There’s no way this can be fun, or easy. All the usual cautions about being sure of your ground and avoiding preventable harm to people and organizations apply. And of course, your first responsibility is to the mission, program and beneficiaries of the organization you serve.

That said, I don’t think such knowledge can be ignored.

I’d start by asking for a confidential conversation with my own board chair. When we met, I would calmly and briefly lay out the facts as I know them and mention whatever speculations or rumors there are that point in the same direction. I would answer the predictable questions as well as I could, and be very candid about the limits of my knowledge. My goal for the meeting would be to reach an agreement with my board chair about how the issue should be addressed.

In many cases, the best approach may be for the chair of your organization to arrange for a private and confidential conversation with the chair of the other nonprofit’s board. In preparing for the meeting, I’d want to think about how to handle predictable resistance, maybe even anger, from the other organization’s board chair. The conversation should begin with a clear declaration of belief in the value and importance of the other organization’s work and a short discussion of the risks to board members and the wider community that are posed by financial misdeeds. It’s important to accept that there is not likely to be any sort of agreement about the problem or promise of action. The best that might be expected is some expression of concern and diplomatic gratitude for the efforts made in reporting the possible problem. That high standard may well not be met.

Of course, it would probably be smart, if a little optimistic, to prepare a response for the unlikely but possible event that the other organization’s board chair agrees that there’s a problem and asks for advice or help in dealing with it. Your answer will probably depend on the people -- consultants, knowledgeable attorneys, respected problem solvers -- your and your board chair might suggest to work sensitively and confidentially with the other organization in such a case. Whatever the solution is, it will almost certainly involve the necessity of confronting the troubling behavior at its source. When that happens, the presence and help of someone who holds the respect of everyone in the room will be a big help.

After the two board chairs meet, you and your chair can do little but wait and see. If a long time (several months) goes by and there’s no hint or suggestion that things have changed, then you will have to consider the much more drastic and risky possibility of some sort of outside intervention.

The Nonprofit FAQ has a useful summary of approaches that might be taken in such cases; look at http://www.nonprofits.org/npofaq/16/06.html to review the list. As you’ll see, most observers agree that it’s unlikely outside authorities will act in any but the most outrageously damaging situations. So the chance is very real that your attempt at intervention will result only in bad feelings and, maybe, bad publicity. But those are risks you must weigh against the possibility of putting an end to something troubling and wrong. It's a tough call, deciding how far you should go in an effort to prevent diversion of resources that should be dedicated to the public good into private enrichment.

The truth is that the success of every nonprofit organization depends on the public’s confidence in our work. While we are necessarily primarily responsible for our own mission and activities, meeting that responsibility imposes on all of us a small but inescapable further responsibility for the well-being, and the good behavior, of other organizations that serve our communities. You may decide that there is no practical way you can intervene to reduce the damage that is being done by dishonesty at another organization. No one will fault you for coming to that conclusion. But it’s something you need to think about -- sad as that is.

— Putnam Barber, President

The Evergreen State Society

August 26. 2003

---

Further thoughts?  If you have suggestions or comments about this question or response, send the to the Editor or directly to Putnam Barber.

If you have a query you would like to see addressed in a future issue of Observing Nonprofits, put in in an email to the Queries Editor.

[[[Go to the September 2003 "front page"...click here]]]

---