Posted on May 18, 2016
Should scam veterans nonprofit organization leaders be prosecuted?
3.49K
24
11
11
11
0
Vietnam Veteran Foundation head is a VA employee making $127,000, plus his pay as CEO of VVF.
Non-Profits
Scam
Ethics
Disabled Veterans
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 7
3
3
0
Just because you work for a non-profit doesn't mean you can't get paid. However, making a steep profit while claiming to assist the down trodden in my eyes should be a prosecutional offense. There is absolutely no accountability.
(3)
(0)
Absolutely. I am not familiar with this organization. If this organization is a scam, they should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
Most definitely. The Wounded Warrior Project top two were caught with their hands in the warriors back pocket.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Absolutely. Additionally, if my memory serves me right, there is a "code of conduct" or some such titled guidelines that Federal employees must adhere to which, if the employee is found to be in violation of, would also be cause for him to be terminated. He should be thoroughly investigated by the criminal justice system and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and a class action lawsuit be pursued in the civil courts by the VVA and anyone else he defrauded. The most sickening part of it all is that he is an employee of the VA.
(1)
(0)
Shawn J. G.
Standard of Care
1. Duty of Care: board member must exercise “reasonable care” when he or she makes a decision for the organization. In this case, “reasonable” is what a prudent person in a similar situation might do.
2. Duty of Loyalty: Board member must give undivided allegiance to the organization when making decisions affecting the organization.
3. Duty of Obedience: A board member must be faithful to the organization’s mission. This means he or she cannot act in a way that is inconsistent with the organization’s goals. This also includes making sure that at least 75% of the resources are dedicated to accomplishing the mission.
Following, are 10 responsibilities of nonprofit boards:
Establish mission and purpose.
Select the executive director.
Support and evaluate the executive director.
Set policies and ensure effective planning.
Monitor and strengthen programs and services.
Ensure adequate financial resources.
Protect assets and provide proper financial oversight.
Build a competent board.
Ensure legal and ethical integrity.
Enhance the organization’s public standing.
The IRS lays out exactly how compensation should be handled. It is a three-step process to determine appropriate compensation for upper management.
1. The board should arrange for an "independent body" (which means that the person receiving the compensation should not be part of the review process) to conduct a "comparability review." Many nonprofits task a "compensation committee," or use their executive committee, or another sub-group/task force of board members, for this purpose.
2. The independent body should take a look at "comparable" salary and benefits data, such as data available from salary and benefit surveys, to learn what employers of a similar budget size that are located in the same, or a similar geographic region, pay their senior leaders. Ideally, the comparison will include data from other nonprofits of a similar mission focus.
3. The board/independent body that is conducting the review should document who was involved and the process used to conduct the review, as well as the disposition of the full board's decision to approve the executive director's compensation (minutes of a meeting are fine for this). The documentation should demonstrate that the board took the comparable data into consideration when it approved the compensation.
By following the IRS’s three-step safe harbor procedure, a nonprofit organization can significantly minimize the risk that the IRS will later determine that the organization has engaged in an excess benefit transaction. Following this procedure is known as establishing the rebuttable presumption of reasonableness. If the rebuttable presumption of reasonableness is established, payments made under a compensation arrangement will be presumed to be reasonable. The nonprofit must comply with all three steps to establish the rebuttable presumption of reasonableness. The nonprofit will not enjoy the protections the safe harbor affords if the organization fails to meet any one of its three requirements.
1. Duty of Care: board member must exercise “reasonable care” when he or she makes a decision for the organization. In this case, “reasonable” is what a prudent person in a similar situation might do.
2. Duty of Loyalty: Board member must give undivided allegiance to the organization when making decisions affecting the organization.
3. Duty of Obedience: A board member must be faithful to the organization’s mission. This means he or she cannot act in a way that is inconsistent with the organization’s goals. This also includes making sure that at least 75% of the resources are dedicated to accomplishing the mission.
Following, are 10 responsibilities of nonprofit boards:
Establish mission and purpose.
Select the executive director.
Support and evaluate the executive director.
Set policies and ensure effective planning.
Monitor and strengthen programs and services.
Ensure adequate financial resources.
Protect assets and provide proper financial oversight.
Build a competent board.
Ensure legal and ethical integrity.
Enhance the organization’s public standing.
The IRS lays out exactly how compensation should be handled. It is a three-step process to determine appropriate compensation for upper management.
1. The board should arrange for an "independent body" (which means that the person receiving the compensation should not be part of the review process) to conduct a "comparability review." Many nonprofits task a "compensation committee," or use their executive committee, or another sub-group/task force of board members, for this purpose.
2. The independent body should take a look at "comparable" salary and benefits data, such as data available from salary and benefit surveys, to learn what employers of a similar budget size that are located in the same, or a similar geographic region, pay their senior leaders. Ideally, the comparison will include data from other nonprofits of a similar mission focus.
3. The board/independent body that is conducting the review should document who was involved and the process used to conduct the review, as well as the disposition of the full board's decision to approve the executive director's compensation (minutes of a meeting are fine for this). The documentation should demonstrate that the board took the comparable data into consideration when it approved the compensation.
By following the IRS’s three-step safe harbor procedure, a nonprofit organization can significantly minimize the risk that the IRS will later determine that the organization has engaged in an excess benefit transaction. Following this procedure is known as establishing the rebuttable presumption of reasonableness. If the rebuttable presumption of reasonableness is established, payments made under a compensation arrangement will be presumed to be reasonable. The nonprofit must comply with all three steps to establish the rebuttable presumption of reasonableness. The nonprofit will not enjoy the protections the safe harbor affords if the organization fails to meet any one of its three requirements.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
Let's all send him an email or call and let him know how we feel.
J. Thomas Burch, Jr. (101/026D) Office of General Counsel Department of Veterans Affairs 810 Vermont Avenue, NW , Room 1175 B Washington, DC 20421
Tele: [login to see]
Fax: [login to see]
Email: [login to see]
J. Thomas Burch, Jr. (101/026D) Office of General Counsel Department of Veterans Affairs 810 Vermont Avenue, NW , Room 1175 B Washington, DC 20421
Tele: [login to see]
Fax: [login to see]
Email: [login to see]
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
This is big government taking advantage of us. Obama keep saying that he support veterans, but when come for justice or punishment. He calls for none. As long as no jail time is handed down from this administration. This problem will continue and veterans will paid the ultimate price.
(0)
(0)
PO1 Tony Holland
This is not an Obama problem. The problem is unclear Congressional laws, Treasury Department guidelines and a lack of IRS agents to enforce them. Most states have enforcement arms for charitable organizations, but usually underfund them as well.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google