Nonprofit Organizations

Subterms

    Latest story

    100 Shares36 Views

    Climate United Sues E.P.A. Over Frozen $20 Billion

    by

    In a lawsuit, Climate United claims the E.P.A. is illegally withholding funds that have become a target of the Trump administration.A multibillion dollar dispute between the Environmental Protection Agency and several nonprofit organizations escalated on Saturday when one group sued the E.P.A. and Citibank, seeking access to grant money that has been frozen under President Trump.Climate United, a nonprofit organization, claimed that the E.P.A. and Citibank have illegally withheld a nearly $7 billion award announced last April. Citibank has housed the funds as part of a green financing program to finance projects that address climate change.The funds are part of a larger pot of money, $20 billion, that have been swept up in controversy after Lee Zeldin, the E.P.A. administrator, called the green financing program a “scheme” that was “purposely designed to obligate all of the money in a rush job with reduced oversight.”Now, some of the nonprofits say, their bank accounts are frozen and that they are struggling to pay staff.Climate United had planned to loan the money to developers across the country in support of solar power, electric trucks, and energy-efficient affordable housing projects, and said the freeze has meant small businesses and developers are unable to draw down funds they were promised.“We’re not trying to make a political statement here,” said Beth Bafford, chief executive of Climate United. “This is about math for homeowners, for truck drivers, for public schools — we know that accessing clean energy saves them money that they can use on far more important things.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    More stories

    • 113 Shares41 Views

      in Elections

      Supreme Court Rejects Trump’s Bid to Freeze Foreign Aid

      by

      The Supreme Court on Wednesday rejected President Trump’s emergency request to freeze nearly $2 billion in foreign aid as part of his efforts to slash government spending.The court’s brief order was unsigned, which is typical when the justices act on emergency applications. It said only that the trial judge, who had ordered the government to resume payments, “should clarify what obligations the government must fulfill.”But the ruling is one of the court’s first moves in response to the flurry of litigation filed in response to President Trump’s efforts to dramatically reshape government. The vote was 5 to 4, with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Amy Coney Barrett joining the three liberal members to form a majority.Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., writing for the four dissenting justices, said the majority had gone profoundly astray.“Does a single district-court judge who likely lacks jurisdiction have the unchecked power to compel the government of the United States to pay out (and probably lose forever) $2 billion taxpayer dollars? “ he asked. “The answer to that question should be an emphatic ‘No,’ but a majority of this court apparently thinks otherwise. I am stunned.”The administration halted the aid on Jan. 20, President Trump’s first day in office. Recipients and other nonprofit groups filed two lawsuits challenging the freeze as an unconstitutional exercise of presidential power that thwarted congressional appropriations for the U.S. Agency for International Development.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 88 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      OpenAI Fires Back at Elon Musk’s Lawsuit

      by

      The artificial intelligence start-up argues that Mr. Musk is trying to hamstring its business as he builds a rival company.Earlier this month, Elon Musk asked a federal court to block OpenAI’s efforts to transform itself from a nonprofit into a purely for-profit company.On Friday, OpenAI responded with its own legal filing, arguing that Mr. Musk is merely trying to hamstring OpenAI as he builds a rival company, called xAI.What Mr. Musk is asking for would “debilitate OpenAI’s business, board deliberations, and mission to create safe and beneficial A.I. — all to the advantage of Musk and his own A.I. company,” the filing said. “The motion should be denied.”OpenAI also disputed many of the claims made by Mr. Musk in the lawsuit he brought against OpenAI earlier this year. In a blog post published before Friday’s filing, OpenAI portrayed Mr. Musk as a hypocrite, saying that he had tried to transform the lab from a nonprofit into a for-profit operation before he left the organization six years ago.The filing and blog post included documents claiming to show that in 2017, Jared Birchall, the head of Mr. Musk’s family office, registered a company called Open Artificial Intelligence Technologies, Inc. that was meant to be a for-profit incarnation of OpenAI.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Regulator Sues Anti-Police Activist Who Spent Charity Funds on Himself

      by

      Brandon Anderson, who used his nonprofit’s accounts to rent mansions and buy luxury clothes, was featured in a New York Times story in August.The District of Columbia’s attorney general on Monday sued an activist known for his calls to abolish the police, saying that he diverted $75,000 from a charity to pay for mansion rentals, a trip to Cancún and designer clothes.Attorney General Brian L. Schwalb, an elected Democrat who oversees nonprofits in the city, said Brandon Anderson had turned an anti-police-brutality charity called Raheem AI into a piggy bank for himself.Mr. Schwalb also sued Raheem AI. He asked a judge to shutter the organization, bar Mr. Anderson from leading any other Washington nonprofit and order Mr. Anderson or Raheem AI to repay the $75,000. The money would then be given to a charity chosen by the judge.“Brandon Anderson misused charitable donations to fund lavish vacations and shopping sprees, and the Raheem AI board of directors let him get away with it,” Mr. Schwalb said in a written statement. He continued, “My office will not allow people to masquerade behind noble causes while violating the law.”Mr. Schwalb has jurisdiction in the case because Raheem AI was incorporated in Washington. A spokesman for him declined to say what prompted the investigation. A former staff member at the nonprofit named Jasmine Banks told The New York Times this year that she had reached out to Mr. Schwalb’s office, seeking help after the nonprofit stopped paying her salary.Mr. Anderson did not respond to a request for comment sent on Monday morning. He has previously told The Times that he takes responsibility for the group’s failures: “The bottom line is simply that it didn’t work, and as the leader of that effort I share most of the blame.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Nonprofits Vow a New Resistance. Will Donors Pay Up?

      by

      In Donald J. Trump’s first term as president, some of his toughest opponents were not elected Democrats but left-leaning nonprofit groups. They bogged down his immigration and environmental policies with lawsuits and protests and were rewarded with a huge “Trump bump” in donations.Now, some of those groups are promising to do it all over again.“Trump’s gotta get past all of us,” Anthony D. Romero, the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, wrote on the nonprofit’s website the day after the election.“Trump’s bigotry, misogyny, anti-climate and anti-wildlife zealotry — all will be defeated,” Kieran Suckling, the executive director of an environmental nonprofit called the Center for Biological Diversity, wrote in an email to potential donors.That bravado masks uncertainty. This time could be a lot harder. Mr. Trump’s administration could learn from past mistakes and avoid the procedural errors that made its rules easier to challenge. And the higher courts are seeded with judges appointed by Mr. Trump.Another problem: Nonprofits are finding that some supporters are not energized by another round of “resistance.” Instead they have been left exhausted, wondering whether their donations made any difference. Some are afraid that they could be targeted for retaliation by Mr. Trump and his allies for donating to groups that oppose his administration.“The response from donors has been shock, anger and depression, sprinkled in with a few checks,” said Vincent Warren, the executive director of the Center for Constitutional Rights, which challenged several of Mr. Trump’s previous immigration policies in court. “It’s not been a flood.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 188 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Supervisor Andrew Do in Southern California Resigns and Agrees to Plead Guilty in Bribery Scheme

      by

      Federal prosecutors said that Andrew Do, an Orange County supervisor, enriched himself and his family with federal pandemic aid meant for seniors.The federal money was supposed to feed seniors and people with disabilities in Southern California who were stuck at home and especially vulnerable to Covid-19.Instead, Supervisor Andrew Do figured out how to funnel more than $550,000 to himself and his family through a charity in Orange County, Calif., federal prosecutors said on Tuesday. Rather than pay for meals, some of the funds helped to finance a million-dollar home for his daughter and retire $15,000 of his own credit card debt.Mr. Do, 62, resigned on Tuesday from the Orange County Board of Supervisors and agreed to plead guilty to taking bribes in exchange for directing more than $10 million in pandemic relief funds to a charity that had no track record of serving the community.Mr. Do now faces up to five years in prison under a plea agreement that he struck with federal prosecutors. He had sat on the elected board since 2015.“By putting his own interests over those of his constituents, the defendant sold his high office and betrayed the public’s trust,” Martin Estrada, the U.S. attorney for the Central District of California, said in a statement. “Even worse, the money he misappropriated and accepted as bribe payments was taken from those most in need — older adults and disabled residents.”The case, the latest in a string of criminal corruption investigations in California, ended the tenure of one of the most influential Vietnamese American politicians in the country. Mr. Do, a Republican, represented more than 600,000 people, including a large constituency of older Vietnamese Americans who fled communism as refugees and live on a fixed income.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 75 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Film Academy Looks Overseas for Donors

      by

      The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has announced a global $500 million campaign to shore up its financial future.The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences on Friday announced a global $500 million fund-raising effort to help diversify its base of support and ensure its financial future in a period of transformation for the film industry and the nonprofit cultural sector.“Both are going through radical business model shifts right now due to changing audience habits and revenue streams,” Bill Kramer, the chief executive of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, said in an email. “As a nonprofit, and like any healthy organization or company, the academy needs a sustainable and diverse base of support to allow for solid long-term planning and fiscal certainty.”Announced during a news conference in Rome hosted by the Italian film studio Cinecittà, the campaign is called Academy100, in honor of the 100th Oscars ceremony in 2028. The academy plans to use about $300 million of the new funds to bring its endowment to $800 million; the remainder will go toward operating expenses and special projects.The academy currently has an annual operating budget of about $170 million, 70 percent of which comes from its Oscars broadcast deal with Disney and ABC, which runs through 2028. About $45 million of the operating expenses are used by the Academy Museum of Motion Pictures.Given the challenges experienced by many cultural organizations, the academy has reason to want to shore up its finances. In March, for example, Joana Vicente of the Sundance Film Festival resigned after less than three years as chief executive amid questions about her fund-raising abilities. Last summer, Center Theater Group in Los Angeles announced a series of sharp cutbacks — including suspending productions at the Mark Taper Forum — to deal with drops in revenue and attendance. And the Metropolitan Opera in New York has withdrawn emergency funds from its endowment.The academy said in its news release that the money raised “will endow and fund programs that recognize excellence in cinematic artistry and innovation; preserve our film history; enable the creation of world-class film exhibitions, screenings and publications; train and educate the next generation of diverse global film artists; and produce powerful digital content.”More than $100 million has already been committed to the campaign, the academy said, including support from Rolex, which is based in Switzerland.As part of the effort, the academy plans to host gatherings and events in locations around the world to “become increasingly global,” press materials said, and help develop a global “pool of new filmmakers and academy members and support the worldwide filmmaking community.”The academy said its “expanded international outreach” will include Buenos Aires; Johannesburg; Kyoto, Japan; Lagos, Nigeria; London; Marrakesh, Morocco; Melbourne, Australia; Mexico City; and Mumbai. More

    • 63 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Inside the Crisis at NPR

      by

      NPR employees tuned in for a pivotal meeting late last year for a long-awaited update on the future of the public radio network.After many tumultuous months, marked by layoffs, financial turbulence and internal strife, they signed in to Zoom hoping to hear some good news from NPR’s leaders. What they got instead was a stark preview of the continued challenges ahead.“We are slipping in our ability to impact America, not just in broadcast, but also in the growing world of on-demand audio,” Daphne Kwon, NPR’s chief financial officer, told the group, according to a recording of the meeting obtained by The New York Times.For the past two weeks, turmoil has engulfed NPR after a senior editor assailed what he described as an extreme liberal bias inside the organization that has bled into its news coverage. The editor, Uri Berliner, said NPR’s leaders had placed race and identity as “paramount in nearly every aspect of the workplace” — at the expense of diverse political viewpoints, and at the risk of losing its audience.The accusations, leveled in an essay published in an online publication, The Free Press, led to a deluge of criticism from conservatives, including former President Donald J. Trump, who called for the network’s public funding to be pulled. The essay also generated vociferous pushback internally, with many journalists defending their work and saying Mr. Berliner’s essay distorted basic facts about NPR’s coverage.But NPR’s troubles extend far beyond concerns about its journalism. Internal documents reviewed by The New York Times and interviews with more than two dozen current and former public radio executives show how profoundly the nonprofit is struggling to succeed in the fast-changing media industry. It is grappling with a declining audience and falling revenue — and internal conflict about how to fix it.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Nonprofit Theaters Are in Trouble. Lawmakers Are Proposing Help.

      by

      Proposed legislation would allocate $1 billion annually for an industry coping with rising expenses and smaller audiences.The financial crisis facing nonprofit theaters in America has captured the attention of Congress, where a group of Democratic lawmakers is introducing legislation that would direct $1 billion annually to the struggling industry for five years.That money could be used for payroll and workforce development, as well as other expenses like rent, set-building and marketing. But the legislation, which lawmakers plan to introduce on Tuesday, faces long odds at a time when a divided Congress — where Republicans control the House and Democrats lead the Senate — has had trouble agreeing on anything.Nonprofit theaters around the country have reduced their programming and laid off workers to cope with rising expenses and smaller audiences since the coronavirus pandemic began. There are exceptions — some nonprofit theaters say they are thriving — but several companies, including New Repertory Theater in suburban Boston, Southern Rep Theater in New Orleans, and Book-It Repertory Theater in Seattle, have ceased or suspended operations in response to the crisis.“It hasn’t been a recovery for the nonprofits — they’re really lagging compared to many other sectors in the economy, and it’s for a lot of reasons,” Senator Peter Welch of Vermont, one of the legislation’s sponsors, said in an interview. “So they do need help.”Mr. Welch argued that the organizations merit government assistance because they strengthen communities and benefit local economies.The legislation, which is called the Supporting Theater and the Arts to Galvanize the Economy (STAGE) Act of 2024, is also being sponsored by Senators John Fetterman of Pennsylvania and Jack Reed of Rhode Island. Representative Suzanne Bonamici of Oregon is sponsoring it in the House.Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, who is the majority leader and who led the fight to win government aid for performing arts organizations during the pandemic, is supportive of the proposed legislation and is also open to other ways to assist nonprofit theaters, according to a spokesman.The pandemic aid package that Mr. Schumer championed serves as a precedent: In 2020, Congress passed the Save Our Stages Act, which led to a $16 billion Shuttered Venue Operators Grant program that made money available to a wide array of commercial and nonprofit performing arts organizations.Mr. Welch said the earlier aid program succeeded despite initial skepticism.“With everything else that was going on, the expectation was this would die on the vine, but it didn’t — as this started getting momentum, there was excitement about being about to do something concrete,” he said.The new legislation is narrower, benefiting only professional nonprofit theaters, and only those that have either seen a decline in revenues or that primarily serve historically underserved communities.“This is a beginning,” Mr. Welch said. “There are obstacles, but let the effort begin.” More