Raining on someone's parade (advice needed)

[JcWoman]

@Q.N.Jones

That said–it is always better to phrase things in terms of a recommendation that is open for discussion. I can’t tell from what you write, but I wonder if you sounded like your opinions on the matter were law, and not open for discussion, which is guaranteed to generate bad blood. As a pretty opinionated person myself, this is a talent I have had to cultivate. Boards are about collaborative decision-making, and it’s important to approach it that way, both in your expressions and in your attitude toward the process. On our board, we disagree often–but we do it respectfully and with the goal of finding consensus.

Thanks, yes, we are all opinionated. Personally, I don’t have a problem with that, but I think some people don’t like conflict, meaning really, disagreements. I don’t think my tone was “laying down the law” except perhaps for the reply where I said we should draw up a contract (but I made it clear that was only if we agreed that we could comply with her terms). Before that my tone was more questioning: what if we can’t do that, do we need to refund the money? If the person fails to do the follow up training, do we have to refund it then? One person just replied “we won’t know until we try” and other than that there was no discussion (except apparently, one about my tone that I wasn’t included in). Very frustrating. That’s why I titled the thread “raining on someone’s parade” because I think they got pissed off because I wouldn’t agree to a Mary Poppins optimism that it would all work out in the end.

[D_Anconia]

I can’t speak to any legal issues, but I do recommend you talk to a CPA. In the land of non-profit accounting, there are three types of funds–permanently restricted, temporarily restricted, and unrestricted.

It sounds like this donation would fall into the category of temporarily restricted. The money can only be spent meeting the donor imposed restrictions, such as paying for the trainer’s certification and required follow up courses. It cannot be spent for any other purposes.

[Q.N.Jones]

Well, I can tell you that in our NPO, when a donor tries to make very restrictive stipulations–especially those that envision creating a new service or program, as this one does–we talk to the donor before accepting the donation. We explain to them the reasons why their stipulations are difficult, and might put us in a position where we are unable to follow through on their intent. Usually, we try to get them to relax the stipulations to the point where both the donor and the organization are comfortable they can reasonably be met.

We also discuss with the donor that, if something unforeseen occurs, that we need the flexibility to spend the money in another way, and that we need an alternate plan for what to do with the money if the original plan becomes infeasible. We generally discuss what those conditions would look like, and what they would like the money to go to if that happens.

Hope that helps.

[Malthus]

This is a matter of relationship-managing, not lawyering.

It doesn’t matter a toss if the donor could sue and get their money back, or not; win or lose - the whole amount would be eaten up in legal fees.

What does matter, is that if the donor gets the feeling he’s been dicked around, you can kiss goodbye any more $5000 a year donations, let alone special $10K ones. And possibly an expensive (if possibly pointless) lawsuit, if he’s the litigious type.

So I agree with those upthread saying you should communicate with the donor and find out his realistic priorities. $10,000 is simply not enough to actually hire an employee, obviously. Taking his money and doing squat by way of what the donor wants is a stupid option - he will of course find out and be pissed off - and doing what he wants isn’t possible; so the best thing to do is talk with him and work out a compromise that is possible.

[handsomeharry]

@JcWoman

First my concerns were simply brushed off. Later I learned from one board member that someone else on the board didn’t like my tone. I was politely told to shut up. I feel like they don’t value my input on the board and am now thinking of resigning.

So, am I an asshole? Or was there a better way to raise my concerns?

Not an asshole, but a bit officious. You started acting like a clown by saying “we need a contract…and a lawyer!” to accept money as a gift. Just read what the circumstances are of the gift. As they have been in the gift receiving business, the board knows how to receive gifts with strings. If you think it can be fulfilled, accept and comply. If not, return the cash.
So, you were basically interfering in the work.

If they have you there, they value you. Yes, your concerns were simply brushed off, because they weren’t of major import. Your feelings are hurt, and you are wanting parity-something that rarely happens when the boss slaps you down.

Quit if you want, but, there is no need to. You were, well, I can’t say overly wrong, but, you weren’t overly right.

[KittenKat]

@D_Anconia

I can’t speak to any legal issues, but I do recommend you talk to a CPA. In the land of non-profit accounting, there are three types of funds–permanently restricted, temporarily restricted, and unrestricted.

It sounds like this donation would fall into the category of temporarily restricted. The money can only be spent meeting the donor imposed restrictions, such as paying for the trainer’s certification and required follow up courses. It cannot be spent for any other purposes.

THIS!

I am an accountant with many years of experience with non-profits. Restricted funds are a big deal, and I think all the folks here saying that the donor should have made his restrictions known before he gave, while perhaps technically correct, are pretty much picking nits. It sounds like the email was virtually concurrent with the donation, and may very well be binding, but a consultation with an attorney or CPA is definitely in order to be sure.

I do think your concerns are valid. Not having been at the meeting, I can’t speak to how you presented them. The comment about the contract may have been a bit premature. First, I think the board needs to decide if they want to accept the donstion, then they can decide what type of documentation is required/desirable.