Fundraisers Fined $24 Million
The Attorney General of New York has just announced a $24.6 million settlement with a veterans charity and its fundraisers.
This is the largest financial settlement won by fundraising regulators in U.S. history.
CNN broke the news last night on Anderson Cooper 360. You’ll recall it was that network’s investigative team who first surfaced the story, then for two years relentlessly pursued it.
For all the work the CNN team put into this effort, you’ll see that Drew Griffin ends with the unfortunate admonition to avoid all direct mail. Not fair … but understandable given what these shows have to do to win audience.
The investigation focused on direct mail fundraising practices at the Disabled Veterans National Foundation (DVNF). It “shines an unflattering light on some of the most troubling features of direct mail charitable fundraising as it is practiced in the United States today”, said Attorney General Eric Schneiderman.
Here’s what New York’s Charitable Bureau found in their investigation:
- Through the end of 2013 DVNF raised more than $116 million in donations. DVNF paid its fundraisers more than $104 million and still owed them another $13.8 million. The Agitator alerted our readers to this two years ago and indicated this situation was not unique.
- The investigation determined that DVNF’s board was ill informed, largely absent, and not performing its fiduciary role.
- Since its founding, DVNF’s principal program activity has been its “gifts-in-kind” (GIK) program, where the Foundation paid a third-party vendor, Charity Services International (CSI) of South Carolina to obtain GIK that really had no useful purpose. See The Agitator’s 11,500 Bags of Coconut M&Ms.
- Conflicts of interest. Larry Rivers, prominent in veterans groups, helped land the DVNF contract for Quadriga. He then continued to serve as Quadriga’s representative while also positioning himself as an unpaid advisor to DVNF’s board. He was paid $2.3 million by Quadriga without the knowledge of the client. River’s daughter, without any nonprofit experience, was hired as the Foundation’s administrator.
You can download all the details of the investigation here.
Here are the key elements of the settlement:
- Quadriga Art, which produced and sent out the mailings, will pay $9.7 million in damages, and Convergence Direct Marketing will pay $300,000 in damages. The $10 million will go to support the lives of disabled American vets.
- In addition, Quadriga will forgive $13.8 million in debt that DVNF owes the firm and will pay a further $800,000 to the State of New York in costs for the investigation.
- Perhaps most importantly, where the future of direct response fundraising is concerned, Quadriga has proposed and agreed to adopt a set of reforms that improve transparency and set higher ethical standards than now exist. More on this in a moment.
- In terms of the Disabled Veterans National Foundation, the settlement gives the organization a fresh start. All of its original board members must step down by the end of this year. At least five new qualified directors must be appointed. The board must establish an independent audit committee and the organization must permanently stop using fundraising claims the Attorney General’s office found to be false and misleading.
This is serious stuff. $24 million worth of seriousness. And heaven only knows what these revelations will do to fundraising at other nonprofits dealing with veteran issues. Or any type of fundraising for that matter.
HOWEVER … there is another side to this story. One that CNN and the public won’t –and shouldn’t — dive into. But fundraisers should. Let’s call it the Silver Lining Side.
Here are some additional facts and observations:
- Since the Attorney General’s investigation started, DVNF has appointed a new Executive Director, a Marine veteran, and a new board to support him.
- There are new processes and procedures in place. The 0-15 months file numbers nearly 600,000 donors who will produce a net of nearly $4.5 million from direct mail this year. To boost this the Foundation has launched an online giving effort and a mid-level giving program.
- I’ve just spoken with Mark Schulhoff, CEO of Quadriga. And, after two years of denying or avoiding the issue he candidly told me, “Roger, we made a bad mistake. We’re sorry and we want to move forward. We are committed to reform and want to be engaged in it with the direct response community.” Frankly, as I told Mark, I’m all for redemption and hope the trade will take him up on the offer.
- Take a look at the letter Quadriga will post on its website and Quadriga’s statement for the media. Most importantly review the list of reforms Quadriga has pledged as part of the settlement to undertake.
- These reforms are good and needed. Particularly those that go to transparency in letting all nonprofit clients know which consultants, which agencies, are being paid how much for their use of Quadriga. Frankly, this must become an industry-wide standard for everyone.
- To me these reform practices mean fundraising companies, consultants and their copywriters — this means everyone involved in this sector, no weaseling — has the duty to determine whether their clients’ claims and stories are true.
- Fundraising companies and their suppliers have the duty to disclose all payments made to themselves and other fundraising agencies, consultants, and suppliers or anyone else in the food chain. (I don’t have anything against fee splitting or kickbacks, if they’re disclosed to the client.)
- No more slick tactics. Don’t even think you can recommend a lawyer, who also works for your agency, to give an unsuspecting client advice and approval that “this contract is a good deal”.
- Expect to report regularly in front of boards on ROI and how true your actual results are measuring up to your promises.
Of course today these aren’t regulations and rules in every state; but they should be. Attorney General Schneiderman, even though it’s an election year and he’s riding the now-so-popular veterans cause, has demonstrated he has more balls than all the other 49 Attorneys General combined.
The obligation of transparency and financial disclosure could be, by far, the most important outcome of this case. And the fact that we as a sector have failed at self-policing is our own fault.
Thank heavens for David Fitzpatrick, the producer of the CNN investigation, and the team’s investigative reporter, Drew Griffin, were there and raising hell when the rest of us weren’t. They get an Agitator raise.
Quadriga has given us a $24 million lesson and a huge opportunity by putting forth a set of new standards. Are we up to the transparency proposed?
Your thoughts, please?
Roger
P.S. In the days ahead we’ll explore the myriad details and implications of this case. How to explain fundraising costs — and income — to donors … how to make sure your board really understands how your fundraising works financially … and when and why having an outside agency fund your direct response program can be a good — not bad — thing.
Roger:
In my more than 40 years in working with nonprofit organizations –most of it raising money for them –I have run into several of the bullet points in your posting on DVNF and Quadriga — but not all of them in a single organization.
Many boards are made up of well-intentioned people who are successful in some field or other. Many of them, however, believe that their personal success and expertise in their field of endeavor translates into expertise on the field you write about each day here in this blog. How many people do you know who truly know how to read nonprofit financial statements?
What makes me the saddest about this posting is that there are hundreds of nonprofits out there in our country that are doing everything right and make only a few hundred thousand dollars or a few million at most for their causes.
David Krear
“The obligation of transparency and financial disclosure could be, by far, the most important outcome of this case. And the fact that we as a sector have failed at self-policing is our own fault.”
Yes and yes. Everyone who got fined here deserved it, and I hope all fundraisers stand up and acknowledge that. I would especially like to see AFP say something meaningful about this. Thank you for this post, Agitators.
To agitate a little myself, I must ask…in a landscape that arguably has too many nonprofits focused on the same issues, is it really worth it to rebuild DVNF from the ground up? Wouldn’t the expertise of the new executive director and future qualified board members be better used by a quality veterans organization?
Is it a big deal? Yes. Is it enough? Financially, perhaps. But I can’t tell from your blog today if we have really learned anything.
Anyone who has worked in fundraising understands that the cost of acquisition is high. They also know that working with outside counsel and service providers can be a more efficient and effective way to get that job done. The public and media know neither. And then along comes a scandal like this one.
It is clear in both the actions of Quadriga and DVNF, as well as the coverage by CNN and newspapers, that the nonprofit world is not communicating well with the public and the public is not being heard by nonprofits and their commercial partners.
To any outside observer, everything about this case is abhorrent.
A charity enlists a vendor to send out letters on its behalf. The stories are apparently fabricated. Almost none of the money goes to the charity. The charity provides no real aid to the supposed beneficiaries.
Forget the fines for a moment. Why would any of us choose to give to DVNF or to hire Quadriga after hearing this story? And why would any governing authority permit either to conduct business in their state? Statements and changes to management are not enough to give reasonable people comfort about these agencies.
And the damage is far greater than that to DVNF, its donors, and Quadriga.
As you point out, CNN admonished its viewers to disregard direct mail appeals. In the minds of viewers, this recommendation may be thought to apply not only to appeals with a postal stamp but to all acquisition/direct marketing activity. This is potentially a far worse result than the $24 million in fines being levied.
Not only will one useless and disreputable charity and its now entirely discredited vendor be damaged by these admissions. Potentially all charities who rely on direct marketing to raise awareness and grow their audiences will be harmed. This is particularly damaging to our work in building a committed body of Millennial donors, a cohort for whom reports like these are a validation of all their skepticism about traditional charities.
This is the time to look seriously and dispassionately at the practices of direct marketing in charitable fundraising. We need to be able to see this work as the public sees it. To determine not only how to avoid appearances of impropriety but to create standards of practice which are clear, understandable, and set a model for all forms of marketing.
Was Quadriga/DVNF a case of just one bad apple? Maybe. But it doesn’t matter. Perception rules. If we continue to avoid listening to and communicating with the public on fundraising, a $24 million fine will be the least of the charitable world’s problems. Too many people rely on our work to let that happen.