I was the Board Treasure for SCV for 6 years

[Tenoris4Jazz]

3 hours ago, Slingerland said:

I'd be surprised if they don't have an audit. Most corps don't publish them online, but having a third party outside eye who handles the 990 and does the audit is pretty standard practice. 

Blue Devils had other issues (liability-to-assets ratio was 59.92%, 60% gets you a zero; their overhead is 38.75% where only 30% or less gets you full credit) but they got a full 20 of 20 points on independent audit or financial review.  

Here's the list for points out of a possible 20 on independent audit:

Academy         0

Blue Knights    0

Blue Devils       0

Blue Stars       20

Bluecoats        20  (and a perfect 100 overall)

Crown              0    (they got a 50 score overall... lots of issues)

Boston             0

Phantom         20  (a perfect 100 overall)

Cavaliers        20   (their liabilities-to-assets ratio is 206%!!!!!!)

Troopers          0

Vanguard         0

Mandarins       0  (liab-to-assets ratio is 83.6%

I don't have the others bookmarked on the site.  I'd have to dig them up, but this is a pretty good indicator that only half of the top corps are truly fulfilling their independent audit.

Also, for those of you who don't know what the "liabilities-to-assets ratio" means... a ratio of 50% means you have $2 of assets for every $1 of liabilities (debts or payables).  In the Cavies case, they have $2.06 of debt for every $1 of assets, which is unfathomable.

Edited January 20, 2023 by Tenoris4Jazz
add Mandarins, explain L to A ratio

[scheherazadesghost]

31 minutes ago, Tenoris4Jazz said:

Which might be the reason CN gave them zero points.  What good is an independent audit if no one sees it besides the people paid to do it and the people covering up the problems?

I don't know if anything short of full transparency will help them replenish their donor base among other things, so point taken. They were still asking for donations from us alum and telling us to hop on AmazonSmile. Smile will be discontinued by the end of February.

Sadly, I'll have to refer you back to their stating in the alum meeting that their advisors told them it's standard/best practice not to publicize such documents.

[IllianaLancerContra]

1 hour ago, scheherazadesghost said:

🤣😭😞

If they said a name, I didn't catch it in my notes. Point very well made and taken. They also said it's best np practice not to publicize audits and line item, internal budgets

 

I don't doubt that this is what was said at the Alumni B*tch Session Meeting, but is this really true? 

I know that in the corporate world the auditing company is listed w/ their financial document filings; Academy Awards uses Price Waterhouse Cooper (who botched it a few years ago, but immediately and publicly owned up to it).   

At this point I don't know that I trust anything VMAPA leadership says.  At the least I think it should be a Trust, But Verify situation.

[Jeff Ream]

15 minutes ago, IllianaLancerContra said:

I don't doubt that this is what was said at the Alumni B*tch Session Meeting, but is this really true? 

I know that in the corporate world the auditing company is listed w/ their financial document filings; Academy Awards uses Price Waterhouse Cooper (who botched it a few years ago, but immediately and publicly owned up to it).   

At this point I don't know that I trust anything VMAPA leadership says.  At the least I think it should be a Trust, But Verify situation.

Maybe they called Enron

[IllianaLancerContra]

4 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said:

Maybe they called Enron

Interestingly, Enron is why I know this.  Their accounting firm, Arthur Andersen, had been firm that also did accounting for electric utility my father (power grid engineer) worked for.  I get feeling that many clients hurriedly hired other firms to check the books after Enron.  Arthur Andersen signed off on Enron’s books, and while parts of AA is still around (under different names), Enron effectively put them out of business.  

[2muchcoffeeman]

1 hour ago, Tenoris4Jazz said:

It's a total score of 100.  They hit 80 out of 80 until they got to the independent audit.  They got 0 out of 20 there.

[scheherazadesghost]

48 minutes ago, IllianaLancerContra said:

I don't doubt that this is what was said at the Alumni B*tch Session Meeting, but is this really true?

I welcome correction from other alum who were there. That's what my notes said.

It wasn't a ##### session on our part. It was a webinar so we couldn't see each other or chat. Their Zoom limits made it necessary.

[IllianaLancerContra]

1 minute ago, scheherazadesghost said:

I welcome correction from other alum who were there. That's what my notes said.

It wasn't a ##### session on our part. It was a webinar so we couldn't see each other or chat. Their Zoom limits made it necessary.

I wasn't questioning your memory, what I am curious about is whether the SCV management is telling truth about non-profits don't divulge the info.  I'm not sure we can trust SCV management at this point.

[year1buick]

This blows my mind. What a colossal CF. It’s one thing to wonder at how on earth they became so upside down, so quickly. But then to keep going through the motions this fall like it was business as usual? On nothing more than a wing and a prayer? (Am I wrong about that? Admittedly, I’ve not delved too deeply into it.) Kinda makes you wonder if it went beyond mere ineptitude and possibly something much worse. I just don’t understand what could’ve caused such a rapid exsanguination of cash.

[scheherazadesghost]

40 minutes ago, IllianaLancerContra said:

I wasn't questioning your memory, what I am curious about is whether the SCV management is telling truth about non-profits don't divulge the info.  I'm not sure we can trust SCV management at this point.

You're all good. I didn't think otherwise, just trying to remain as clear with what I say as possible.