(Neil Giuliano, former executive director at GLAAD and current head of the SFAF.)
Many moons ago, the executives at the San Francisco AIDS Foundation of their own volition began posting several years' worth of IRS 990s along with audited statements and annual reports. Currently, the foundation provides six years' of those documents at their financial information page.
On top of that fantastic voluntary fiscal transparency, the foundation posts their latest IRS 990 on their web site within days of filing it with the feds.
Yesterday, after checking previous IRS 990s and seeing they were filed by the end of each February, I contacted the foundation's communications director James Loduca and requested the 2012 filing because it wasn't available for public inspection on their site. He replied:
You’re right [about the 2012 filing was submitted to the IRS]. In fact, your timing is impeccable because it was just uploaded to our website and released today. You can access it, and all of our financial records here: http://www.sfaf.org/about-us/financial-information/. Please let me know if you have any questions.
If only Paul Kawata's National Minority AIDS Council were as committed to transparency as the foundation. NMAC refuses to share a single IRS 990 or audited statement on their site, a situation that will likely change only when Kawata is no longer executive director of the group.
What were the top executives at the SF AIDS Foundation paid last year? The 2012 tax filing provides the answers:
Neil Giuliano, executive director
$270,000
Bob Rybicki, program director
$210,000
Judith Auerbach, science director (retired)
$198,000
Barbara Kimport, development director
$186,000
James Loduca, communications director
$167,000
Jonathan Zinman, finance director
$156,000
Ernest Hopkins, federal affairs director
$141,000
Total compensation amount paid to the seven top executives: $1,328,000.
How are these pay levels determined? I thought it was the board of directors that directly set the pay, but that is not the case according to this disclosure on page 45 of the IRS 990:
All staff compensation is reviewed by an independent consultant for market rate comparison. The CEO's compensation is also approved by the board, based on the consultant's recommendation.
Sure would be nice to know how much that consultant earns for looking at the IRS 990s of other AIDS Inc groups, which can't take up more than a few hours of time, then make a recommendation. The fee paid to the consultant could be better used providing housing vouchers or hot meals to people with AIDS.
As I reported last August for the Edge on the Net news site, the SF AIDS Foundation contracts with Craig Miller's MZA Events commercial fundraising firm to produce the annual AIDS Walk in Golden Gate Park. The foundation's 2011 walk, according to the California attorney general's division of charities, raised $2.8 million and a whopping 58% of the proceeds went for production costs.
I'm just saying an awful lot of money goes into paying the executives at the foundation, while they also spend robust sums on outside consultants and a commercial fundraiser, and those are funds that I believe should be going to directly assist people with AIDS.
I seem to recall a scandal over the executive director's ridiculously high salary back in the late 1980s. It looks like nothing changed since then except that there are even more overpaid leeches working there than there used to be.
ReplyDeleteThe question needs to be asked---Who selects the consultant the recommends salary level? Is it a CEO selected consultant?
ReplyDeleteRusty,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the reminder about the previous executive director's salary. There is always enough money for these salaries and to pay the consultants.
Greg,
Those are excellent questions and I will send them along to the SFAF. Let's see what kind of response we get.
Greg's questions were sent to James Loduca, and he wrote back with this info:
ReplyDelete"The comp analysis consultant is determined by HR, which periodically reviews the vendor contract and evaluates it for performance, efficiency, etc."
If I'm not mistaken, the HR folks at the SFAF report to and are employed by Giuliano making it very unlikely they would hire a consultant who might recommend lower compensation for Giuliano.
There is always enough money at the SFAF to pay the executives and the consultants. I'm just saying . . .
If the consultant is "determined by HR" and the HR employees report to Guiliano, then this is a major abdication of the fiduciary duties of the the board of directors.
ReplyDeleteThe board should have direct oversight of the CEO compensation and should not relinquish its role to the CEO, which in essence is what they are doing with this arrangement.
It is very sad to see such high salaries for the directors. I bet the actual people who work with clients and programs have to work two jobs to afford to live in San Francisco while the high ups sit pretty on 6 figure salaries.
ReplyDelete