Assessment of allocating cost of speakers in Food For the Poor’s financial statements.

October 5, 2018, 8:39 am

Image courtesy of Adobe Stock.

The Cease and Desist Order filed by the Michigan Attorney General on December 19, 2017 provides an analysis of the joint cost allocation methodology used by Food For the Poor.  The Order can be found here.

FFP hires pastors from various denominations to make presentations at churches in the pastors’ denomination.  FFP applies joint cost allocation accounting to classify a large portion of the speakers’ time as program services.  The AG concluded the allocation methodology did not follow GAAP.

As mentioned previously, FFP settled the AG’s allegations by agreeing to pay the state $300,000 and revising its fundraising materials.

For general education of the nonprofit community, this post will quote the AG’s Cease and Desist Order at length on the joint cost allocation issue.

The authoritative explanation of what constitutes generally accepted accounting principles is found in FASB’s Accounting Standards Codification™ (ASC). I will add some citations from ASC to the AG’s Order. Will also add a few comments along the way.

A detailed look at the AG’s Order is valuable because it provides an in-depth analysis of a specific situation with a detailed comparison to authoritative GAAP.

You might want to get a fresh cup of coffee since this post is a long read, currently sitting at over 1,500 words. It is also quite technical.

Read the rest of this entry »


Food for the Poor settles allegations in Michigan AG’s Cease and Desist Order

October 4, 2018, 11:38 am

Image courtesy of Adobe Stock.

On October 1, 2018, Mark Hrywna reports in Nonprofit Times that Food For the Poor Settles With Michigan AG. The settlement calls for FFP to pay the state $300,000 and to revise its fundraising appeals.

Action is based on 2015 financial data. The filed data shows 96.5% of all expenses are categorized as program services, according to the article.  The AG asserts that if gifts-in-kind are excluded, program services would be about 67%.

The AG issued a cease and desist order in December 2017. More on that later in this post.

Might want to get a fresh cup of coffee. This will be a long read.

My summary of the numbers mentioned in Attorney General’s Cease and Desist Order:

 total expense  program  supporting svc  prog %
 per filing             1,157.5    1,117.0                     40.5 96.5%
 GIK             1,033.3    1,033.3
 cash exp.                124.2         83.7                     40.5 67.4%

 

One particular fundraising pitch is mentioned in the article. FFP conducted a “6 Cents Appeal”, in which it claimed, quoting the article quoting the campaign, that “It only takes 6 cents to provide a meal for a starving child.” The AG took exception to this campaign for multiple reasons. More later in this post.

Article says FFP denies the accusations which leaves us in the typical situation seen in such settlements:  While denying the quite serious allegations, the charity will write a $300,000 check from donor funds to pay the state since they did nothing wrong and change their fundraising materials, all of which was actually fine, with both those actions done voluntarily since they didn’t do anything inappropriate.

Dropping the smart alack tone, I really do understand why such comments are absolutely necessary in negotiating a settlement, especially since the California AG still has a separate Cease and Desist Order under appeal. It still rubs me the wrong way, but that’s just me.

Press release from AG

Read the rest of this entry »


Food for the Poor’s response to news articles

July 5, 2018, 11:13 am

Clean water from a well – There are places in the world where that is a big deal; I’ve visited a few. Many charities, including those whose accounting is being criticized by the CA AG, are working to improve the lives of the least among us. Image courtesy of Adobe Stock.

Food For The Poor Executive Director Angel Aloma provided the following response to the post earlier today discussing several news articles. I am pleased to print the comments, with permission of FFP. For ease of reading, the comments will not be put in quotations. 

FFP has another statement at their website which you can read here.

The FFP statement, which is in response to comments in the Boston Globe article:

 

Food For The Poor is troubled by recent news coverage suggesting that our non-profit organization is not transparent about how we operate. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The claim that we deliberately mislead donors is contradicted by the facts. The regulatory action brought by the California Attorney General does not suggest any wrongdoing on our part in the handling of donations or our daily operations. It is an accounting issue about how we value donated goods and we are challenging it.

The Attorney General’s office claims that we have over-valued our pharmaceuticals because we have used the United States as our principal market and have valued our pharmaceuticals at U.S. wholesale prices, rather than international prices related to the 17 countries we serve. However, almost all international nonprofit organizations that receive significant donated goods use the same industry-specific methodologies to value their donated pharmaceuticals in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) established by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB).  In following those standards, we are required to value all of our donated goods in a fair and consistent manner and to declare that value as revenue in our financial statements.

Read the rest of this entry »


More articles discussing the California AG’s enforcement actions over medical GIK

July 5, 2018, 5:30 am

…What accounting rules sometime feel like.  Image courtesy of Adobe Stock.

Here are three more articles discussing the cease-and-desist orders issued by the California Attorney General against three large charities who have large amounts of donated medicine. Previous post discusses a few earlier articles.

Update:  Food for the Poor has provided a response to the Boston Globe article, which you may read here.

5/30/18 – editorial in Sun Sentinel – Food for the Poor controversy reveals need for nonprofit transparency – Editorial highlights that using US pricing compared to international pricing increases apparent efficiency.  The challenge, visible in the article, is that the charity claims 95% of all expenses are for program and the article says the California AG claims 66.7% of cash donations are used for program.

In a statement which should sober every accountant, CPA, auditor of NPOs, and staff of R&D charities, the editorial asks:

(S)uch accounting practices may be legal, and they may be the industry standard, but are they honest?

Let me paraphrase two questions embedded in that comment (yeah, CPAs actually talk that way – we look for embedded derivatives and embedded leases). The editorial is asking:

  • Is the industry standard consistent with GAAP?
  • Is either GAAP or the industry standard honest?

Read the rest of this entry »


Three charities file appeal of California AG Cease and Desist order

April 13, 2018, 4:07 pm

Image courtesy of Adobe Stock

With a deadline of April 11 to appeal cease and desist orders from the California Attorney General, MAP International, Food for the Poor, and Catholic Medical Mission Board each filed their appeal on the 10th or 11th.

You may find a PDF copy of the appeals and cease and desist orders at the AG’s website.

The individual appeals may be found at:

Read the rest of this entry »


Various thoughts from continuing education classes this year, part 3. Not so good news on audit and peer review quality.

October 5, 2017, 9:35 am

The road we CPAs need to be on, but not all of us are…
Image courtesy of Adobe Stock.

As I’ve mentioned here and here, I have reread my notes from several continuing education classes this year. Thought I would share a variety of stray ideas.

Probably need to note again that I have not gone back and read the original pronouncements supporting each idea and therefore I do not have a specific citation for you. (Reading three of the documents is the next step for  my writing project.)

I should probably throw in a disclaimer. All of the comments I’m mentioning were the opinion of the presenter, not the agency from whom the person was drawing a paycheck. That is why I’m not mentioning the names of the presenters, or even the CPE event. In addition, the rephrasing of their comments is my interpretation, not their words.

Here are some tidbits you might enjoy:

More interest in Financial Reporting Framework for Small- and Medium-sized Entities (FRF-SME)?

The FRF-SME framework is a non-GAAP alternative to GAAP. It is dramatically less complicated with the promise it will not be revised more often every three years.

Read the rest of this entry »


Various thoughts from continuing education classes this year, part 2

October 4, 2017, 9:10 am

As mentioned in the previous post, I’ve reread my notes from several continuing education classes this year. Thought I would share a variety of stray ideas.

For what it is worth here are some tidbits you might enjoy:

Presentation of not-for-profit financials – ASU 2016-14

Presenter said that if an organization wanted to break out the with restriction column into more detail there is nothing to resented been broken into two or three columns. Perhaps it could be columns for:

  • donor endowment
  • other with restriction contributions
  • time restrictions
  • total with donor restriction
  • without donor restriction
  • total (total column is not required, but total change in net assets is)

Another possibility to present more detail would be to present multiple lines within the with donor restriction column, such as contributions to donor endowment, various purpose restrictions, time restriction, and a subtotal.

Read the rest of this entry »