June 2018 NPFM Meeting: Developing an Affirmative Action Plan (and Why You Should)

Do you know what an Affirmative Action Program is?  Many folks confuse having non-discrimination policies with having an Affirmative Action Program.  Many don’t realize that a written Affirmative Action Plan sets specific targets for recruitment, hiring and advancement, tracks progress data, and must be updated regularly.

Often nonprofit organizations undertake “Diversity” or “Equity and Inclusion” initiatives and would benefit from following a structured, data-driven, and comprehensive approach.  Affirmative actions include training programs, outreach efforts, and other positive steps. These procedures should be incorporated into the company’s written personnel policies.  For those receiving federal funds, affirmative action must be taken by covered employers to recruit and advance qualified minorities, women, persons with disabilities, and covered veterans.

Virginia Capezio, a Senior Human Resource Consultant with TriNet (a professional employer organization) presented to our group.  Virginia is considered to be TriNet’s expert on Affirmative Action.

May 2018 – Federal Funding Compliance: Best Practices for All Organizations

Hui-Ting Grady, CPA  and Olga Yasinnick CPA, MBA  from AAF CPA’s gave a presentation about what you need to know if your organization receives Federal funds, is hoping to do so, or simply wishes to use the federal regulations as a standard for “best practices.”  Hui-Ting has extensive experience providing assurance solutions to diverse nonprofit organizations, including: affordable housing development projects with HUD requirements, multi-service human & social services providers, and behavioral health agencies. Olga specializes in driving high-energy audit teams, and advising sophisticated nonprofit organizations, including multi-services human & social services providers, community development corporations (CDCs) and their affordable housing development projects.

If your agency receives less than $750K in Federal funding, through Direct Federal funding, pass through the State, or pass through another organization, you are subject to the traditional GAS yellow book audit. Organizations are subject to the Federal Single Audit standards if they receive $750K or more in Federal funds in a fiscal year, either directly or indirectly. The funding could be cash or noncash awards. OMB A-133 Compliance Supplement is an extensive United States Federal government guide created by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and was originally created in 1996.  It is used in auditing federal assistance and federal grant programs, as well as their respective recipients. It is considered to be the most important tool of an auditor for a Single Audit. It serves to identify existing important compliance requirements that the Federal Government expects to be considered as part of a Single Audit.

For December 31, 2015, year-ends and beyond

    • All single audits performed under Subpart F of the Uniform Guidance
    • Auditees comply with the new administrative requirements and cost principles for federal awards made on or after December 26, 2014, and to incremental funding made on or after that date
    • Auditees comply with the “old” OMB administrative requirements and cost principles for awards made prior to December 26, 2014, until those funds run out
    • With regard to subawards, the effective date of the Uniform Guidance is the same as the effective date of the federal award from which the subaward is made
    • Auditor compliance testing will test against both the old criteria and the new criteria depending on federal award dates

New procurement standards go into effect for those agencies with a year end of 12/31/17 on 1/1/18, and for 6/30 year end, on 7/1/18. It is the auditees’ responsibility to prepare a complete Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) and to comply with all OMB A-133 standards, regulations, and audit report requirements, and to have a strong system of Internal Controls.  As much as possible, try to segregate Federal funding from other sources of funds.  If you are a contractor/vendor that receives Federal funds, then you do not have to comply.  If your organization is a sub-recipient, then you have to comply.  Generally, it you should comply with the standards even if you receive less than $750K in Federal funds, but you are not subject to the more expensive and extensive audit.

There are usually some changes to the regulations annually, which are listed in the Compliance Supplement. Part 3 lists Compliance Requirements, and Part 4 lists Agency Program Requirements (specific to the Federal program).  Internal controls are included in Part 3.  For effective internal controls, there are five major components:  1) Control of the environment 2) Risk Assessment 3) Contract Activities 4) Information and Communication, and 5) Monitoring.  Part 3 also identifies and describes the 12 types of compliance requirements where noncompliance may have a direct and material effect on a Federal program and provides audit objectives and suggested audit procedures. The 12 types of compliance requirements are: A. Activities Allowed or Unallowed B. Allowable Costs/Cost Principles C. Cash Management D. (Reserved) (Note: Some agencies have made Davis-Bacon Act (Wage Rate Requirements) a Special Test and Provision; see 20.001 in Part 4 for a cross-cutting section addressing Wage Rate Requirements.) E. Eligibility F. Equipment and Real Property Management G. Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking H. Period of Performance I. Procurement and Suspension and Debarment J. Program Income K. (Reserved) L. Reporting M. Subrecipient Monitoring N. Special Tests and Provisions.

At the end of the process, the auditors will issue a set of Financial Statements in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards and Uniform Compliance. You will have to file a Data Collection Form also. If your auditors have detected any material weaknesses or issues a material finding in the course of their A-133 audit, then your organization will be required to file and implement a Corrective action Plan.

 

May 3, 2018 NPFM Meeting: Considerations and Legal Issues relating to Separation Packages for a Departing Employee

Considerations and Legal Issues relating to Separation Packages for a Departing Employee

Separations from employment present a minefield of overlapping statutes, regulations, and internal policies and procedures. They are often emotionally charged for both the employer and the departing employee.  Jeff Siegel and Desiree Murphy, experienced management-side employment attorneys from Morgan, Brown & Joy, LLP, gave a presentation about when an employer should consider proposing a separation package for an employee, the types of clauses and options available to employers when presenting or negotiating a separation package, and how to draft legally enforceable separation agreements.  They provided insights and practical experience on how to navigate the legal issues these disputes present and offered suggestions on how to avoid costly litigation and (hopefully) reach an amicable resolution to an often difficult situation. Morgan, Brown, & Joy LLP has been representing employers in employment and labor law since 1923. Jeff has worked there for 13 years and Desiree for 3 years.

Most often, severance packages to departing employees who have been terminated involve giving a certain amount of money to them in exchange for agreeing not to sue the organization, its management, etc. Money is the driving force 90% of the time. From the employer’s viewpoint, you should offer the least amount that will accomplish the task. There are several ways to do this. You can offer a lump sum payment or you can arrange to continue paying the ex-employee’s salary for a certain number of weeks or months. You can also offer to continue health insurance payments for a set period of time. The employment ends as of the termination date, even though you are continuing payment in some form. The employer is under no obligation to offer the same package to different employees.   The employer can also agree not to contest the ex-employee filing for unemployment benefits. It is best to treat the payments as reportable on W-2 forms. If the terminated employee signs a release form with the employer, that will not affect their ability to file for unemployment benefits.

There can be non-monetary features of a separation agreement. The employer can agree to give the ex-employee either a positive or a neutral reference.   Often, these agreements have a confidentiality clause. Usually the employer wants this, and sometimes the ex-employee wants this also. Any confidentiality agreement applies to everyone in your organization.   In adversarial terminations, it is best to get everything settled and signed at the same time. If the employer asks the ex-employee to sign a release of claims, that does not affect any future rights against the employer. It is important to cite the specific laws, regulations, etc. explicitly in the body of the release. The regulations affecting releases are a creature of state laws, so you need to closely follow your state regulations. You need to ensure that the release covers the appropriate claims and potential claims, and that the release complies with ADEA (age discrimination) and OWBPA (older American protection).

 

March 2018 NPFM Meeting: New Innovations in HR – Employee Financial Security

Recent studies have found that worker’s financial worries impact productivity, absenteeism, quality of customer service, and turnover.  We will talk about this research, hear from the group about their experiences with the impact of worker financial security in their workplace, and discuss new innovations in HR benefits and practices that can address these issues, including on-boarding practices, raise linked opportunities, and health benefit designs.

Melissa Gopnik, long time NPFM member and non-profit HR professional presented.  Melissa is Senior Vice-President at Commonwealth is a national non-profit organization that builds solutions to  make people financially secure by discovering ideas, piloting solutions and driving innovations to scale.

February 2018 NPFM Meeting: Fundraising Activities and the IRS: Things to Watch out for to Avoid Problems

Fundraising activities are now on the IRS’s radar screen. The Service issued an Audit Technique Guide on what they look for in audits of fundraising activities. 

Summary of the Presentation:

For context, the presenter gave an overview of how changes in income tax incentives could affect charitable giving, and how organizations are responding. She then provided takeaways from the recently issued IRS Audit Technique Guide, which outlines what the IRS looks for when it examines fundraising activities. She covered challenges related to cash and in-kind contributions, events, auctions, anonymous gifts, and gift acknowledgments. Lastly, she reviewed common red flags and pitfalls when reporting fundraising activities on the 990 and its schedules.

IRS Audit Technique Guide on Fundraising

The presenter suggested that nonprofit managers refer to the Audit Technique Guide (ATG) as a risk management tool when setting policy and putting procedures in place. A PDF of the guide is available from the IRS website: Audit Technique Guide – Fundraising Activities

Context: Fundraising Activity Increases in Response to New Tax Law

The presenter briefly summarized the ways in which tax incentives for charitable giving have changed:

  • Increase in the standard deduction for filers
    • Estimated that proportion choosing the standard deduction will increase from 70% to 94% of filers
    • Those filers no longer itemizing will have a reduced incentive to make charitable donations
  • Reduction of top marginal rate – another disincentive for charitable giving
  • Increase in charitable deduction limit to 60% of Adjusted Gross Income – an incentive for giving, applies to a subset of tax filers
  • The Pease limit on itemized deductions will be phased out – another incentive for giving, though only in very limited scenarios
  • Elimination of the 80% deduction for payments for the right to college sports tickets
  • Increase in estate and gift tax exclusions means less incentive for charitable bequests

The predictions of the effect of these changes on charitable donations have been dire, ranging from a $13B to $20B per year reduction in giving. While the new law reduces charitable giving incentives for low- and moderate-income tax filers, in some cases it increases them for high-income filers. The presenter noted increased effort, on the part of charitable organizations, to cultivate high-income donors. Overall, fundraising activity is predicted to increase. Against this background, tax reporting and compliance will become more important.

One of the trends the presenter expected to continue was the tendency to bunch contributions in a single tax year, in order to maximize the tax deduction.  One of the ways donors accomplish this is by making larger contributions to donor advised funds during certain years.

Tax Reporting Challenges and Avoiding Pitfalls

The presenter described common challenges and pitfalls.

  • Cash contributions: For contributions of $250 or more, contemporaneous written acknowledgment is required for those donors who plan to make tax deductions for charitable giving. She gave an example of acceptable language for acknowledgments.
  • In-kind contributions
    • No deduction allowed for donated services, or for the use of facilities
    • For noncash contributions valued from $500 to $5,000, an acknowledgment is needed in order to claim a deduction
    • For in-kind donations of more than $5,000 in value, the donor must both have an acknowledgment from the charity and file a Form 8283 in order to deduct the value. For anything other than publicly-traded securities, a qualified, independent appraisal of the donated goods is also required. Securing and paying for the appraisal is a responsiblity of the donor, not the receiving charity. Similarly, the gift acknowledgment should describe what the charity received, but not assign a dollar value to it
  • Fundraising events
    • Common misconception: The fair market value of goods or services provided to the donor can be based on the cost to the organization. In fact, the IRS requires an estimate of the value based on a market equivalent. For example, if the venue and food for an event were donated to the charity, this would not reduce the quid pro quo value subtracted from a charitable gift.
    • The charity is still required to report the quid pro quo value against the donation, even when a donor does not show up to the event.
  • Raffles
    • The cost of raffle tickets are not tax deductible to the purchaser
    • Items donated to be raffled off are deductible, except for time (such as services) and use of facilities (such as a vacation home)
    • In Massachusetts, before holding a raffle, an organization needs a permit from the local jurisdiction
  • Auctions
    • In-kind donations of items to be auctioned off are deductible to the donor — again, excluding donated time and use of facilities
      • If the value is greater than $5,000, the donor needs to have the charity sign a Form 8283. Assuming the item valued at $5,000 or more is sold at the auction, the charity needs to file Form 8282 with the IRS, and provide a copy to the donor
    • Payments on winning bids are deductible only for the amount above the value of the item won. If the bid is the fair market value or less, no deduction is allowed
  • Sponsorships
    • Corporate sponsorship is usually a charitable contribution, unless the organization provides advertising in return. In that case, it may trigger UBIT for the charity
    • But many things do not count as advertising, including the use of the donor’s name, logo, and list of products in materials. There are specific rules about the type of sponsor information will not be considered paid advertising.
  • Anonymous gifts
    • If the donor is taking a charitable deduction, they need a receipt acknowledging their donation
    • It is fine for the organization to withhold the identity of the donor from the public and from people within the organization, but if the donation is over the threshold for Schedule B reporting, the charity must disclose the donor’s name to the IRS
  • Receipts
    • Quid pro quo
      • Donations of more than $75 are deductible only in the amount exceeding the FMV of what the donor received or was entitled to. It is the organization’s responsibility to disclose that value to the donor, as part of the solicitation and acknowledgment
  • State registrations
    • States have their own rules concerning registration and reporting. In some states, these rules may be triggered simply by having a “donate” button on a website accessible in that state
    • Parts of the state registration and reporting may be delegated to outside services, such as Labyrinth (http://www.labyrinthinc.com)

Form 990 Reporting

  • Though there may be legitimate reasons for fluctuations in the ratio of fundraising expense to contributions, a high ratio may trigger IRS attention
  • Be mindful of consistency between the disclosure checklist and the financial reports and schedules
  • See questions about required filings and communication. Note that responses to other questions — e.g., about event-related income and expense or in-kind donations received — may trigger additional attention to your responses.
    • 7b, whether the organization notified donors of the value of goods and services received for payments over $75
    • 7c, whether the organization filed Form 8282 for in-kind donations sold
  • Pay attention to reporting of event income and expense, and be prepared to justify the appearance of low or negative net income. Expect your Schedule G, Part II report to come under close review
  • Is the reporting of professional fundraising services consistent with activities reported?
  • A common error is checking the wrong box in the Schedule B list of contributors. Are in-kind donations checked as “noncash”?

The IRS and your organization

Links to specific guides published by the IRS (Overview: Audit Technique Guides (ATGs) for Exempt Organizations)

Based on the ATGs, expect IRS attention in these areas:

  • Professional fundraisers
  • Fundraising events
  • Substantiation rules
  • Quid pro quo contributions
  • Non-cash contributions
  • Penalty considerations

Contact from the IRS can take multiple forms short of an audit, ranging from informational letters to compliance checks.

The presenter predicted these activities or features will become red flags for the IRS:

  • Fundraising events
  • In-kind donations
  • Donations of art or historical treasures
  • Anonymous donors

Resources from the meeting:
IRS Notice 2017-73 – DAF – IRS requests comments
Audit Technique Guide for Fundraising Activities NPFM Fundraising Slide Deck

Audit Technique Guide for Fundraising Activities

IRS Notice 2017-73 – DAF – IRS requests comments

Laura J. Kenney is a tax principal in BlumShapiro’s non-profit group and enjoys providing tax services to many types of non-profit clients throughout New England for over 25 years. BlumShapiro is the largest regional accounting, tax and consulting firm in New England, with over 450 people. Our non-profit service group understands the unique needs of non-profit clients.