[Foundation-l] Chapters

[Ray Saintonge]

On 08/26/11 2:26 PM, Nathan wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 3:44 PM, Lodewijk<lodewijk at effeietsanders.org>  wrote:
>> Hi Jimmy,
>>
>> There are several side effects to the idea of not allowing chapters at all
>> to fundraise (I note that boardmembers and staff members have a different
>> take on this, so I'll keep it general - keeping in mind there are many other
>> aspects to be considered, such as transparancy. However, imho fundraising
>> through chapters should remain the best way).
> Lodewijk,
>
> I don't think the chapters are barred from all fundraising... At most,
> they are at risk of not being able to participate in the global WMF
> fundraiser. They can still raise funds on their own through other
> methods. Maybe such other methods are more time consuming, difficult
> and less lucrative... But there are innovative substitutes for the WMF
> annual fundraiser, I'm sure.

I agree with that much. Chapters should be warned not to become 
dependent on the WMF fundraiser.  Information about such innovative 
substitutes may need to be more freely shared.  The result may indeed be 
decreased revenues, but if one of the complaints is that some chapters 
are sitting on piles of money that they don't use there may not be much 
harm to that.
>
> In any case, the barriers to participation relate to the
> organizational capacity of the chapters and the associated risks. A
> chapter that has financial controls and active leadership should be
> able to meet the WMFs requirements (with the exception of tax
> deduction eligibility, based on jurisdiction); a chapter that does not
> puts both their funds and their public reputation at risk.  As the
> host of the fundraiser and the mark owner, the WMF shares in that risk
> - and it is both reasonable and necessary that the Foundation adhere
> to and require minimum standards of accountability in order to
> mitigate the risk of fraud, waste and abuse.

If the question is one of "minimum standards of accountability" the 
WMF's first obligation would be to publish the standards which it 
requires, presumably consistent with IFRS. Chapters incorporated within 
particular jurisdictions will be subject to the financial reporting laws 
of their respective jurisdictions.  These are more important than the 
FUD and distrust at the heart of recent proposals.  There is no doubt 
that a small band of individuals unaccustomed to large infusions of cash 
will have challenges to face, but in these cases the WMF would do better 
to help these chapters find competent help in their own countries than 
to play the role of a distrustful parent.
>
> If it were only the chapters themselves at stake (as is the case when
> they raise funds independently), then they could get money first and
> organization second. But the WMF shares in the risk, and is offering
> organizational support to chapters, so cart before horse does not make
> sense.
>

There's a difference between organizational support and organizational 
takeover. One possible solution might be to not allow chapters to 
participate in the global fundraiser unless they already have a suitable 
organization in place, but that could make it more difficult for the WMF 
to take a piece of the chapter's action.

Ray