My Nonprofit Reviews
Not Buying It
Review for COMMUNITY ALLIANCE FOR THE ETHICAL TREATMENT OF YOUTH, NY, NY, USA
Beasinthearmy has presented the clearest picture of how corrupt the house of CAFETY has become, and obviously many support Beasinthearmy's depiction of CAFETY over what he calls "dishonest reviews". As a founder, former board member and treasurer, his views carry weight and deserve a better response than feeble denials and being directed to the "proper authorities". Kat is fond of directing whistleblowers to the IRS, but not the proper agency. The IRS form to download is www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f13909.pdf This is form 13909, the Tax-Exempt Organization Complaint (Referral), and it is an interactive PDF that you can fill in and print for mailing, or email/fax it. You will need CAFETY's EIN#: 26-1196770, and most current address: P.O. Box 1319, New York, NY 10163. The form asks for details of violations - include all documentation and screenshots, too. Line 5 asks for your personal information, and includes a box to be checked that states: "I am concerned that I might face retaliation or retribution if my identity is disclosed". Check it, given CAFETY's reputation for speculation and seeking vengeance even when they are completely at fault. You will receive a confirmation letter from the Director of EO Examinations in Dallas, along with a phone number to call for account services. This is the number to call as soon as CAFETY harasses you.
Beasinthearmy is right, as a 501 (c)(3) CAFETY is prohibited from being involved in a political campaign, and the prohibition is wide-sweeping:
IRS Revenue Ruling 2007-41:
"...organizations described insection501(c)(3) may not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office."
"Even if a statement does not expressly tell an audience to vote for or against a specific candidate, an organization delivering the statement is at risk of violating the political campaign intervention prohibition if there is any message favoring or opposing a candidate. A statement can identify a candidate not only by stating the candidate’s name but also by other means such as showing a picture of the candidate, referring to political party affiliations, or other distinctive features of a candidate’s platform or biography."
"If an organization posts something on its web site that favors or opposes a candidate for public office, the organization will be treated the same as if it distributed printed material, oral statements or broadcasts that favored or opposed a candidate.
An organization has control over whether it establishes a link to another site. When an organization establishes a link to another web site, the organization is responsible for the consequences of establishing and maintaining that link, even if the organization does not have control over the content of the linked site"
This link on CAFETY's page is only one example of trashing Romney, and there are still questions whether Romney was with Bain during the AEG acquisition: http://www.cafety.org/privately-funded-programs/911-romney-profits-from-bain-owned-health-company-facing-wrongful-death-neglect-allegations- pretty damning of Romney and his business dealings during an election. CAFETY should be following Kat's suggestions: "I advise you file a complaint to someone who can verify the accuracy of your allegations - Facts give us something to work with. Rumor and innuendos do not. If you are indeed acting in good faith, please take a moment to file the details of your concerns with the proper authorities". As a 501(c)(3), CAFETY is prohibited from engaging in this kind of political activity. They can lobby as much as they can afford to, but even that wouldn't meet the standard test.
I've accumulated many examples of CAFETY "showing a picture of the candidate, referring to political party affiliations, or other distinctive features of a candidate’s platform or biography." I've sent CAFETY screenshots including a picture of Romney and Mel Sembler with Kathryn Whitehead's comment: "Melvin Sembler and Mitt Romney together in a recent pic - we need to step up the publicity of their connection regarding child abuse centers across America! Please read and pass on - program watch". http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:_biON--PW5oJ:pt-br.facebook.com/CAFETY/app_53267368995%3Ffilter%3D2+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a Later that caption was changed to the article title "Mitt Romney's Big Drug Problem". Great article - not appropriate for a public charity prohibited from intervening in a political election. And this jewel of Mitt-bashing: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151074045006816&set=a.10150566639796816.372904.90524391815&type=1
That should influence some of your constituents to vote against Romney. Romney is evil - CAFETY should try to at least rise above his level. CAFETY is a 501(c)(3), not a 501(c)(4).
The questions CAFETY's bookkeeping raises are too many to list here, and I've delivered them to the "proper authorities". No sense in bringing it to CAFETY - they know. One thing stands out the most - the first (and apparently last) Annual Benefit in 2010 - here on Guidestar, you mention no dollar amount raised. On CAFETY's Accomplishment page, http://www.cafety.org/cafetys-accomplishments the event is listed under 2010: "CAFETY's 1st Annual Benefit ( Raised over $60,000! ) - Special thanks to artist Jim Hodges- NYC - Yale Club - Featuring work by artist: Jim Hodges - November 18, 2010. Raised over $60,000? CAFETY's 990-N does not reflect that, nor does the recently posted 2010 financial data. $14,000 being spent on a paper to be delivered this fall, travel and conference expenses that were extravagent. This is for the IRS, though. It would make the IRS job easier if there were one consistent method of record keeping. CAFETY is no longer "ethical" and has wandered far from their original mission statement, as was evidenced in the profane exchange between CAFETY's National Outreach Director and a 13 yr. old boy. Even knowing he was addressing a 13 yr. old, the CAFETY Director encouraged the boy to engage in illegal sexual activity while cursing and belittling the young man.
How does this organization compare with others in the same sector?
How much of an impact do you think this organization has?
Will you recommend this organization to others?
When was your last experience with this nonprofit?