According to former employees and policy analysts, federally chartered conservation foundations pay lavish salaries to their officers while they work to restore wildlife and plant habitats.A former employee said that the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation's Form 990 tax records should raise questions about its internal financial practices and potential impact on conservation programs.According to Alex Echols (the foundation's deputy policy director, 1995-2000), top officials such as Jeff Trandahl, the foundation's CEO and executive director, receive annual compensation packages that seem to be out of line with other non-profit conservation groups.According to tax records from the latest Form 990, Trandahl was paid $1.29million in annual compensation in 2018. In comparison, the salaries of CEOs at other non-profit conservation groups have fallen well below Trandahl's in recent years.2017 Sierra Club Executive Director Dan Chu received $238,000, while American Forest Foundation President and Chief Executive Officer Thomas D. Martin earned $386,560. Rhea Suh, then-President of the Natural Resources Defense Council, earned $543,741 in 2018, while David Yarnold, then-CEO of National Audubon Society, made $676,306.Echols stated in an interview with The Daily Signal that donors to organizations like the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation will look into executive compensation. If it is not appropriate, they will be concerned and ask why they pay more than peer organizations. Although I don't know if there are any untoward happening with NFWF or not, the fact that salaries are so high raises some questions.Trandahl is a Republican who worked for 23 years on Capitol Hill. He was the clerk for the House of Representatives between 1998 and 2005. In November 2005, Trandahl joined the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation as CEO and Executive Director. The House clerk is elected every two years as the House organizes for a new Congress.The Congressional Research Service released a 2018 report, 12 years after Trandahl resigned, estimating that the average clerk's salary was $172,500 per year.Along with the U.S., the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works and House Natural Resources Committee are responsible for overseeing the foundation and its activities. The foundation and its activities are overseen by the Fish and Wildlife Service.The National Fish and Wildlife Foundation was established by Congress in 1984 as an extension of the work of the Interior Departments Fish and Wildlife Service and Commerce Departments National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.According to its website, the nonprofit foundation has grown to be the nation's largest private donor for conservation projects over the past 37 years.Trandahl, foundation staffers, and U.S. corporations and federal agencies foster conservation partnerships with individuals and organizations in all 50 states. With a budget of $355.9M for 2020 and 145 employees, the foundation claims to have supported nearly 20,000 conservation projects.The National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (also known as NFWF) is committed to the preservation, restoration and enhancement of the nation's fish, wildlife and habitats for future generations.Echols, who served as the foundation's acting executive director during his tenure, supported its overall mission to conserve wildlife habitats. He also said that he has concerns about the execution.Echols stated that the mission is unchanged and it's a good mission.My concern is that the NFWF has stopped being as innovative in its efforts to create partnerships to address broad-based conservation issues. While they still do great work, their approach is more standardized and established than the innovative ideas it once had. The availability of money is one of the biggest limiting factors in conservation. The effectiveness of using the money is another limiting factor.Of course, we often forget that money doesn't just mean more money. We need more money. NFWF was the first to implement the matching grant system. However, it must take a closer look at who is receiving the money. They should ask how much money is going to innovators, such as small-scale institutions, and not larger institutions.The National Fish and Wildlife Foundation's latest Form 990 shows that top officers made more in 2018 than CEOs of other non-profit conservation groups.Thomas Kelsch, senior vice president made $622,778 while Timothy DiCintio was another senior vice-president and earned $632,991. Lila Helms was an executive vice president and earned $572,977. Tokunbo Falayi was chief financial officer at $376,316, and Holly Bamford was chief conservation officer at $471,185.The salaries of the officers and CEOs of foundations far exceed those earned by the top officials in the Interior Department.According to current government records, the salary of the interior secretary (a Cabinet official) is $219,200, while the salary of the deputy secretary is $199,300. According to the executive schedule, which sets salaries for top officers across all agencies, assistant secretaries earn $172,500Whitney Tilt was the director of conservation at the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation between 1988 and 2003. He told The Daily Signal that he and his colleagues were subject to strict oversight by the Interior Department Inspector Generals Office and members Congress when he ran a grant program.Tilt stated that we were subject to a proctologists' exam quite often while I was there. We were all examined, from GAAP [Generally Accepted accounting Principles] to OMB [Office of Management and Budget] auditors to congressional oversight. It was great for us, and it was also good for accountability.Tilt addedRegularly, we were called before Congress to provide a complete accounting of the grant program's operation and how it was being used. They did not find anything inappropriate. NFWF is a worthy organization.Although I don't know the details of its current operation, I can assume that they are still delivering conservation successes. Otherwise, they wouldn't receive support from corporate sponsors, their agency or individual sponsors. The board wouldn't just allow salaries to be paid like this, I think. They have to be doing great conservation.The Congressional Research Service described the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation in a 2017 report as a conduit for public/private partnerships.NFWF activities can be supported by gifts of capital and property, as well as funds arising out of regulatory actions or requirements for project mitigation and legal settlements. These contributions are from many sources, federal and not. From its inception to FY 2015, NFWF managed $3.5 billion in grants. NFWF supported various federal agencies with $87.6 millions in FY 2015. This included $0.4 million in other funds, $38 million private funds, and $132.4 Million in directed funds. These funds were primarily for oil spillages in the Gulf of Mexico.According to the report, the legislation that created the foundation stipulates that federal funds given to NFWF by all federal agencies must be administered by NFWF in matching grants. Federal funds will not exceed half of grant, and nonfederal partners at least half.The Interior Department provided financial support to the foundation when it was first chartered by Congress. This was in order to pay administrative costs. The support was ended in 1989 and the foundation moved to Washington.As ex officio voting members, the foundations 30-member board includes the director of Fish and Wildlife Service and undersecretary for commerce for oceans and animals. The interior secretary currently Deb Haaland approves board members.The Daily Signal asked Interior Departments Office for Inspector General if it was concerned about Trandahl's salaries and those of other officers at National Fish and Wildlife Foundation.The Daily Signal also asked Fish and Wildlife Service's press office if it received any reports on foundation activities and if it had concerns about the salaries of foundation employees.The Fish and Wildlife Service did not respond to The Daily Signals at the time of publication. However, the Interior Departments Office of Inspector General acknowledged The Daily Signals' phone call and invited anyone with concerns about foundation salaries online.Bonner Cohen, a senior associate with the National Center for Public Policy Research in Washington, stated that he doubts that Trandahl's 15-year tenure at the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation as CEO was a genuine oversight.It shouldn't be surprising that a congressionally chartered foundation was established 37 years ago.This is the nature of mission creep. It's a Washington chronic disease. It is not stated anywhere in the charter of NFWFs that the foundation should be used to enrich its executive director or other high-ranking employees. This is because Congress and the NFWFs board have not provided oversight that would be worthy of their name. These outrageous levels of compensation will not stop if there is no adult supervision. Despite millions of Americans losing their livelihoods due to the pandemic-related lockdowns in the USA, the NFWF was able to continue its good work.On a section of their website, the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation highlights accountability, transparency and efficiency.Our return on investment averages three to one. NFWF's operations are designed to be as efficient as possible. Only four percent of our budget goes to administrative expenses. We invest 96 cents per dollar in priority actions to restore and protect fish, wildlife and habitats throughout the United States and abroad. Each collaboration is brought to us by a results-oriented approach and a national network of contacts.Vice president of public policy for Conservative Coalition for Climate Solutions Nick Loris said that he was open to the idea of public-private partnerships, similar to the one already in place at the foundation. Loris expressed concern about the opportunity cost of high salaries and stated that he believes there is a need to be more transparency.Loris stated that injecting money from individuals and corporations can be a powerful tool to conserve the environment. She added:Policymakers must demand greater transparency and accountability. NFWF is a federally chartered non-profit, even though federal funds are not allowed to flow to it currently. Transparency will ensure funds don't flow to projects with the highest political returns and instead go to those that benefit our environment. While individuals should be paid for the contribution they make to an organization, there are also opportunities costs. It is not possible to spend dollars on exorbitant salaries and conservation at the same time.The Washington-based National Council of Nonprofits helps nonprofits achieve their mission. It recommends that board members of NFWF conduct a review of similar-sized peer organizations in the same geographical location to determine what senior leaders are offered in salary and other compensation. The IRS considers reasonable nonprofit compensation.The Daily Signal emailed Rob Blumenthal, a spokesperson for National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, asking if the foundation had any comments on the method used to determine salaries of its CEO and other officers. The Daily Signal asked if Trandahl was still being paid more than one million dollars per year in 2019, 2020 and 2021.Blumenthal sent an email to defend the compensation practices of foundations. Beth Christ Smith, vice-president of human resources, stated in it:The foundation uses a strict process that includes the use of independent, outside experts to determine compensation and market surveys to establish executive pay. We are confident that Mr. Trandahl's unique expertise and experience will be of benefit to NFWF. The Board of Directors has also set the appropriate compensation for other senior members of the foundation.Katie Tubb, an energy policy analyst at The Heritage Foundation said that she isn't optimistic about the chances of any serious oversight from the Interior Department. (The Daily Signal, Heritage's multimedia news agency, is the source.Tubb does however see an opportunity for Congress, to examine foundations practices.Tubb stated that Interior wouldn't be motivated to oversee the foundation because it can be used by the Biden administration as a tool to achieve many of its goals.Biden's administration is very eager to acquire federal lands and expand federal control over private lands. A foundation like this could be seen as a useful tool to assist them in this endeavor, she stated.Tubb also pointed out yellow flags in 2017's Congressional Research Service report that raise questions about the foundation's use of private funding sources. She suggested that members of the Senate and House might investigate these questions.This equation includes the Deepwater Horizon oil spillage in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010 and subsequent criminal settlement agreements between BP, based in London, and the Obama Justice Department.According to the Congressional Research Service report, the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation received more than $2.54 Billion for restoration of the Gulf Coast between 2013 and 2017.The foundation explains in detail what it received as a result of the BP oil spillage and how the funds were used for projects that benefit the natural resources along the Gulf Coast.The foundation founded the Gulf Environmental Benefit Fund. It claims that it has funded 183 projects in excess of $185 billion.Tubb questions if the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation fulfilled its obligation after the Deepwater Horizon oil disaster to properly spend the money. This is a good place for Congress to investigate and find out what happened.Do you have a comment about this article? Send us an email at [email protected] with your comments. We may publish your edited remarks in the We Hear You section. Include the URL of the article, the headline and your name as well as the town and/or the state.
