School.

Applications are due August 21. Eligibility is limited to New Haven residents 18 years and older, and only 25 students will be accepted. Classes will meet on Thursday evenings from 5:30-8:00pm beginning September 3 and going through November 5.

Click here for more information and click here for the application. 

This weekend I discovered a book that was published several years ago (April 2009) that strikes me as worth a brief mention here. The book, Owning Up...14 Questions Every Board Member Needs to Ask by Dr. Ram Charan..strikes me as worth a discussion because it poses some questions that could be helpful in framing the work of the nonprofit board.
I'm not actually that familiar with Dr. Ram Charan, a kind-of guru in the for-profit governance world but he appears to be well regarded in the business community. I know, well regarded in the for-profit sector does not instantly translate to well-regarded in the nonprofit sector but for the moment lets accept that there is some value in at least reviewing the 14 questions offered in "Owning Up".
I recommend paying particular attention to Questions 10, 6, 9, 11, 12, 1 and 13 in this order. As a matter practicality, I propose that if a board asks and answers these questions, it can go far in significantly improving board outcomes.
Here's the questions:
1. Is our Board composition right for the challenge?
2. Are we addressing the risks that could send our company over the cliff?
3. Are we prepared to do our job when crisis erupts?
4. Are we prepared to name our next CEO?
5. Does our Boar really own the company strategy?
6. How can we get the information we need to govern well?
7. How can our Board get CEO compensation right?
8. Why do we need a lead director anyway?
9. Is our governance committee best of breed?
10. How do we get the most value out of our limited time?
11. How can executive sessions help the Board own up?
12. How can our Board self-evaluation improve our functions & our output?
13. How do we stop from micromanaging?
14. How prepared are we to work with activist shareholders & their proxies?
Yes, there are other questions a nonprofit board can ask and answer but imagine just getting through at least the questions I highlighted.

Matching Funds Program - Third Round of Funding Available

CIRCA: Nearly $100,000 to Support Climate Resilience Across Connecticut

The Connecticut Institute for Resilience and Climate Adaptation (CIRCA) is pleased to announce its third round of funding through the exciting Matching Funds Program. CIRCA has made up to $100,000 available for matching funds for projects that will assist Connecticut towns and cities adapt to a changing climate and enhance the resilience of their infrastructure.

CIRCA will consider requests from Connecticut municipalities, institutions, universities, foundations, and other non-governmental organizations. To be funded, a successful Matching Funds request must have a commitment of primary funding within 6 months of the CIRCA award announcement, or have received a waiver from the CIRCA Executive Steering Committee. CIRCA Matching Funds will provide up to 25% of the primary funder's contribution other than municipal or State of Connecticut funds to enhance the likely success of project proposals that advance CIRCA research and implementation priorities. Requests are due to CIRCA by September 15, 2015.

Project proposals should develop knowledge and/or experience that is transferable to multiple locations in Connecticut and have well-defined and measurable goals. In evaluating proposals preference will be given to those that leverage independent funding awarded through a competitive process. Preference will also be given to those that involve collaboration with CIRCA to address at least one of the following priority areas:

• Improve scientific understanding of the changing climate system and its local and regional impacts on coastal and inland floodplain communities;
• Develop and deploy natural science, engineering, legal, financial, and policy best practices for climate resilience;
• Undertake or oversee pilot projects designed to improve resilience and sustainability of the natural and built environment along Connecticut's coast and inland waterways;
• Create a climate-literate public that understands its vulnerabilities to a changing climate and which uses that knowledge to make scientifically informed, environmentally sound decisions;
• Foster resilient actions and sustainable communities - particularly along the Connecticut coastline and inland waterways - that can adapt to the impacts and hazards of climate change; and
• Reduce the loss of life and property, natural system and ecological damage, and social disruption from high-impact events.

Those requesting Matching Funds should consult the CIRCA office via email at CIRCA_matchingfunds@uconn.edu with any questions. Matching Fund request forms can be found at http://circa.uconn.edu/funds.htm. All requesting funds must complete the form in its entirety on or before September 15, 2015. Matching Funds requests will be accepted on a rolling basis.

Notification of award: Requests will be acted upon every two months. The review will be held on September 15, 2015 and every two months thereafter.

August Greetings!!!

There has been some exciting news - Friends of Grove Street Cemetery now has a Facebook page.

So we invite everyone to take a peek and maybe you would like to follow us on Facebook. It has just been about 7 weeks since it has been in place for us.

Come one - Come all!!!

All the best to everyone,

Patricia Illingworth

Chief Docent

What exactly should a nonprofit board do when it learns that its trusted Treasurer has redirected some of its funds?

Below is the Washington Post story about the theft experienced by the Talbot Watermen Association. The Treasurer helped herself to the nonprofit's funds and members of the organization called the cops. Presuming that the nonprofit has liability insurance, much of their loss should be recovered.

The good news. Below the Washington Post article is what the Association shared with its members. On the Association Website the item is simply titled "Talbot Watermen Association Official Statement. Clicking-on this title gets one to the statement. Fair enough.

Good step: once financial theft is learned or even perceived: call the cops! Next step, fix the systems and policies that enabled the theft. Finally, talk to your constituents. Kudos to the Association for moving forward in what I believe to be correct actions.

EASTON, Md. — Maryland State Police have charged the former treasurer of a Talbot County nonprofit with stealing from the organization.

Forty-year-old Lisa N. Gowe of Neavitt was charged Thursday with theft scheme, $100,000 plus.

Troopers say in January, members of the Talbot Watermen’s Association contacted state police and alleged that Gowe, then the group’s treasurer and event organizer, depleted the association’s bank accounts.

Investigators say bank records show that Gowe wrote numerous checks written, made withdrawals, debits and electronic money transfers that were not authorized.

Police say Gowe used the money for herself and not the Watermen’s Association. Washington Post

Talbot Watermen Association, Inc. Official Statement (Website)

POSTED ON JULY 25, 2015

As most of you are now aware, our past treasurer Lisa Gowe has been arrested for embezzling money from our Association. As a Watermen Community and a Association, we have pulled together and will overcome this setback. This is our official statement :

Lisa Gowe’s criminal charges are the result of an investigation by the Maryland State Police. The investigation was requested by our Association when we discovered discrepancies between information provided between Ms. Gowe and information provided by the bank. We were shocked and disheartened to learn that our once trusted treasurer was, in fact, untrustworthy. Since learning the details of the apparent embezzlement, we have consulted with attorneys and accountants, and have instituted new financial controls and oversight. We are saddened by our prior treasurer’s actions, for her family, for our members, and for our supporters throughout the community. We have asked the State’s Attorney to seek restitution as a component of the criminal process.

Outreach Nonprofit Consulting (ONC), a student organization at Yale School of Management (SOM), provides pro bono consulting services to nonprofit organizations in the New Haven area. For 20 years, ONC has brought together nonprofit leaders and Yale MBA students to achieve a positive impact in the New Haven community.

ONC is currently accepting applications from nonprofit organizations that wish to solve an important organizational challenge in one of these key areas: Financial Planning, Human Resources, Marketing/PR, Operations, Design & Innovation, and Strategy.

Selected organizations will typically work with a team of Yale SOM student consultants from January–May 2016.

To qualify, an organization must meet the following criteria:

• Have a clearly defined project with goals related to the client organization’s mission and a tangible deliverable
• Feasible project scope and timeline
• Strong potential to make a significant impact on the client organization
• Enthusiasm for the project within the client organization
• Commitment to assist Yale ONC leaders and teams during a semester-long project

Important Application Dates

Sat, Aug 22:  Application due date

Fri, Sept 5:  Finalists notified about their selection status

Fri, Aug 22-Fri, Sept 5:  Finalists meet with SOM Outreach Coordinator to further define their projects and discuss desired outcomes

Wed, Oct 8:

Finalists present their project at mandatory “Meet-the-Clients” evening session with student consultants

Apply here. Applications are due Saturday, August 22, 2015 at 11:59pm.  

Please craft your proposal carefully to communicate a well-defined project that will address a pre-existing need for your organization.

Learn more about ONC at its website.

Family Centered Services of CT is sponsoring a Back to School program for the children that we serve.  Our goal is to outfit 125 kids with all the necessary supplies from backpacks to markers to notebooks. 

The follow is a list of needed supplies:Backpacks, notebooks, pens, pencils, markers, crayons, rulers, binders, scissors and sharpeners. Donations can be dropped of at Family CT, 235 Nicoll St, New Haven CT or we will pick up.

For more information or to arrange pick up contact: Shannon Ryan at 203-624-2600 ext. 121

A big shout out to Frank Pepe Pizzeria and Gary Bimonte for hosting our annual dine out event today at Pepe's on Wooster Street, New Haven. Pepe's has been working with Family Centered Services of CT for a number of years.  Come on down and enjoy a meal with family and friends.  Dine Out runs all day today, July 28. Come and enjoy.

Generally, when I ask nonprofit CEOs about their boards there are two types of answers: polite and complaining. Usually both types of answers are given by each CEO I encounter. So, it should come as no surprise when an accounting firm asks 100 nonprofit CEOs about their boards, the responses are less than positive. It's kind-of just the way it is as CEOs only have so much control over their boards and boards have such wide--ranges of experiences and are in various stages of development and face, depending on their sector, wide-ranging experiences and challenges.

The results from the Marks Paneth accounting firm survey of 103 nonprofit CEOs generally in the "big" nonprofit category should not come as a surprise to anyone who has been to more than two nonprofit board meetings. Yes! Nonprofit boards are often challenged by understanding an organization's finances. And yes, nonprofit board members should have better training.

Thank you for making a mountain out of a molehill. The real need here is not to "document" (100 respondents does not document in my opinion) but to provide the answers for effective training and support. This would be a survey.

I do however need to congratulate this firm: they are definitely fine marketers.

Nonprofit Executives Say Board Members Are Too Removed From Some of Their Key Responsibilities, According to Survey Findings

Directors Are Often Light on Performance Monitoring, Strategic Input and Making Good Connections for the Organization, Executives Say in Marks Paneth National Survey.

NEW YORK, NY -- (Marketwired) -- 07/15/15 --Nonprofit executives recognize their board members' passion for the mission but say directors are removed from some of their key governance responsibilities.

Those are among the findings of Nonprofit Pulse, a national survey of nonprofit leaders byaccounting firm Marks Paneth.

On the plus side, 73% of nonprofit executives say their boards "have a passion for the mission," and most (61%) say their boards are engaged but don't micromanage. Further, most (57%) say directors "closely monitor financial expenditures" and have "strong attendance" at meetings (54%).

But when it comes to some specific and sometimes mission-critical activities, board members fall short in the eyes of many nonprofit executives, according to the survey findings. (It included over 100 executives at nonprofits with annual budgets between $10 million and $100 million -- namely Presidents, Executive Directors, CEOs, CFOs, Board Chairs, Treasurers, Development Directors and Vice Presidents.)

Relatively small percentages of nonprofit leaders say directors do the following "very well":

Only 15% say the board "closely monitors dashboard performance compared to peer organizations".
Only 28% say board members are highly strategic in providing guidance.
Only 29% say the board connects the organization to external sources.
Only 47% say board members lend their professional expertise to the board.
Only 45% say the board closely monitors investments.
CIO, CTO & Developer Resources

In addition, half of nonprofit executives say board members follow the overall performance of the organization but fail to look into specific programs.

"It's probably not an overstatement to say nonprofit leaders love their boards. However, these executives have suggested they would benefit from deeper or more thoughtful board involvement in key areas of governance and strategy," saysMichael McNee, CPA, Partner-in-Charge of the Nonprofit and Government Services Group at Marks Paneth.

"One solution to get more productive involvement from boards is member training. But our survey suggests that director availability and cost present significant obstacles," says McNee. The majority of leaders say directors' limited time is a roadblock to training, and 48% say cost is a deterrent.

To receive a copy of the Nonprofit Pulse and/or to speak with a leader from Marks Paneth's Nonprofit and Government Services Group, please contact Katarina Wenk-Bodenmiller of Sommerfield Communications at (212) 255-8386 or katarina@sommerfield.com.

Methodology
The Nonprofit Pulse: A Leadership Study from Marks Paneth represents the findings of a survey of nonprofit leaders in the United States. The 103 professionals participating in the research include Board Chairs, Presidents, Executive Directors, Chief Executive Officers, Chief Financial Officers, Treasurers, Chief Operating Officers, Development Directors, Vice Presidents and Board members and are with organizations with annual budgets between $10 million and $100 million. The research employed self-administered questionnaires completed online by respondents. The national list of professionals surveyed was compiled by Marks Paneth LLP, the research sponsor, and by Michaels Opinion Research. Interviews were completed during the period of November 12 to December 31, 2014.

About Marks Paneth LLP
Marks Paneth LLP is an accounting firm with more than 550 people, including over 70 partners and principals. The firm provides public and private businesses with a full range of auditing, accounting, tax, consulting, trade remediation and valuation services as well as litigation and corporate financial advisory services to domestic and international clients. The firm also specializes in providing tax advisory and consulting for high-net-worth individuals and their families, as well as a wide range of services for international, real estate, hospitality, media, entertainment, nonprofit and government services clients. The firm has a strong track record supporting emerging growth companies, entrepreneurs, business owners and investors as they navigate the business life cycle.

The firm's subsidiary, Tailored Technologies, LLC, provides information technology consulting services. In addition, its membership in Morison International, a leading international association for independent business advisers, financial consulting and accounting firms, facilitates service delivery to clients throughout the United States and around the world. Marks Paneth, whose origins date back to 1907, is the 35th largest accounting firm in the nation and the 9th largest in the mid-Atlantic region. In addition, readers of the New York Law Journal rank Marks Paneth as one of the area's top three forensic accounting firms for the fifth year in a row.

Its headquarters are in New York City. Additional offices are in Washington, DC, New Jersey, Long Island, Westchester and the Cayman Islands. For more information, please visit www.markspaneth.com.