DATELINE: January 2, 2008, Chicago
Yesterday the fighting Illini were no match for USC and today the Smithsonian is no match for Senator Grassley. Today's Washington Post Investigation's column featured a story describing Senator Grassley's and Senator Dianne Feinstein's responses to last week's story in the Post on W. Richard West, Jr.'s compensation, travel, and perks as the director of the National Museum of the American Indian. Their reactions to the Post's revelations...
The Desktop Guide is Quickly Becoming the Must Have Guide for Nonprofit Executives
Some of our readers have followed the link to the Amazon.com Web site, but apparently have not bought the Guide. If they were turned off by the price, they should reconsider. One prominent attorney in the exempt organization field grabbed a review copy of the Guide and couldn't put it down. She has instructed a number of her clients to buy it, pointing out to them that for less than 1/2 hour of her billable time, they receive a lesson (and resource) that tells it like she would like it told. If you are starting a new charity, the Guide could save you thousands of dollars in legal fees by teaching you how to better utilize your legal counsel and framing the issues so you don't spin your wheels at $400 an hour. |
are unfair.
Grassley told the Post that,
Overall the West case raises real questions about the Smithsonian management's commitment to reform in the wake of the Secretary's departure last spring.
We take issue with this statement. The expenses in question were incurred over a 4-year period, a time-period that included the three-year period before the widespread reports of Lawrence M. Small extravagant spending practices. In other words, the Smithsonian's board should not be judged on its current commitment to change based on past events. Senator Grassley scored his points—and rightfully so—when the revelations first surfaced (if our recollections are correct, in late 2006 and during the first part of 2007). Now it is time to get behind the Smithsonian's board as it attempts to restructure the institution. Comments like "It sounds like Mr. West made quite a haul long before Christmas" simply are not constructive, particularly when the reference should be to Christmases two and three years past rather than just ten days past.
Senator Feinstein is not nearly as feisty as Senator Grassley, but we sense some inconsistency in her comments. She said in a statement quoted in the Post,
We're asking for an accounting both from the Smithsonian Institution's Board of Regents, as well as from the Government Accountability Office. What I'm interested in is the nature of the trips, who authorized them, and what they accomplished.
Fair enough, but the Post appears to provide at least a partial answer in an earlier paragraph. According to the Post, West raised $155 million for the institution. Unclear is the period of time over which that occurred. We suspect that it went further back than the four-year period in which West racked up $250,000 in travel expenses, but given the Smithsonian's heavy reliance on government funding, Feinstein should pleased with West's efforts.
In mid-December of last year, Feinstein was concerned about the Smithsonian's efforts to raise funds for maintenance and needed renovations. Feinstein had crafted an agreement, according to Post reporter Jacqueline Trescott, under which the Smithsonian would receive $15 million in additional federal funds if it raised $30 million in private funds for renovation. Smithsonian Challenged to Raise More Private Funds (Dec. 13, 2007). Feinstein became perturbed when one Smithsonian executive suggested a one-to-one match. It seems to us that Feinstein should be applauding West's success as a fundraiser, assuming the Post has accurately characterized his efforts.
We agree with both Grassley and Feinstein that some of West's expenditures were extravagant, but the two senators need to recognize that raising money from private sources cannot be done on a civil service expense account. In short, we would like to see Senators Feinstein and Grassley back off for a year. Let's give the people currently running the Smithsonian some time to right the institution and its internal operations and governance. That does not mean that the the two senators should stop asking questions, but they should do so in a less confrontational manner.
Internal Revenue Service - Circular 230 Disclosure: As provided for in Treasury regulations, any advice (but none is intended) relating to federal taxes that is contained in this communication is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any plan or arrangement addressed herein.
THE FOREGOING IS NOT AND SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN AS LEGAL ADVICE. IF LEGAL ADVICE IS REQUIRED, THE NONPROFIT OR OTHER PARTY IN QUESTION SHOULD SEEK THE ADVICE OF QUALIFIED LEGAL COUNSEL. If you liked this post, please visit http://www.charitygovernance.com for a description of our training and consulting services. You will also want to acquire a copy of Jack Siegel's book, A Desktop Guide for Nonprofit Directors, Officers, and Advisors: Avoiding Trouble While Doing Good."
Copyright 2008, Charity Governance Consulting LLC. All Rights Reserved. You may not copy any portion of this post to a computer "clipboard" for re-posting anywhere or e-mailing, or otherwise reproduce this post. If you want others to review this post, you may provide them with a link to this web blog. Any use of the material or ideas in this post by reporters or other publishers shall make reference to Jack Siegel, author of "A Guide for Non-Profit Directors, Officers and Advisors: Avoiding Trouble While Doing Good" and this web blog. For additional information call 773-325-2124
