Attorneys general focusing on fiduciary responsibilities.

While long-established charities are seeing donations drop and more are shuttering their doors because of a tough U.S. economy, according to Terry Knowles, assistant director of the New Hampshire Department of Justice Charitable Trusts Unit, her office is seeing an increase in filings for nonprofit status.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

"There is this persistent urban legend that there are millions and millions of dollars in grant money that no one claims, both from the federal government and from the private funding sources," she said. "When we have people calling new charities, we immediately say to them, 'Why do you want to do that?' The number one answer is 'Well, there is grant money available that I can get if I become a charity.' The number two answer, for us is, 'I need a job, so I'm going to start a charity.' So you have this disconnect between perception and reality."

The reality is that charity regulators started 2009 with a full workload, everything from potential fraud to questions and concerns about the new federal Form 990 filings. There's plenty of regulatory work without urban legends of a nonprofit financial haven.

And while nonprofits often talk about their ratings on charity watchdog Web sites, like the BBB Wise Giving Alliance, Charity Navigator or GuideStar, the state and federal regulators wield the power to legally pursue offending nonprofits. The National Association of State Charity Officials (NASCO) does not aggregate national statistics on complaints filed with members, but some state charity regulators are reporting increased complaints.

The Georgia Office of Secretary of State, Securities and Business Regulation Division, reported 34 complaints in 2008, a 44 percent decrease from the 61 complaints made in 2007. While Georgia saw a decrease, Florida Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services, Consumer Affairs division had more than a 26 percent increase--from 147 complaints in 2007 to 186 complaints in 2008. The Ohio attorney general's office had 1,325 complaints in 2008, a more than 5 percent increase from 2007, but not all the logged complaints fit under the office's jurisdiction. The Colorado Secretary of State reported 28 complaints against charities in 2008, resulting in two prosecutions, one from the Boulder district attorney and the other by the Colorado attorney general, and seven still under investigation.

Chris Cash, NASCO president and Colorado Department of State charities program manager, explained that state charity officials realize that nonprofits tend to receive a small amount of consumer complaints, and disgruntled former employees or volunteers file some complaints. "We investigate all complaints, but not all complaints require agency action beyond a simple inquiry to verify facts," he said about the Colorado program.

The retooled Form 990 adds an extra punch to the charity regulator arsenal. It includes questions about policies regarding governance, management and disclosure, which some regulators are hoping will give more insight to a nonprofit's operations. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) worked with NASCO to develop the new Form 990 and received feedback from the organization before releasing the draft to the public in June 2007.

"It's a big interest to the sector because, of course, it's new and it's much bigger and broader in scope So that presents challenges to them on how they are going to fill that out," said Tracy McCurdy, director of the Pennsylvania Bureau of Charitable Organizations. "I think it presents challenges to the accounting professionals because they have to have a higher level of expertise to work on these things. But it's also really great for the regulators because the IRS has given us a lot with the governance questions and some of the other things, they have really allowed the states to have to play a bigger role in the information that comes out of the 990s."

Overall, the Form 900 is going to provide state charity regulators with a lot more information, "particularly in the areas of governance and also compensation issues because although the states and the IRS have two different jurisdictions, many of the things that we are looking at are important to the states for different reasons because of their areas of charitable oversight," said Lois G. Lerner, director of the Exempt Organizations (EO) Division of the IRS. "When you look at the facts we look at to determine whether an organization meets the requirements for tax-exemption, those same facts can also give rise to some of the violations at the state level."

Lerner explained that the IRS expected to have regular interaction with NASCO about the new filing and monitor trends that arise with the new Form 990 and hoped the feedback would help shape future adjustments. The IRS and state regulators already have a compliance relationship--the IRS can give some information to state regulators about enforcement activities under the Pension Protection Act of 2006, while the state regulators can lead the IRS to potential tax violations. In 2008, EO disclosed nearly 200 enforcement activities to state agencies, including terminations and revocations, and state officials made 83 referrals to EO, including political activities, employment tax and failures in operating within designated exemption status.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

The EO Examinations office, with the Exempt Organization Compliance Unit (EOCU) that conducts compliance checks and Review of Operations (ROO) that manages follow-up reviews of organizations, has increased its compliance checks steadily during the past few years. EO examined 7,861 returns in FY 2008, a slight increase from 7,580 in FY 2007 and 7,079 in FY 2006. Compliance contacts, made to ensure nonprofits are consistent with tax-exemption and reporting responsibilities, jumped from 1,475 in FY 2004 to 7,466 in FY 2008. EO has improved its compliance check percentage by using modeling to target nonprofits that would be at a higher risk for noncompliance, which increased its corrective action cases from 63 percent of its examinations in FY 2004 to 80 percent in FY 2008.

The EO also plans to launch a long-range study this year about funds and charities as part of its new Fiscal Year 2009 compliance initiatives, which should provide more information about nonprofit spending.

Some nonprofits are seeing increased fundraising costs trying to chase discretionary donor dollars, which regulators are keeping on their radar screens. U.S. Supreme Court cases, such as Schaumburg v. Citizens for a Better Environment decided in 1980, have upheld that high fundraising costs alone do not prove fraud, yet regulators are keeping watch for other red flags. "The charitable watchdogs are going to have an issue here because they have percentage-based accountability standards and nonprofits are going to have a harder time meeting that kind of standard as their fundraising percentages increase due to the collapsing economy," said Seth Perlman, senior partner at Perlman & Perlman in New York City, who advises in nonprofit legal matters.

"This year we're really focusing on organizations that have unusual fundraising levels and on organizations that report that they have unrelated trade or business activities but have pretty low levels of program service expenditures. We just want to know what that means and I want to caution here--my world is never black and white. It's always grey," said Lerner.

"Some things may raise questions for us. But when you look behind them, oftentimes things are perfectly fine. But we think when you see those kinds of disconnects, it's important for us to go in and take a look and report out to the public about what we're finding because it's important for the public to understand that even if we find there is no problem--or if We do see there is a problem, we think that's important for the public to know as well," said Lerner.

"At the end of the day, what I'm hoping the new form does is to leave us with fewer noncompliant organizations and give us a better tool to pursue those who are not compliant and I think the states are looking at it the same way," said Lerner.

And some state regulators say that some nonprofits are already asking questions about the form and if they will be penalized for their answers, which includes information about an organization's governing body, conflict of interest policies and compensation reviews for top officials. "We often find nonprofit organizations don't want to call the regulator because they are afraid that the regulator will then take action against their organization, and in our case nothing could be further from the truth. We try to be as proactive as possible and deal with things before they become a real problem," said Knowles.

"[The new 990] will change internal procedures for the nonprofits in respect to their financial reporting," said Perlman. He thought the changes could be relatively positive and explained that regulators and nonprofits alike were "holding their breath" about it and how the results will shape the sector. "Public charities need to be very aware of what their obligations will be under this new 990, which will include ensuring that they have the appropriate policies in place to respond affirmatively to those best practices questions because it can be embarrassing to an organization to have to answer 'no' to a question about whether they have appropriate policies in place when that document will be a public document reviewed by the public and state regulators," he said.

"There's information required on this form in a format that has not been required before and you really need to have a conversation within the organization to be able to provide the right information and tell a good story, because this form really allows the exempt organizations to tell the story of what they do to the public and the IRS and they should take advantage of it," said Lerner, who recommended different departments should review the 990 together.

Print Get the Mag Weekly Updates