Non profit outcomes

The Possibility Of Fraud – A nonprofit Board Alert

The Possibility Of Fraud – A nonprofit Board Alert

By: Eugene Fram

“According to a Washington Post analysis of the filings from 2008-2012 … of more than 1,000 nonprofit organizations, … there was a ‘significant diversion’ of nonprofit assets, disclosing losses attributed to theft, investment frauds, embezzlement and other unauthorized uses of funds.” The top 20 organizations in the Post’s analysis had a combined potential total loss of more than a half-billion dollars. *

One estimate, by Harvard University’s Houser Center for Nonprofit Organizations, suggests that fraud losses among U.S. nonprofits are approximately $40 billion a year. **

Vigilant nonprofit boards might prevent many of these losses. Here’s how:

• Have an audit committee charged with reviewing the overall results of a yearly independent audit conducted by an outside auditor.
• Carefully oversee executive compensations, pension benefits and other finance activities.
• Conduct a yearly review of conflict-of –interest policies. And be certain that employees sign a conflict-of-interest statement.
• Assure new hires are well vetted for honesty by searching background.
• Meet with external auditors at specified times, including an executive session without management present.
Ask the auditors:
1. Have they perceived any fraud problems?
2. Are internal controls adequate, e.g., those handling financial matters must take at least two weeks vacation per year so their duties can be temporarily assigned to others?
3. Are financial records accurate? To what extent were material mistakes located or was there an increase in non-material mistakes?
4. Do the proper managers or officers properly authorize activities and expenditures?
5. Do all assets reported actually exist?
6. Is the organization performing any activities that might endanger its tax-exempt status? For example, provide misinformation on the IRS Form 990.
7. Is the organization paying its payroll taxes, sales taxes and license fees on time? ***

Trust But Verify

Some directors argue boards can do little to prevent fraud. I argue that every director should know enough about finances to raise issues about questionable activities. At the least, everyone in the organization should be alerted to the fact that board members are paying attention to the possibility of fraud. That knowledge, in itself may deter some people from trying to steal.

* Joe Stephens & Mary Pat Flaherty (2013) “Inside the hidden world of thefts, scams and phantom purchases at the nation’s nonprofits,” Washington Post, October 23rd.

**Janet Greenlee, Mary Fischer, Teresa Gordon & Elizabeth King, “An investigation of the fraud in nonprofit organizations: occurrence & deterrents, “ Working Paper#35 hauser-center@harvard.edu.

***More actionable details can be found: Eugene Fram & Bruce Oliver (2010) “Want to avoid fraud? Look to your board,” Nonprofit World, September-October.
Eugene Fram (2013) “Preventing and managing leadership crises in nonprofit organizations, “ in Handbook of Research on Crisis Leadership in Organizations, Andrew J. DuBrin, editor, London, Edward Elgar International Publishing.

The Balancing Act – A Must For Nonprofit Boards

The Balancing Act – A Must For Nonprofit Boards

By: Eugene Fram

The success of the board depends on making sound judgments in numerous situations that involve balancing different interests.*

Like for-profit boards, nonprofit boards must juggle a variety of interests and objectives when making strategic decisions. But board meetings are often constrained to 1-2 hours, making it almost impossible to give thoughtful consideration to a disparity of perspectives. How does your board weigh in on the following conflicting issues? Following are areas in which thoughtful balancing needs to take place. (more…)

Nonprofit Directors and the Future of Technology: A Modest Proposal

Nonprofit Directors and the Future of Technology: A Modest Proposal

By Eugene Fram

Both for-profit and nonprofit boards are trying to find ways to become better informed about technology issues when they encounter them in developing policies or strategic directions. Some organizations have tried to add technological experts to their boards. However, the type of people with this expertise who also can contribute to broader discussions on finance, marketing, human relations, etc. are in short supply. Another approach has been to consider younger directors who understand the world of technology better. But this leaves only one director, or at most two, on the board qualified to intelligently review the issues involved.

Nonprofit directors need to prepare themselves to become more technologically literate. (more…)

Nonprofit Boardroom Elephants and the “Nice Guy” Syndrome: A Complex Problem

Nonprofit Boardroom Elephants and the “Nice Guy” Syndrome: A Complex Problem

By: Eugene Fram

At coffee recently a friend serving on a nonprofit board reported plans to resign from the board shortly. His complaints centered on the board’s unwillingness to take critical actions necessary to help the organization grow. (more…)

Building The Autonomous Nonprofit Board

Building The Autonomous Nonprofit Board

By Eugene Fram

I recently came upon a current article about building an autonomous business board. * Some of the suggestions in the article, I think, can be applied to NFP boards. The overall viewpoint in the article is summarized as follows, but it is modified to be useful for NFP boards:

Simply adopting the right policies and complying with the rules can no longer achieve good nonprofit governance. As increased scrutiny of the board’s mission imperatives (for example, via IRS 990 Forms) intensifies, both directors and management must be willing to respect the boundaries that define their exclusive roles while working together to ensure that their actions support the goals of the nonprofit and its various stakeholders. (more…)

Why Are Dysfuctional Nonprofit Boards Interesting? Revised/Updated

Why Are Dysfunctional Nonprofit Boards Interesting?

By: Eugene H. Fram

My blog (http://bit.ly/yfRZpz) has been drawing an unusual number of views related to dysfunctional nonprofit boards.  Is it because:

  • Nonprofit evaluations have become a prime media interest?
  • Dodd-Frank passage has alerted a greater number of nonprofits to really review their charters?  
  • More boards have found board problems arising as a result of reviewing the expanded 990-form section on governance?
  • More audit committees are being given expanded responsibilities?  

Can a nonprofit organization focus on its mission vision and values if it has a dysfunctional nonprofit board?  I have seen this accomplished in situations where the CEO is managerially oriented and can live with the board’s problems or foibles.  For example, one nonprofit I encountered had an eleven person board, four of which never attended meetings and several others were sometimes absent for personal reasons.  Meeting minutes clearly showed a focus on operational detail. However a strong CEO was able to focus well, and the organization prospered. On the other hand,the CEO openly complained that she was overworked, needed board assistance and could become a “dictator” for the nonprofit!!

In another situation I encountered, the board chair and ED were very strong, but the board governmentally weak. Work and family pressures constrained the time directors could devote to their governance responsibilities. While the organization performed reasonably well, performance problems and board liability issues might arise, if either the chair or ED retired or resigned.
 

If you have any other insights as to why I am getting so many views related to dysfunctional nonprofits, I and other viewers would be delighted to have your comments.

 

 

 

 

Nonprofit CEO: Board Peer – Not A Powerhouse

Nonprofit CEO: Board Peer – Not A Powerhouse

By: Eugene Fram

Some nonprofit CEOs make a fetish out of describing their boards and/or board chairs as their “bosses.” Others, for example, can see the description, as a parent-child relationship by funders. The parent, the board, may be strong, but can the child, the CEO, implement a grant or donation? Some CEOs openly like to perpetuate this type of relationship because when bad decisions come to roost, they can use the old refrain: the board made me do it.

My preference is that the board-CEO relationship be a partnership among peers focusing on achieving desired outcomes and impacts for the nonprofit. (I, with others, would make and have made CEOs, who deserve the position, voting members of their boards!)

There are many precedents for a nonprofit CEO to become a peer board member, some without voting rights, some with full voting rights. One nonprofit group is university presidents, where shared governance with faculty bodies can be the norm. For example, when General Eisenhower became president of Columbia, he referred to the faculty in an initial presentation as “Columbia employees.” Later a senior faculty member informed him “With all due respect, the faculty is the university.”

Another nonprofit group is hospitals where the CEO may also be or has been the chief medical officer. The level of medical expertise needed to lead requires that a peer relationship be developed. Also if the hospital CEO is a management person, he and the chief medical officer must have a peer relationship, which extends to the board.

Hallmarks of a Peer Relationship
• The CEO values the board trust assigned him/her, and carefully guards against the board receiving surprise announcements.
• The board avoids any attempts to micromanage, a natural tendency for many nonprofit boards.
• When a board member works on a specific operating project, it is clearly understood that he is accountable to the CEO for results.
• The CEO has board authority to borrow money for short term emergency needs
• The CEO understands need for executive sessions without his/her presence.
• The CEO understands the need for robust assessment processes to allow the board to meet its overview duties.
• Both board and CEO are alert to potential conflicts of interest which may occurs.
• Both value civil discussion when disagreements occur.
• The board realizes that nobody does his/her job perfectly, and it does not react to occasional CEO modest misjudgments.

Summary
Elevating a nonprofit CEO to a status of board peer does not automatically make the CEO a powerhouse. The board legally can terminate the CEO at will. However, in my opinion, the following benefits can accrue to the organization.

The peer relationship help will:

• Help the organization to build a desirable public brand,
• Allow a capable person to interface with the media.
• Define a role for the CEO to lead in fundraising.
• Allow the organization to hire better qualified personnel.
• Allow the organization to present a strong management environment to funders. After all, top people readily communicate with people in similar positions.

What Does Nonprofit Board Oversight Mean? Revised/Updated

Once Again! What Does Nonprofit Board Oversight Mean?

Every week, three or four nonprofit case stories surface in the meida related to inadequate oversight by nonprofit boards of directors. Many of the cases result six or seven figure dollar losses to the nonprofits. Following is my personal list of what reasonable board oversight means to attempt to help nonprofit boards of directors to avoid such losses.

  • At least half the board should be able to analyze the monthly or quarterly financial statements. Have voluntary information sessions available for those who do not have the skills. (more…)

The NonProfit Overhead Myth – Devil in the Details

A frank discussion of the overhead myth may impact the very survival of nonprofits. Article in the September-October issue of Nonprofit World?

Click to access V310509.pdf

A Nonprofit Board’s Most Important Job!

A Nonprofit Board’s Most Important Job!

By: Eugene Fram

Many people believe as I do that a nonprofit board’s job is to find the best possible person to act as CEO of the organization, then stand back and let that person manage. If your board is in agreement, here are guidelines for action: (more…)