You are here

Governance—A Tale of Good Intentions

A Classic by Carol Henn, former E.D. of Lehigh Valley Community Foundation

This Ready Reference Page was published in 2011. Written by Carol Henn, former Executive Director of the Lehigh Valley Community Foundation.

In the city of Serenity, located about mid-point between the Shenandoah Valley and Silicon Valley, life was generally peaceful and pleasant.  The city had survived the downturn in relative prosperity, and it had no reason to think that it would not continue to flourish in the quiet composure reflected in its name.  It certainly could not imagine that it would be the place where a Great Truth would be revealed.

The changes began inauspiciously enough.  George Radnor, senior partner in Radnor Motors, came back to his office one morning after attending a meeting at the local Red Cross, where he served on the board of directors.  He remarked to his brother, Glenn, that serving on agency boards gave him a solid, deep down sense of satisfaction. His brother agreed, noting his own service on the local museum and symphony boards.

Soon, George convinced himself that the satisfactions and advantages of a volunteer board shouldn’t be confined to nonprofits alone.  If the Red Cross and the museum and the homeless shelter could have boards of directors, why not Radnor Motors?  A dinnertime conversation with his cousins, Liz Radnor, an attorney, and Rick Radnor, editor of the Daily Serenity, convinced him that he was onto something.  “We’ll get new ideas,” George said.  “Having a volunteer board of directors would be like having the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval for the way we do business.” 
Soon, they were all genuinely excited about the idea of having their own boards of directors to lead them to new heights of visibility, prosperity and effectiveness.  Within a week, they had each recruited a splendid board of well known movers and shakers, distinguished doyennes, up-and-coming entrepreneurs, marketing VPs from local companies, and a few professors, being careful not to duplicate their choices among these exemplary citizens.

Over the course of the next few months, all of their boards met, elected officers, formed committees and set meeting schedules that seemed, to most of the Radnors, to be a bit more energetic than they had expected.  Appropriately, the bloom first began to come off the rose at Radnor Motors, where George Radnor had come up with the board idea in the first place. 

It began when the Sub-committee on Product came to George to tell him that his first problem was limited product line.  Add motorcycles, they said, and boats if possible.  Eventually, mopeds or bicycles would bring an additional demographic.  George tried to explain that the dealership had done very, very well with the automobiles it sold.  Short-sighted approach, they told him.  Transportation means more than cars, they said.  Better diversify now, even if it means borrowing to buy inventory. 

The marketing committee headed by Prof. Simmons reported next.  The name of the dealership is all wrong, he said.  Too staid and old fashioned; not modern or catchy.  George tried to explain that his father and uncle had begun the dealership 50 years ago, and it was now welcoming its third generation of the Radnor family into the business.  People had come to know and trust the Radnors.  Customers came from miles around, and many bought cars there because their parents and grandparents had dealt with the Radnors.  James Jeffers, vice president of marketing at the regional energy company, explained patiently to George that a name was more than a name and had to be kept “fresh.”  “Look at us,” he said. “We used to be Energy-Serenity, then EnSeCo, then EnCo, then Energize and now ElektrikOptionOne.  You need to change the name, change your image, on a regular schedule.  Like Lady Gaga.”  George was too embarrassed to ask who Lady Gaga was. 

When his board began to ask questions about the employees at Radnor Motors, George became defensive.  “We have a great team here,” he assured the board, “and they are responsible for our success.  From the sales staff to the service people, they’re all skilled, dedicated, and effective.  Many have been with Radnor for 20 years or more.” 

“But are they Rotarians?” asked Prof. Simmons.  “Your people have to be visible in the community.  They have to be the public embodiment of your image, of your marketing strategy.” 

“I need them be what they are—great mechanics, technicians, bookkeepers, sales people,” protested George, but by then the board had moved on to a discussion of trendy logo colors.

Over at the Daily Serenity, Rick Radnor was having his own problems.  His board, too, had formed committees and said it wanted to give Rick hands-on help.  He was expecting his board to endorse and applaud his idea for a seasonal sports insert featuring the local high school and college teams.  But the board’s first project was to re-arrange the sections of the newspaper, recommending that sports (“limited interest”) be placed behind the classifieds, and reducing the space for obituaries (“negative, negative, negative.”)  Muffy McGuire, president of the Serenity Society League, persuaded the board that social news deserved a much more prominent space, such as the first page of the second section, because all Serenity families would sooner or later be in those pages and they’d know most of the other people mentioned in that section.  They can get world news every night on TV or on Twitter, she reasoned, but only the Daily Serenity can tell them that the Harrisons were in Hawaii for their 25th anniversary.  That made sense to the board, although it made no sense to Rick Radnor.  And the board made it clear that it wasn’t suggesting, it was instructing. 

“Don’t be afraid of change, my boy,” said Dr. Chimorra, a respected proctologist.  “When I chaired the United Way campaign last year I re-organized the whole thing.  The last chairman had structured it according to geography – towns, boroughs, etc., but I told them that we had to do it according to business type – retailers, manufacturers, professionals, healthcare, education, and so on.  I think it would have worked well if they’d given it a few years’ run.  But I understand that this year’s chairman has asked the staff to re-arrange all the accounts according to size – large companies, mid-size employers, etc.” 

The board at Liz Radnor’s law office had formed only two committees, business development and social justice.  While she had done her share of pro bono work and was involved with several nonprofits, Liz had never intended to carve out a specialty.  Hers was a basic, general practice, and she enjoyed the variety of clients and issues with which she dealt.  The board told her that her personal investments should be moved to social conscience funds.  Immediately.

Edwin Graves, retired chairman of Graves Knitting Mills, was the first person to tell Liz that her business needed more of an edge.  “Billboards that make it clear that you’ll find deadbeat dads, get millions for accident victims, and get results.  Maybe a graphic with a three-dimensional fist coming out of the billboard,” mused Graves.  Liz reminded them that her practice was largely estate planning and real estate, with a few divorces and DUIs thrown in.  “Hardly cutting edge,” taunted Graves.  Just as Liz was starting to wonder what kind of billboards she would put up, she reverted to the more basic question of  how she had found herself in her own conference room taking instruction from people who knew nothing about the law, her clients, or her.

The next two years were rough on the assorted Radnors.  They discovered that, once formed, boards of directors took on a life of their own.  They formed nominating committees and drew up by-laws, assuring their tenures and ongoing influence.

But sales at Radnor Motors dropped instead of increasing.  Circulation of the Daily Serenity plummeted after the board ordered the removal of the Sunday comics (“sexist, violent, and political”).  The United Way staff spent more than 1,000 hours changing campaign records and data from geographic to industry type, without increasing contributions.  Liz was blessedly too busy to really alter her practice or move her investments but she was constantly being compared to every lawyer her board members had seen on TV. 

Just before he was about to order the motorcycles, George Radnor called a friend with an auto dealership in Raleigh.  He wanted to ask if his friend had added anything to his inventory beyond cars.  When he explained his board’s recommendations, his friend asked, in measured tones, “Do you mean you asked a group of people who know almost nothing about your business to come in and tell you how to run it and give you instructions to follow?  And you have to keep doing all of your work, accommodate their changes, and report to them at the same time?”  Though he hated to hear it in those words, George had to admit that, yes, that’s exactly what he had done.

“But George,” said his friend, “only nonprofits are crazy enough to do that.”

A Great Truth of Governance 
Nonprofit Boards of Directors…. 
…assure the trustworthy management of resources – human, financial and program 
…support the organization and help to gather support from others 
…define mission and policies to fulfill mission
...and ‘do no harm.’

—Carol Henn
Executive Director
Lehigh Valley Community Foundation
Allentown, PA

Conflict of Interest Policies Help Avoid Problems

In addition to protecting against embarrassment and loss of contributions, policies can provide protection against possible excess benefits tax violations

In addition to protecting against embarrassment and loss of contributions, policies can provide protection against possible excess benefits tax violations. For charities dependent upon public contributions for their success, a conflict of interest scandal can be devastating. It can erode public confidence in their organization and jeopardize the entire program.

Not a subscriber and want access to this page? You can buy the 3 page pdf in our store for only 3.95.

Preparing Minutes of Board Meetings Is Usually More Art Than Science

Minutes document formal Board actions and provide collective journal of corporate history

Minutes of nonprofit Board meetings can vary widely in format, and in the level of detail they capture. In some regards, this is fine; there is no one correct style. Each Board should adopt a style of record-keeping that suits its own particular needs.

However, minutes serve several vital managerial and legal functions. It’s important to understand those functions, in order to understand the types of material that should be recorded.

Minutes are a Board’s collective journal. They provide all members of the Board, including brand new ones, with a common baseline of information about what the Board has seen and done. They are a critical tool for efficient, continuing, sound governance.

Minutes are also the primary record of a corporation’s actions. Approvals of transactions, adoption of policies in compliance with regulatory requirements, and allocations of corporate assets are just a few examples of corporate actions that various parties inside and outside of the organization may need to see recorded in writing.

Finally, minutes are a vital tool when disputes arise as to a Board’s actions or responsibilities.

Not a subscriber and want to access this page? You can buy the 3 page PDF in our store for only $3.95.

IRS Guidance Has Not Changed on Electioneering

Although the climate for enforcement has been altered, charities are still prohibited for supporting or opposing candidates

With nonprofits gearing up for the elections, it is important to know what they can — and cannot — do with respect to the elections.  Section 501(c)(3) charities can lose their tax-exemption if they participate in an election indicating support for or opposition to any candidate for public office at any level of government. 

Section 501(c)(4) social welfare organizations, often formed for the purpose of electioneering, (c)(5) trade unions, and (c)(6) trade associations do not face such limitations.  These and other types of nonprofits (See Ready Reference Page: “What Do We Mean When We Say Nonprofit?”) will not lose their exemption so long as electioneering is not their primary activity.

Not a subscriber and want to access this page? You can buy the 4 page PDF in our store for $3.95 or buy this page along with our Ready Reference Page: Lobbying Rules Create Opportunity for Charities in a combined doucmnet, get both pages for $6.95

 

IRS Finalizes Regs Covering Sponsorship

Payments will be considered charitable contributions where there is no arrangement that the sponsor will receive 'any substantial return benefit in exchange for the payment'

The Internal Revenue Service has published final Regulations to determine whether sponsorship payments for charity fund raisers are considered charitable contributions or unrelated, and possibly taxable, income.

Not a subscriber and want to access this page? You can buy the 3 page PDF in our store for only $3.95.

Donor Advised Funds Still Compare Well with Private Foundations

Pension Protection Act imposed new limitations but absolute control of foundations has costs and other limits

Donor advised funds (“DAFs”) are often considered the small donor’s private foundation. They may be more quickly established, are often less expensively administered, and are more tax advantageous.

But for donors who want absolute control over administration, investment policies, and grantmaking -- and who want to be paid for doing it -- a private foundation may be the only answer. The charitable reform provisions of the Pension Protection Act of 2006 have made it more likely that donors seeking control, and particularly those seeking compensation, will opt for a private foundation.

This Ready Reference Page contains a comprehensive list of comparisons between a donor advised fund and a private foundation so that potential donors can determine which may be more appropriate in their situation.

Not a subscriber and want to access this page? You can buy the 3 page PDF in our store for $3.95.

Federal Law Protects Nonprofit Volunteers

Act reduces standard of liability to gross negligence, flagrant indifference

Volunteers for charities and other nonprofit entities have an additional line of defense against the threat of personal liability now that Congress has finally passed a federal Volunteer Protection Act. Acting in the euphoria for citizen service following the Presidents’ Volunteer Summit in Philadelphia in April 1997, Congress passed with fanfare a bill that had been languishing in both House and Senate, in various forms, for a decade. 

The law (42 USCA Sec. 14501 et seq.) generally provides that volunteers will not be personally liable for their acts or omissions if they are acting within the scope of their responsibility for the organization and the harm is “not caused by willful or criminal misconduct, gross negligence, reckless misconduct, or a conscious, flagrant indifference to the rights or safety of the individual harmed.” 

 

Charity Fundraisers Raise Many Legal Issues

From preparation, through running the event, and reporting the results careful lawyering can reduce the risks of liability and embarrassment

It isn’t easy to run a successful charitable fundraising event.  There is a lot of planning required, a lot of details to worry about, and a lot of people to coordinate.  And, if you ask – and sometimes even if you don’t – there are the lawyers.

A fundraising event presents a wide range of nonprofit legal issues.  What follows is a checklist of some of them.

This Ready Reference Page covers; preparing for the event, soliciting for the event, running the event and after the event.

Charities Often Restructure to Protect Corporate Assets

Creation of a separate foundation to hold reserve assets provides protection and flexibility for new programs

Threats of high litigation verdicts and a crisis in obtaining insurance caused many charities to restructure their organizations to create separate “foundations” to protect their reserve assets a couple of decades ago.  Prior to that, many hospitals had created foundations in order to maximize their reimbursements for medical services.  Both the wave of huge adverse verdicts and the difficulty in obtaining insurance have waned over the years.  Hospital reimbursement has changed so foundations no longer increase hospital income.  But many charities are continuing to restructure today, both to protect their assets and to provide greater flexibility in the programs they undertake.

Not a subscriber and want access to this page? You can buy the 3 page pdf in our store for only 3.95.

Senate Committee’s White Paper Proposes Vast Expansion of Federal Power Over Charities

Proposals extend beyond tax regulation to give IRS, Tax Court authority over traditional state law concepts of fiduciary duty

The Senate Finance Committee released a 19-page staff “white paper” prior to its June 22 hearing outlining a series of proposals that would significantly increase governmental regulation of charities.

Although Committee Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said the discussion paper is intended only to start a “dialogue” on the issues, if significantly implemented, the proposals could extend federal regulation vastly beyond federal tax law and into areas of governance and fiduciary duty traditionally left to the states. It also includes recommendations for more state and federal cooperation in enforcement proceedings.

The paper, self-described as “a work in progress,” is divided into 9 sections, including proposals dealing with exempt status, expanding self-dealing rules, limiting administrative expenses, improving Form 990 reporting, federal governance rules.

Pages

Subscribe to Nonprofit Issues RSS

Sign-up for our weekly Q&A; get a free report on electioneering