The Washington Commanders Charitable Foundation, which receives upwards of 75% of its donations from fans and the public, is operating in a way that calls into question whether it is fulfilling its charitable mission.
CharityWatch and the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy examined the charity's tax filing and said there are enough red flags to warrant attention from the attorneys general in Maryland and Virginia. Civil penalties can be imposed on nonprofits by attorneys general.
The Commanders' charity gave away more than $700,000 in grants and contributions in the fiscal year that ended in June. During the height of the Pandemic, it gave away more than half a million dollars.
The foundation's finances were examined by ESPN after it cut a check to a winner. The team wired the winner's winnings because of a bank error. As of March 31, 2021, the foundation had a little less than $1 million in the bank, with an average of more than $2 million in the previous five years.
The Washington Commander owners, players, donors, alumni, and staff have dedicated time and resources to helping others and we are very proud of the work that has been accomplished.
The Commanders' charity was found in a review of the tax filing by the two groups.
Lacks independence. The foundation's sole voting board member for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2021, through April of this year was Commanders co-CEOs, and co-CEOs of the company, and co-CEOs of the company, and co-CEOs of the company, and co She took on a more active role in the team after her husband was suspended from the team.
The company it frequently lists as one it owes money to is owned by the owner of the team.
A $6,000 payment to a for-profit company that provided marketing services to the foundation was included in its financial filing.
Grants were made to organizations that weren't in line with the mission of the organization.
Laurie Styron is the executive director of CharityWatch. Taxpayers who subsidize the existence of public charities also have a stake in knowing that nonprofits aren't being used to advance the personal interests of the people running it.
Public charities should have at least five voting members with a "diversity of perspectives" and their names should be made public.
The National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy said that this protects the charity or foundation by making sure that people aren't making self-interested deals and that they are getting multiple perspectives on the societal problems that they claim to solve. There is only one board member listed on the most recent filing. She was a board member before the fiscal year ended. Two of the board members were co- executive directors.
It's a violation of all the best practices.
Styron said it was a big problem. One person cannot rule themselves. The board is missing. There is no freedom. Conflict or competing interests are not checked against each other.
After weeks of asking why the charity didn't have the recommended five trustees, Medina released a statement on Wednesday saying that the charity had only one board member for a short time. The team president, senior vice president of corporate affairs and strategy, and the foundation's executive director all worked for the team. The foundation told government agencies it would provide for public inspection.
The practice of filling the board with team employees was problematic. There is a high chance of abuse.
Medina gave a 12-page document in response to the questions. There are nonprofits that have fewer than five voting members.
According to the most recent government filings, the Ravens, Eagles, and 49ers have at least a dozen voting board members. Washington's is the only charity with a single member.
There should be people on the board who are not beholden to the team. The foundation says that it is working towards the best interests of vulnerable children. That would make sure that the foundation is used to benefit the community.
The foundation regularly lists liabilities owed to the for-profit holding company for the Commanders that are not disclosed to the public. Tax documents show the foundation owes the group more than $200,000 in the last three years.
It's a big deal. A good attorney general investigation can uncover this. Are they using dollars that were supposed to be used for charity?
There was no evidence that the Commanders profited from the foundation, despite the many questions raised about it. According to Medina, the liability is for the repayment of transactions paid by the Commanders on behalf of the Foundation.
The Washington Commanders are considered a related party to the Foundation even though it is a stand alone entity.
The charity didn't identify the relationship or that the group is owned by the husband of a woman. The foundation was not required to file additional disclosures according to Medina. Both watchdog organizations said that the wife of the team's owner could potentially benefit from transactions between the foundation and other organizations owned by the family.
As required by Maryland state law, the charity submitted an audit as it solicited donations at FedEx Field. The charity's audit was obtained through a public records request. The foundation "periodically reimburses" the football team and there were related party transactions that included "amounts paid on behalf of the foundation" according to the audit. According to the audit, the foundation's financial statements present fairly, in all material respects the financial position of the charity and that they were in line with accounting principles generally accepted in the US.
There was a letter forwarded by Medina that said he did not have any substantive concern about the relationship between the Foundation and Pro- Football, Inc.
"Reimbursements like those from the charity to the WFI Group are common amongst teams where all staff are employed by a team entity and services performed are expensed to the foundation," Medina said.
The 49ers Foundation reimbursed the team for similar services, and that foundation filed additional paperwork that revealed its relationship with the team, according to a review by the sports network. The Commanders' foundation is the only one that owes money to the team because the 49ers gave nearly double that amount back to the foundation.
The reporting guidance is both rules-based and principles-based, and in some cases requires the governing body of a charity to make judgement calls in good faith with respect to whether or not the charity really has the ability to make decisions independently of for-profit interests.
The only team that doesn't have an official charity is the Cincinnati Reds. Private foundations rely on concentrated support from a single individual, a family or a small group of donors instead of relying on contributions from the public. Some of the private foundations, such as the Packers', share a name with the team, while others, such as the Falcons', operate under the name of team owners.
The Washington foundation and at least four other public charities have reported receiving game tickets from their affiliated team.
Some public charities filed additional disclosures about their financial relationship with their affiliated for-profit team, while others reconciled the value of the tickets they received with the value of the tickets they gave away.
The Washington charity received between $246,000 and $708,000 in tickets in the last fiscal year. There were no ticket contributions reported during the fiscal year. Washington did not file disclosures detailing the affiliation between team and charity and reported a higher value of tickets given away than received.
Other in-kind items that were donated as part of a community relations programming are also included in the value of the tickets. She said that the expenses included bears from Build-A-Bear. The lower bowl and club sections of the stadium are given out to youth groups and various organizations like veteran, first responders and frontline workers.
The team should donate the tickets if they want to. They don't need to give them to the charity first.
The Commanders' foundation's stated mission is to help children that need it most, through initiatives to elementary through high-school age students in the region.
Most of the charity's grants and donations were given to local children's schools and charities before the foundation's president became aware of the swine flu. The grants ranged from $300,000 to $400,000 a year and went to the Prince George's County Schools.
The most recent financial filing shows that the foundation gave some of its money to a number of children's charities. The foundation has given money in the past to the Capital Area Food Bank and World Food Kitchen.
Some donations have gone to organizations that don't have a connection to children. Two donations to children's schools are listed by the foundation. Other donations included $10,000 to Acts Inc., a behavioral health services group in Florida, and $10,000 to the Foundation for Appalachian Ohio, a group geared to creating opportunities for Appalachian Ohio's citizens and communities.
"We believe this was a grant to match a player's personable charitable contribution, which is consistent with previous grants from the Foundation," Medina said. "Our mission statement does not restrict our geographic focus," she said in a second statement. Our mission is to support our community, which we define as inclusive of our players and the causes that are meaningful to them, while focusing on giving in the District of Columbia/Maryland/Virginia area.
The charity gave money to the American Cancer Society and the Brem Foundation.
"In recent years, the foundation has expanded its focus to provide for those in need, addressing social justice and supporting the fight to end cancer," Medina said.
Styron wants donors to know where their money is going.
She said that fans took the charity's word that their donations would be used. "If fans were told that their donations would be used to fund specific programs, it's unethical, not to mention insulting, for the person running the charity to use those funds for something completely different."
The apparent change of mission is one of the reasons charities need more trustees.
He said that if there were other board members, it wouldn't be possible to change the mission. There would be people on that board who were committed to helping the poor. They may not vote in favor of funding cancer research. Is it really right for a single person to make a decision about the direction of a charity? I don't believe that.
A grant of $6,000 was listed in the charity's most recent filing. The Commanders are referred to on the website by their former team name.
Medina said that the payment was for a third-party that designed the impact report.
Medina forwarded a statement from the accounting firm that said it was an expense and had no effect on net assets.
According to Styron, misstatement means the foundation is exaggerating its grants.
She doesn't say she makes a charitable grant to the electric company when she pays her electric bill. It is an expense paid in exchange for a service.
According to the team's website, it has given away more than $30 million, but the government says the number is less. According to Medina, the website is the more accurate number and the figures reported to the government haven't been updated in two years.
Styron said it's always a red flag when a charity's marketing doesn't match its financial reporting.
It's a huge problem if they don't report their financial information accurately. It's the official financial record of the organization. The'real' number is that one. Their tax forms should match what they say publicly.
There were other problems in the charity's tax filing. The foundation received hundreds of thousands of dollars in grants over the course of the next two years.
Some of the grants were for the sale of license plates. Motorists in Virginia and Maryland could buy a team logo license plate from their state's Department of Motor Vehicles, and part of the purchase price went to the foundation.
The entire $75,180 government grant was made up of license plate sales according to Medina. License plate sales brought in $178,890 of the grants. She didn't reveal the source of the rest of the money.
John Mastroberardino is a researcher for the sports network.
All Rights Reserved © 2024
