A Message from WE Charity's COO on Frequently Asked Questions
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
A Message from WE Charity’s COO on Frequently Asked Questions By Scott Baker Chief Operating Officer I have been with WE Charity since 2004 and I’m immensely proud of the team we’ve built, and the impact our programs have had both domestically and internationally. Recently, I served as Executive Director from December, 2010, to January, 2019, working with the WE Charity Board of Directors to develop and execute the very strategies that have often been criticized within this recent political tsunami. Much has been written about WE Charity in past months and, in my opinion, not much of it has been fair, balanced or accurate. WE Charity finds itself in the middle of political battles and, as a result, the subject of extensive misinformation. Although WE Charity is apolitical and has worked with politicians from all parties, in the current discourse the charity has become associated with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and former Finance Minister Bill Morneau. The past months brought the country within inches of an election. Various politicians, pundits and some media have sought to disparage the charity in order to fulfill political objectives. In this hyper-partisan environment, so much inaccurate information has circulated in social media and even mainstream media. Since July, our team has received over 6,000 media questions and worked hard to provide complete answers to each one. For a period of time on a near daily basis we were issuing correction notices to various journalists. Many stories were more fiction than fact. It has certainly been a trying time for all of us, particularly given our announcement in September that we will be winding down WE Charity in Canada. Like so many of my colleagues, after spending nearly twenty years with this charity, I hoped it would continue to function in its present form. Yet, we made the difficult choice to wind down because our financial modeling showed us that by acting now, we could sell our real estate and establish an endowment to support our most critical global development programs and digital-education resources in Canada. What has made this so challenging to accept is the misinformation spread about us leading up to closure. There has been little attempt to discern the truth. I appreciate you taking the time to read this detailed article in which I will address some of the most significant misconceptions about the charity. In the spring, a civil servant from the federal government reached out asking us to submit a proposal about how to implement their idea for the Canada Student Service Grant (CSSG). WE Charity did not make first contact, despite contrary reports. In fact, we thought about saying no. We knew it would be an incredible amount of work while we also navigated the effects of the pandemic. But our purpose is to help young Canadians with volunteer service, and we felt a responsibility to do our best to fulfill this important project. No one could have predicted the devasting outcome of accepting the government’s request was the shuttering of WE Charity. Still, if all other things were equal, we probably would have said ‘yes’ again. That’s the nature of non-profit work. We say ‘yes’ when others ask for help. The sector is needed now more than ever. I would like to express my sincere appreciation to the wonderful people and organizations working in this space, especially at this difficult time. COVID-19 has increased the need for programs, while economic contractions thwart fundraising efforts. To have WE Charity bring any negative attention to the sector is truly painful. In this article, I will share facts about a few major areas of contention. In the sections below, I hope to help readers understand the decisions and directions taken by the leadership of WE Charity. Each decision was made in full partnership with our highly-qualified Board of Directors, senior staff, and regional leadership around the world. 1. Why WE Charity chose to do the CSSG 2. WE Structure and Governance 3. Social Enterprise 4. Owning Real Estate 5. Reporting and Transparency 6. WE Charity’s Canadian work: WE Schools 7. WE Charity’s Global Work: WE Villages 8. Compensation of Founders 9. Government Funding 10. WE Charity is apolitical 11. WE Charity Employees and Workplace Culture 12. Addressing Inaccuracies When the political fracas is over and the dust settles, researchers and academics will have time to conduct comprehensive reviews of the past months and wider history. When they do, I am confident they will come to a far different conclusion about our organization and its work than what has been portrayed in the media and shared by several politicians and pundits. Until then, I hope this article can shed some light on a few of the major misconceptions. 1. Why WE Charity chose to do the Canadian Student Service Grant (CSSG) In April, WE Charity was approached by the Government of Canada about delivering the CSSG program to support post-secondary students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, on Sunday, April 19, 2020, Rachel Wernick (the Senior Assistant Deputy Minister at Employment and Social Development Canada), called Craig Kielburger to ask for a proposal on how to implement an emergency student support program. I recall the debate amongst our senior leadership team. The scope and scale were aggressive, and it would require a herculean effort. We knew it would be 24-7 of work. Our families knew it, too. Several of my colleagues talked about how they would have benefited from a program like the CSSG to help pay for university or college expenses. We consulted a dozen other non-profits to ask if they needed volunteer help by post-secondary students to support with fundraising or program delivery. The need was clear. Ultimately, our desire to support Canadian youth won out. Following approval from WE Charity’s Board of Directors, we signed a contribution agreement that contains 26 references to the fact that WE Charity would only be reimbursed for “eligible expenditures,” specifically identified in the agreement. As everyone in the sector knows, to be eligible, the expenditures must be “directly related to the carrying out of the Project.” The total value of the contribution agreement was $543.5M, not the $900M to $1 billion that has been widely and incorrectly reported. The agreement would provide $500M to the students participating in the program, $8.75M to other partnering not-for-profits, with WE Charity eligible to receive $14.5M up to a maximum of $34.78M, to administer all aspects of the program including its design, delivery, disbursement of grants, hiring of hundreds of support staff to mentor the up to 100,000 students, technology bursaries for at-risk youth participants, etc. I led the team responsible for building relationships with our peers in the not-for-profit community. We began outreach with very positive conversations across the sector. I am extremely grateful to the 83+ not-for-profit partners who signed up to support student volunteer placements through the CSSG. By July 6, 2020, over 40,000 post-secondary students from across Canada had signed up to participate with over 60 per cent from a visible minority population. Despite the clear demand and positive movement within the sector for the program, it was immediately embroiled in divisive politics and controversy. 2. WE Structure and Governance There has been much written about how WE is “complex”. Allow me to provide clarity. WE is comprised of two components: WE Charity and ME to WE Social Enterprises. Within these two entities are various sub-entities established over the past 25-years for various purposes. For example, there is ME to WE Trips and ME to WE Chocolate – which are legally incorporated as separate entities for operating purposes, but all the financials and decisions roll- up to ME to WE Social Enterprises. Similarly, WE Charity has charitable affiliates established in North America and around the world. In each country where WE Charity operates (Kenya, India, etc.) there is a local incorporated affiliate to adhere to local regulations. In Canada, over the past 25-years our charitable programs have also expanded. The ME to WE Foundation facilitates donations to WE Charity. WE Well-Being was established as a stand-alone youth mental health charity, as per the wishes of the founding anchor donor. Finally, the WE Charity Foundation was formed following a review with the WE Charity Board of Directors to limit potential risk and liability to the primary charity. Prior to the spring of 2020, the WE Charity Foundation was never in operation. At that time, and with the full support of the WE Charity Board of Directors, it was repositioned to manage liability from the CSSG. What many do not realize is that WE Charity is the “sole” or “founding member” of these related charities. What this means is that WE Charity’s Board of Directors has significant authority over each of these charitable affiliates. This structure was established at the advice of our legal counsel. To further ensure accountability to WE Charity, the charity placed senior staff of WE Charity, myself included, as Officers or Directors of these charity affiliates. This was done to facilitate coordination and to ensure an accountability line to the WE Charity Board. The relationships between these entities were always fully disclosed in our audited financial statements, and we believe that this was a smart and efficient operating structure for a multi- purpose global organization. It has been suggested that there was not a strong Board of Directors in place for an organization the size of WE Charity.