scheherazadesghost

🥺💔 There were plenty of us even when I marched. From all over. If that has diminished further since I marched then it's a real shame. Am supposing that higher tour fees make that likely.

VMAPA claimed yesterday in a closed alum Fb group that they plan to be out of debt early, by the end of this month. Totally agree with the essence of your statement though. I still strongly believe that VMAPA should reopen all positions to the public for application. And bring in an outside recruiter to oversee the process. Prevent any further JSS potentials. That's how SoA found their current CEO...I know bc I originally applied. 💯 I'm only just now realizing how few people understand this. Burnout in the sector is a serious problem. It's why I left.

This would also help Vanguard more fully embody the non profit model... and increase access for prospective members from marginalized communities.

Ultimately, the difference between our interpretations of these regulations is problematic nonetheless though, which I think we all can see. Prospective experienced donors/sponsors won't look as far as into it as any of us. They'll see "delinquent" and bounce, which, as a former np development manager, continues to be a big red flag for me minimally.

The delinquency letter to VMAPA from CA AG Bonte dated 9/9/21 (on the first page of this thread) literally says: "A delinquent organization may not engage in any activity for which registration is required, including solicitation or disbursing of charitable assets." The registry website reinforces this regulation on several different pages. Relying on CA's bureaucratic slow down to find the time to clear the delinquency is not a winning strategy.

Until I'm given evidence to the contrary, I will continue to believe that this was an administrative oversight that occurred due to the loss of institutional knowledge from high staff turnover. Couple high turnover with few leadership roles filled by people who have robust experience successfully running nonprofits and you might get into this type of situation. Pair all that with a broken whistleblower system and enough outright denial that it's broken despite qualified alum (who have navigated the established wb process) trying to point that out. Again, the state provides so much guidance about how to climb out of delinquency status. That's the relatively easy fix here, assuming it was a simple, but massive oversight. Restoring transparency, trustworthiness and accountability that primary stakeholders can rely on is another thing.

In the January Q&A with alumni, alumni association, some board members, CFO and then-CEO present... JVW stated that they do conduct yearly third-party audits, but they aren't made public.

All good. Honestly, adversarial collaboration is my jam so... I'm seeing you say it's not illegal and that's all unless I missed something. But I don't understand how delinquency doesn't mean what the DOJ says it does, which is that delinquent orgs can't operate or solicit. The DOJ clearly defines it as such so I hope it is understandable why I'm still confused. I'm not "choosing" to believe this. I'm leveraging the facts as I read them on the state's website as a former long term non profit professional, just like any major funder would.

Alum fundraiser donations are restricted, meaning they're only supposed to go to food, housing, travel and scholarships for the next season. Bingo revenue is what's clearing the debt, projected to be zeroed by next month. Just providing what I know for clarity.

Please feel free to be less insulting and clearly line out for everyone here why this is. The only thing I've done in this thread and elsewhere is explain why I'm concerned about the documentation I've found as it refers to the stated regulations and laws in California. VMAPA = delinquent status with The State of California's DOJ Delinquent = no soliciting or operating Do you actually think I want to be right about this? Or any other instance of institutional abuse that's been reported to me over the last year? Please feel free to prove me wrong. That would make my day. Edit to add: assuming you could do so respectfully without insults. But before you call anyone a troll, consider that we are facing an organization, with grown adults running it, that is censoring critical feedback about finances, member treatment, and staff treatment. We, separately, have taken a hundred other steps outside of DCP before arriving here.

They are. 🤷🏽‍♀️

They are publicly available documents from the CA DOJ's charity registry website. I discovered them myself a few weeks back. The site also clearly says that their status means not only can they not solicit, they should not be operating. All according to CA law and regulations for charities. This is definitely a logistical hurdle... but they've been collecting and soliciting donations and grants for the last three years. That's a tougher hurdle to clear.

Understood and my apologies to you. I'm a little twitchy over this but I didn't intend to lash out at you. Edit to add: this whole previous year has been a schlogg trying to overcome the barriers this activity has erected to suppress critical feedback from qualified professionals. I'm more surprised when someone believes me than when they don't. So working on that.

There may be a fiscal sponsorship agreement at play here, implied or documented, that I'm not privy to. But you have to have a functioning np status with the state somewhere along the chain to justify solicitation. And fiscal sponsorships, when correctly executed, also require a paper trail. To answer you question, I don't know. Thus my concern.

Here is an explanation of statuses: https://oag.ca.gov/charities/content/info "Delinquent – Status assigned to charity registrants that are out of compliance and may not operate or solicit until required annual reporting and/or fees are submitted to the Registry. Required annual filings include a renewal report (Form RRF-1), a complete, unredacted copy of IRS Form 990, including all schedules as-submitted to the IRS, a renewal fee determined by gross annual revenue, and other documentation as required or requested by the Registry. I'm tired of being called dramatic for stating facts in this industry.

You can look up their status and filing documents using the same CA DOJ charity registry website. I chose not to donate when I discovered VMAPA's delinquency status a few weeks back.

FTFY.

Anyone who's donated should reach out and ask about this. Improperly using charity status hurts all nonprofits everywhere because it degrades public trust in the charity model. But again, financials aside, alum are the real victims in this mess because recuperating from institutionalized bullying, harassment, medical neglect, overtraining, or worse from one's youth can take a lifetime. Everything else should take a back seat to that IMHO, especially in an industry that purports to be educational and enriching. Some of us canaries have been singing for a while. This community, DCI, other corps, and other alum mostly refused to listen. I can list out the various channels I tried to leverage. They are numerous. They all failed. So here we are.

... and which population is hurt the most by this? Members like I was... the downstream effects of mismanagement seem to be similar to those from the bingo theft that was happening when I marched, according to alum reporters I'm in contact with. They are the most at risk for being shorted and/or harmed when orgs can't manage everything properly. This has been my consistent message for the last year. Edit to add: since censorship has already been leveraged elsewhere regarding this news, I welcome anyone to review the public information available about this on the CA DOJ's charity tracking website. All statuses and records are available to the public for review. ... because transparency in the non profit world is irreplaceable.

This reminds of one of @Richard Lesher 's first posts mentioning censorship. When alum cannot differentiate between trolls/haters and those qualified professionals bringing up legit concerns, you're gonna have a bad time.

.

.

I know, ILC, you're cool. Just trying to remain clear. Indeed, my chef's kiss to your next faculty meeting in which that laxative image proves helpful to you. 😎

.