July 10, 2011

To Whom It May Concern:

I became acquainted with Kristin Bennett and her capable staff three years ago when Kristin took over planning and operations for the Annual Scientific Conference on behalf of the Colorado Academy of Family Physicians.

Since that time, I have worked with Kristin in various capacities including graphics design, public relations efforts, conference coordination, and continuing medical education offerings.

Kristin takes great pride in her work, and in the services her company provides to nonprofit organizations.  She possesses a great work ethic and attitude, top technical skills, and pays great attention to detail.  These characteristics are visible not only in Kristin, but in the professional staff she employs.

Kristin has worked with Children’s Hospital Colorado staff in scheduling and planning speaking engagements and CME sessions to the CAFP.   She follows through on every detail with speakers, and demonstrates her ability to work with many various personalities each and every time.

It’s my pleasure to recommend Kristin and her staff to any nonprofit organization that demands the best.

Sincerely,

Jeff Cain, MD,  President-Elect American Academy of Family Physicians
Chief of Family Medicine, The Children’s Hospital
cain.jeffrey@tchden.org

June 8, 2009

Re: Kristin Bennett

The Colorado Academy of Family Physicians hired Kristin Bennett in the fall of 2008 to be the Conference Coordinator for our 2009 Annual Scientific Conference.  Kristin immediately took responsibility for the job and carried out all tasks with a great attitude, attention to detail, and leadership.

Kristin worked with our education committee in planning the conference program, schedule, speakers and topics.  She followed through on each speaker with tenacity.  She created beautiful conference materials including brochures.  She worked with the hotel conference staff to arrange room and schedule details.

It really has been a pleasure to work with Kristin.  She easily takes direction, offers opinions on improvements, is very creative and enthusiastic, and fun to work with.

The 2009 conference was very successful and we have contracted with Kristin to coordinate the next one.

Raquel Alexander, MA, CAE

Executive Vice President, CAFP

Re: Kristin Bennett

To Whom It May Concern:

It is my pleasure to write of Ms. Kristin Bennett and her many accomplishments over the past eight years at the Blow-in-Blanket Contractors Association (BIBCA).  Kristin served as Executive Director for the seven years I served on the board, and she was of tremendous assistance to me during my term as BIBCA president.

Among her many contributions to the organization, Kristin improved the website and made it universally user-friendly; increased membership by 25%, and was instrumental in unifying five different, major corporate groups within the organization, making for an effective and cohesive board of directors.

Kristin has the professional and personal qualities that would make her an asset in any business environment.  She possesses extraordinary attention to detail; is a creative problem-solver; has natural leadership skills; and is an excellent public speaker.  Most importantly, she has a warm and friendly personality that makes her a pleasure to work with.

I would recommend Kristin to any organization seeking a creative and results-oriented individual with excellent people skills.  I am certain she will find success wherever she goes and wish her the very best in all her future endeavors.

Sincerely,

Karri A. Thiessen

Astro Insulation, Inc.

4418 Rt. 31

Ringwood, IL 60072

January 25, 2008

RE: Kristin Bennett

To Whom It May Concern:

This is a letter of reference for Kristin Bennett, the President of YES, LLC and Execuive Director for the Blow In Blanket Contractors Association (BIBCA).  I have worked with Kristin for the past 6 years, and have always found her performance to be above and beyond.

Kristin Bennett began working for BIBCA in 2002.  She was initially hired as an assistant to the then Executive Director Steve Malon.  In a very brief time Kristin's performance exceeded our expectations, and she was given the Executive Directors position.

Kristin not only maintains everything associated with our members in the US and Canada, she is also in charge of organizing and running our annual trade show, maintenance of our databases and web site, coordination of regular board conference calls and face-to-face meetings, and all budget, accounting, and graphics work.  She has been instrumental in setting up committees so that when the board meets they are able to move through business quickly and not get bogged down in meaningless details.

I sat on the BIBCA Board of Directors from 1997-2006, serving as President in 2000 & 2004.  Kristin's addition to the Group in 2002 made serving much easier and enjoyable.  For anyone looking for the services of an Executive Director, membership management, Event coordination, or any other association business, I would highly recommend Kristin Bennett.

Sincerely,

Michael Hobson

BIBCA President

2000, 2004

West Chester Insulation

882 S. Matlack Street, Unit J

West Chester, PA 19382

Can nonprofit boards vote by mail and email? As is true of so many matters, there are legal answers and sensible answers to this question, which may not be the same. Attorney Gene Takagi and Emily Nicole Chan discuss both in this helpful article:

We'll start by discussing the legalities, then take a look at the advantages and disadvantages, and finally, we'll offer guidelines and a sample policy for using email voting.

First, the legal issues

Can nonprofit boards legally vote by email? The short answer: Yes, in most U.S. states, but typically only if the vote is consistent with the requirements for unanimous written consent -- that is, when the vote is unanimous and in writing. Some states like Texas require only majority written consent.

Most states make provisions for boards to take action without meeting by written consent. Typically, this involves mailing the proposed action to each board member, and having each sign and return the written action to the board secretary. Once all the signed consents are received, the action taken is just as valid as if it had been taken at a meeting.

Many nonprofits use the rules for mail voting to guide their process of email voting. This may involve an email to each director detailing the proposed action, and an email reply from each director with his or her vote. In a "unanimous written consent" state, if all directors vote the same way, the action is taken.

The danger with email voting is that few, if any, states specifically authorize this practice. The problem is whether an email should be treated the same as a signed written consent. With a signed written consent, the signature gives us some assurance that the director actually consented. With an email without a signature, the consent could have been sent by anyone with access to the board member's email account. Should we accept an email that simply states "Yes" in response to a complicated proposal without further verification? If the director later claims not to have sent the email, the action may be nullified and could result in all kinds of problems, including lawsuits against the nonprofit and individual directors. And what if the email says "Yes, as long as we . . . " Is that an effective consent? Probably not.

One way to address the problem of verification is to have each board member sign the written consent and return the signed copy back to the board secretary -- either by postal mail, by returning a scan of the signed consent via email, faxing back a signed copy, or using an authenticated electronic signature. But lawyers prefer that all of the original signed consents be included in the board minute book as evidence that the action was properly taken.

The many variations in how states regulate (or don't even mention) email voting reflect the newness of the technology and this voting practice. Over time we can hope that standards emerge that most states will adopt, but in the meantime the standards differ widely.

And unfortunately there is no one place that lists the applicable laws for each state. A further complication is that different states assign these responsibilities to different departments. The National Association of State Charity Officials (NASCO) has a list of links to the appropriate authority in each state.

Email discussions can enhance governance

"We require a 2/3's majority on all items we vote on," comments Marcia Slagle of Oak Ridge, Tennessee. "Two years ago our board adopted new guidelines that allow email voting on matters discussed at board meetings. I think it helps keep those members who are unable to attend a meeting in the loop about what has happened at the meeting, but also gives them a voice."

Craig Pampeyan notes that at the all-volunteer nonprofit with which he is involved, "Votes via email work well, though there have not been any major policy change decisions we've conducted this way. All the board members are well-versed in the mission, activities, and much of the historical perspective of the nonprofit."

In many organizations, board discussions by email enhance participation. This should not be discouraged. But more frequently, email voting is not used to promote thorough discussion and involvement. Most nonprofits are interested in email voting in order to make decisions without discussion or involvement -- typically on items that appear not to need either.

Between meetings it may be more convenient to take board action by written consent done via email. But email voting can also serve to effectively discourage rigorous discussion.

Risks and problems

Here's an example: The ABC Organization has the opportunity to take on a government-funded program recently dropped by another organization. But the papers must be signed almost immediately. The Executive Director decides that the program would be attractive and makes her case to the Chairperson. The Chairperson emails the board a request for an email vote (to be followed by written consent) to accept the program and the funding. In the absence of discussion about the risks of taking on this work, it seems like a "no brainer" to the board members who then blindly approve the project.

Regardless of the ultimate decision, this too-common process is seriously flawed. The lack of discussion on a major action indicates inadequate oversight and may even be regarded as a breach of the directors' duties of care. If the decision had instead been made at a board meeting, there would have been an opportunity for board members to ask questions, raise serious issues, and consider alternatives.

"I was really bothered when we were asked to vote in a new board member by email," wrote one Blue Avocado reader who asked to be anonymous. "I wasn't really against the nominee because I hardly knew him, but by the time I saw the email other people were sending, all replying with their 'yes' votes, I didn't feel comfortable asking any questions."

Along the same lines, Put Barber of Idealist comments, "The point of meeting and discussing something in a room together is that better ideas emerge in the course of such discussions and pitfalls are more likely to be identified." He goes on to point out that "a telephone conference meeting, assuming the organization's bylaws and the statutes of its state of incorporation permit that method, is preferable to email voting for many reasons."

We suggest a simple safeguard: the executive committee (or the officers) can be assigned the responsibility of determining whether a particular action should be taken by email/written consent or at a board meeting. If the matter is routine or has already been discussed and widely agreed upon, an action by written consent may be appropriate. And as reader Kellie Dyslin pointed out, it's important to be sure that all such votes are recorded in the minutes of the organization, perhaps at the next meeting (actually, the written actions should be kept with the minutes). On the other hand, if the matter is important or sensitive, and/or may have serious consequences for the organization, holding a meeting may become imperative.

Policy templates

Laurie Prospero provides a good example of a simple but careful way to conduct email voting: "Prior to sending out the email request for a vote, the board secretary confirms the motion along with a mover and seconder. We tried to use the voting buttons in Outlook, but they don't work if you are not on an exchange server. Now we include the voting options in the email. We impose a deadline for the votes to be cast and ask board members to return their vote to the Secretary and Executive Director. The Secretary keeps a log of all the votes and reports on the results. As the ED, I save each individual vote -- and any comments -- as a PDF of the email so that we'll have electronic backup. The motion and the results of the vote are read into the minutes at the next scheduled board meeting." Laurie adds that email voting is only used for items that don't need much additional discussion.

Melissa Kaestner of Community Radio Fund of Canada shared the highlights of their well-developed "CRFC Guidelines for Conducting Board Business Online" (but note that these procedures would not be legally valid in most U.S. states):

"First, we have a private online website that is just for the board of directors, using Google sites. One page is dedicated solely to current decisions.

"Second, we have outlined a procedure that includes how things are posted and timelines for the entire process. There are two types of work we do online: general discussions of issues and official business motions.

"For official business motions:

• Discussion can precede or follow a motion.
• A director can move a motion, and should include a suggestion for discussion time.
• The Secretary (or relevant board member) will post the motion on the board's online space.
• All discussion must follow the same email thread; other emails should not follow this thread.
• A motion needs to be seconded before discussion or voting.
• Discussion: Minimum 5 days unless all agree in writing to a shorter timeframe. Since we are not all online everyday, we need to allow reasonable time for people to discuss. Discussion time can be extended by simple majority of all board members.
• Chair (or mover) sends a summary of points and reminder that the motion is on the table after 3 days and again after 6 days if the discussion period is longer.
• Amendments: If amendments are deemed friendly by the mover, discussion then moves to the amended motion. If amendments are not friendly, then the proposed amendment will be discussed and voted on.
• Consensus: We should aim for consensus. If we cannot achieve it, then we vote.
• In the case of a vote, the chair or mover circulates email with a new subject with a vote name and number. Directors vote by sending an email with "MOTION on xxxx." YES/NO/ABSTAIN.

The Community Radio Fund of Canada has generously made their complete policy available to readers; click here to download the PDF.

Sample E-Mail Voting Policy

In addition to the above guidelines, readers may find helpful the following Sample E-Mail Voting Policy we've developed for this article:

1. Board actions may be taken by unanimous written consent.

2. If an item for board action is best addressed before a board meeting, the following factors will be considered by the Board President before determining whether to ask for an action by written consent:

(a) How soon a decision is required.

(b) Whether the decision would be better made after further discussion
and/or whether alternatives should be considered.

(c) Whether the action is a routine action that the Executive Committee can
take in lieu of the board at a Committee meeting.

(d) Whether a conference call meeting can be scheduled and held (either just for discussion or if a quorum is obtained, to take a vote).

(e) Whether all directors have indicated they are unanimously in favor of the action and will be available to sign and return a written consent.

3. If after considering the above factors, the Board President determines it would be best to take the action by unanimous written consent, the Board President may have the Secretary draft the proposed action and email it as an attachment to all directors at their respective email addresses.

4. The action shall allow a director to check that he or she is in favor of or opposed to the particular action.

5. Each director shall sign and return the written consent to the Secretary by email (scanned copy of the signed consent) or fax within 24 hours unless another deadline is provided in the email. The original signed consents will be sent to the Secretary by mail or delivered in person at the next board meeting.

6. Upon the Secretary's receipt and verification of all written consents approving the action, the action is duly approved. Regardless of whether the action is approved or not, the Secretary will confirm whether the action has passed or failed by email to all directors upon receipt of all the individual written consents.

7. The Secretary will file all individual written consents with the corporation's minute book.

8. The Board will ratify any action taken by unanimous written consent at the next Board meeting. The minutes of this meeting will record the ratification.

Finally . . .

As you can see, conducting legal votes by email is not as simple or as speedy as might be assumed at first glance.To recap our suggestions:

• Check your national and state regulations on what's permissible in your jurisdiction.
• Allow email votes only when they have been authorized by the executive committee or another authorized body or process.
• Have clear, written guidelines about how the votes will be taken.
• Follow up, when appropriate, with documentation of unanimous written consent.
• Be sure that all of the signed written consents are maintained with the board minutes.
• Be hesitant to use email voting: even in a rush, a board meeting via conference call can allow for questions and concerns to be raised about an issue that might not be obvious when first presented. And a conference call of less than a quorum can still serve as important feedback to the ED and the board chair as to whether the issue requires discussion.

The most strategic decision you make regarding how to staff your accounting department may be to not staff it at all. Well, at least not with employees of your organization. Outsourced accounting -- having the accounting done by an outside person or firm -- isn't new, but it is getting a second look as nonprofits search for ways to cut office costs. 

We've written here before about using accurate and timely financial information to manage your organization well. But the question for many executive directors is: how do I get that financial information? While a good in-house bookkeeper is probably better than an outsourced bookkeeper, an outsourced bookkeeper is much better than a bad in-house bookkeeper.

"For a long time I had various people in the office do it," one executive director said. "But they didn't have the skills and as we grew we needed real skills. Then I hired an MBA and only much later did I find out that MBAs don't know how to do accounting or bookkeeping. Then I hired an accountant but he didn't know anything about nonprofit accounting and got our grant reports all screwed up. Then I hired a controller who could talk a good game but could never seem to get anything accomplished and in fact ended up suing us for wrongful termination. Finally I hired an outside bookkeeper who is doing a great job."

Many executive directors find it difficult to find someone with the right skills to prepare invoices (for government or clients), produce financial statements, and analyze financial data to answer management questions. And finding such a person at an affordable rate is even more challenging.

What does outsourced bookkeeping look like?

The term outsourcing may sound bigger than it really is. Many smaller organizations "outsource" their accounting by hiring a part-time, contracted bookkeeper who comes in for half a day every two weeks (for example), writes checks (for the executive director's signature), reconciles the bank statements, posts the transactions into QuickBooks, and prepares monthly financial statements. Such bookkeepers often have five or more nonprofit clients at any one time.

In other situations a nonprofit will contract with an accounting firm to perform the above tasks as well as others.

Here is an example of how financial responsibilities might be assigned in a nonprofit that outsources its bookkeeping:

Sole practitioners vs. accounting firms

Sole practitioners --individuals in business for themselves -- tend to be less expensive and will usually come to your location. Depending on your geographic area and the experience of the bookkeeper, they can charge from $15 to $60 per hour. (One executive director told us: "I used to have a great outside bookkeeper, but then her band finally got a touring contract and she could quit her day job: us."

Some organizations have volunteer, part-time bookkeepers as well, or contract with a retired accountant to do the bookkeeping.

But some boards are more comfortable with an accounting firm that has accountants, bookkeepers and data entry people on staff, thereby providing some backup and different skills. Accounting firms are more expensive, though, and usually want the data sent to their office. We asked around and found an approximate rate of $30,000 per year for a $1 million organization.

With today's technology, there is little difference between having an accountant down the street or out-of-state, and as a result, some companies can provide outsourced accounting at lower rates (typically because labor costs are less expensive where they are located). While some people may feel uncomfortable with having their accounting done 2,000 miles away, such a choice might be a good and more cost effective option for you. One executive director in Idaho told us: "I can see why someone in New York would want to outsource to an Idaho firm that can find a bookkeeper for $14 an hour, but here in Idaho I can do that, too."

If you have an annual audit, your auditor may offer to do accounting services for you as well. They will make sure that the accounting work would be done by a separate department and team than the group that does your audit. It might sound easier to maintain a relationship with only one firm, but we recommend that you use two different firms. This will assure the independence of your auditor and you will benefit from two perspectives on your finances.

When is outsourcing a good idea?

Outsourcing tends to work the best when:

• A smaller organization doesn't need a full-time bookkeeper, but needs more skills than the receptionist or office manager can provide
• An organization of any size can't find a full-time person with the appropriate skills at a cost they can afford
• There have been multiple failures trying to hire a good full-time bookkeeper
• When temporary services are needed -- e.g, if the bookkeeper is on maternity leave, or if there will be a vacancy of several months (perhaps to wait until a new COO is hired who will then hire the bookkeeper)

Don't forget that someone -- perhaps the executive director -- will still need to be involved with finances, from coding and approving invoices, reviewing time sheets, making deposits, and so forth.

Outsourcing is probably not a good fit for your organization if

• You have cash flow challenges that require day-to-day decisions about what to pay and what to hold
• You have a complicated and unique financial system, or
• You want your finance staff to be part of your management team

Building in-house accounting staff may seem like a good goal -- and for many organizations it is -- but the important part is to build a relationship -- either externally or internally -- to meet your financial information needs.

What if you have to write a check on the spot?

The fear of the last minute check is something that keeps many people from outsourcing. Yes, it is often more difficult to cut an immediate check when your bookkeeper isn't on site all the time, but you should be able to work something out with your outsourced provider. For example, you may keep some checks in your office under lock and key that can be written manually and posted later by the bookkeeper when she comes in, or you can use an organizational credit card.

Finding an outside bookkeeper

Ask other nonprofits in your community for their outsourced bookkeepers, and only rely on a recommendation if the person has used the bookkeeper for six months and through an audit. Ask your auditor (if you have one) for recommendations. Talk to references about what they like best and least about their outside bookkeepers. And don't forget that this relationship should be reviewed at least once a year; it may be right to move to a staff bookkeeper or a different external bookkeeper.

Finally, remember the primary audience for financial statements is the organization's management. Just as you wouldn't (or shouldn't!) accept incomplete, inaccurate, or late information from your staff accountant, you shouldn't accept that from an outside vendor either.

MSAE provides its members with numerous professional development and targeted association sessions and conferences.  MSAE’s monthly newsletter publications keeps members informed of important meetings, publications, and intra-industry news.  Association executives must maintain a wide range of contacts in order to perform successfully.  MSAE provides these contacts through a membership and resource directory as well as holding social events.

In today's tight economic environment, nonprofits are facing tough budget decisions, and one expense that often comes up is D&O insurance (Directors & Officers liability insurance). How should a board of directors think about this insurance?

Some statistics from our 10,000 insured nonprofits to get your attention:

• About 1 in 100 nonprofits each year will file a claim under D&O insurance
• Average cost of a settlement in a D&O claim (meaning it didn't go to court): $28,000
• Average legal costs of defending a claim: $35,000

Most D&O claims are employment related: at the Nonprofits Insurance Alliance Group -- which includes both the Alliance of Nonprofits for Insurance (ANI) and the Nonprofits' Insurance Alliance of California (NIAC) -- we know that more than 95% of claims filed against D&O policies are related to wrongful termination, harassment, or discrimination, and so forth. And add to that, during economic downturns, there is an increase overall in the number of employment-related disputes as employers downsize and those fired or laid off find it harder to find employment. 

D&O insurance provides coverage for "intentional" actions taken by an organization's board of directors or management that someone else thinks is wrong. So since the board approved all your personnel policies (intentional act), if your nonprofit fires someone and that individual disputes whether you followed your policies . . . well, you get the picture. Or perhaps you followed all your policies but the employee still believes they have been discriminated against or wronged.

Maybe they were wronged and maybe they weren't, but either way, getting to an answer is probably going to be expensive. Your general liability policy is not going to kick in for a third party -- that coverage is for bodily injury, not for claims by employees. If you have coverage for employment-related lawsuits, that is almost surely going to be found in your D&O policy.

Two more eye-catching statistics:

• One in every 10 claims costs more than $100,000 (whether a settlement or court determined)
• The two largest claims to date: $500,000 and $1 million

I don't know any nonprofit that has those types of dollars just lying around to pay out in a lawsuit!

What are the key features to look for when purchasing D&O?

While it is very tempting to go for what appears to be the cheapest price, there are a couple of things you need to consider. Ask these two key questions first:

• Is there a deductible? Don't get burned by this one! There are policies in the market with no deductible at a very reasonable premium. Remember: deductibles can add up! Just because the quoted premium might be less -- keep in mind, one claim and a $5,000 deductible can easily triple the original cost of the policy.
• Does the insurance company provide any employment practices assistance? If so, is it only by phone or are email communications also included? Is it free or just subsidized? Is it an unlimited service or is it capped at one or two hours? Make sure you ask these questions. Just two or three consultations a year could easily save you more than the cost of the policy.

Also make sure that the policy language is broad. For example:

• Who, exactly, is going to be insured under this policy? Make sure it includes coverage to any person who was, is, or becomes a director, trustee, officer, employee, committee member, or volunteer of the nonprofit as well as the nonprofit itself. 
• Are all costs paid by the insurer as they are incurred? You should not have to front these dollars.
• Does it include broad coverage for employment-related activities? Although it is becoming more common that employment-related activities are covered in the D&O policies, don't assume it is covered -- ask! A broadly written policy covering employment practices should insure a defense for claims alleging a wide range of wrongful employment actions.

OK, so you don't have employees. So based on the data you're thinking you don't need the coverage. Two reasons you should still consider it. First, some individuals are reluctant to serve on a nonprofit board that doesn't have D&O insurance. Check with board members to see if they might each chip in a small amount to make sure they are covered for decisions they make while governing the organization.

Second, a claim which is becoming more common is alleged breach of contract, such as failure to pay an equipment lease or to pay a contractor for work performed. D&O policies are different in how they respond to claims alleging breach of contract. No nonprofit, no matter how small or how few employees, is exempt from this sort of lawsuit.

What about the board member's homeowner or umbrella insurance?

This question often comes up when I speak with boards, but more than likely their homeowner's insurance protects them for serving on for-profit corporate boards, but excludes volunteer nonprofit board service. And even if that coverage is there, not all board members are homeowners or have the right coverage.

What about legal protections for volunteers?

Legislative protections for volunteers are good, but are not in all states. In addition, even where such protections exist, they can't protect you from violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), ERISA (Employee Retirement Income Security Act), or civil rights laws.

Is there anything D&O can't cover?

Yes. In addition to the above, D&O legally can't cover you for tax liabilities the organization incurs, or for any deliberate acts, such as criminal acts.

So, if you are a part of a nonprofit organization, consider D&O as a "must have." Overlooking D& O puts board members at risk unnecessarily. Approach D&O insurance as a positive and essential investment for your organization.

The new plan, which is expected to be voted on by the full commission on Friday, proposed changing the charitable tax break as part of a broader effort to simplify the tax code, reduce the deficit, and lower individual and corporate income-tax rates.

The plan would end all itemized deductions and create three new individual tax brackets, from 12 percent to 28 percent.

The 12-percent credit for charitable gifts would be available only for amounts beyond 2 percent of the taxpayer's adjusted gross income.

It would be "nonrefundable," meaning only people who owed income tax could claim it. (Several liberal groups this week proposed a refundable tax credit that people could get even if they owed no taxes.)

By applying the same percentage across the board, the new credit treats taxpayers more equally than the current system, which favors high earners because they are more likely to itemize and earn a bigger tax break than people in lower tax brackets.

Small Donors

However, imposing the 2-percent minimum would disqualify many small donors. "

This is very little incentive for charitable giving," said Laura Kalick, a nonprofit tax lawyer in Bethesda, Md., adding that a 12-percent credit is not a huge tax break.

She said some charities would also be hit with a "double whammy" because the deficit plan would also end the tax exemption for interest on new state and municipal bonds—a mechanism that some organizations like hospitals and universities use to raise money for building projects. That could make the bonds less interesting to investors.

Rosanne Altshuler, a professor of economics and tax expert at Rutgers University, noted that today donors in the top tax bracket can get a 35-percent deduction for their gifts, so the new proposals would raise the cost of giving for them. At the same time, she added, "We may see more giving from people who were previously non-itemizers."

A fair number of taxpayers are likely to meet the 2-percent threshold, she added. She pointed to Treasury Department data showing that more than half of all taxpayers who itemized in 2002 donated to charity more than 2 percent of their adjusted gross income.

Range of Ideas

Today's proposal is the latest in a series of recent plans that seek to restructure the tax code and lower the federal deficit. All of the plans include measures that would eliminate or reduce the federal tax deduction for taxpayers who make contributions to nonprofits.

The new proposal differs from several options that the chairmen—Erskine Bowles, a former Democratic White House chief of staff, and Alan Simpson, a former Republican senator—proposed in a draft report last week.

Those included lowering income-tax rates and completely ending the charitable tax break unless it could be paid for by raising those rates, or leaving it as a deduction but only for giving above 2 percent of gross adjusted income.

Their final report—which warns that "everything must be on the table" because "America cannot be great if we go broke"—said its specific recommendations on overhauling the tax code are meant to be "illustrative" and that there could be other ways to achieve the same goals. Those goals include maintaining some kind of incentive for charitable giving, it said.

If 14 of the 18 members of the panel, formally known as the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, endorse the plan on Friday, it will go to Congress for a vote. Given that a majority of its members are members of Congress and that many of the proposals affect politically sensitive issues like Social Security and the mortgage deduction, many observers are pessimistic that will happen.



The AMC industry (number of firms) has grown by 150 percent since 1986 and now encompasses more than 670 association management companies across the U.S. and beyond. In addition, AMCs collectively manage annual budgets exceeding $3.4 billion and represent more than 7,600 clients. The AMC industry is also a conventions powerhouse, booking nearly 2 million room nights and $1 billion in meetings and conventions services annually.

Is your organization as effective as it could be?  Maybe it's time to consider this management model!