Minutes: January 23, 2007

Minutes of the Board of Directors, The Special Hope Foundation

After receiving proper notice via e-mail on January 8, 2007, a quorum of the Directors named either by the Incorporator or listed in the Articles of Incorporation, constituting the Board of Directors of this Corporation, held their meeting at this time, on the day, and at the place set forth as follows:

The following Directors, constituting a quorum of the full Board, were present at the meeting:

• Lynne O’Hara, President
• John O’Hara, Vice-President
• Ed Hoskins, Secretary
• Mary Wilson, Treasurer
• Carrie Jones
• Tracie Sloat (via speaker phone)

Minutes Approved

The first order of business involved the review of the minutes from the previous Board Meeting on September 19, 2006. All reviewed and accepted the minutes.
 

Review of Existing Business

Highlights from Updates Received from Prior Grantees

• Unified Sports of Connecticut – have changed their focus to have more of a national focus, so they are trying to create a higher quality video than the production we had funded.  In order to accomplish this, they wanted our permission to add other funding sources.  This would only affect us by not having sole billing on the project.  Of course we agreed to this, and will still retain top billing.
• Benetech – their Route 66 developmental reading program has finished it’s beta cycle, and they have started demonstrating the program at national conferences.  The report showed that the program was engaging for the test subjects.
• Quest – have realized that the sensory integration room can be too stimulating for some of the subjects (as we had predicted) so they will need a full time professional to oversee the room.
• YMCA of Blackhawk County – have been making some breakthroughs in their training programs.  They have found that when they provide a support person to help individual children to integrate into a program, that it is not very successful, since the child has their needs met by someone outside of the program.  So now, they are training program staff to attend to the needs of the child.  They have also started to get some national attention.
• Asha Kiran – we received the interim report that we had requested.  They were able to create a medical facility where they had planned to see 30 patients per day (and they have actually been able to see over 60 per day).  They have started a sports center, and have 235 people involved with it.  These programs are very innovative for India.
• Hope Technology School – They basically stayed within their budget for the move that we funded.  In fact, they haven’t spent all of the money.  They have stayed within their projections.

We watched an ability awareness dvd from http://www.imtyler.org.

Several other updates were received, and they are available upon request.

Committee Reports

Audit Committee – Tracy Sloat
Overall, the audit was a success, and we passed with flying colors.  They not find any unusual transactions.  They did make one adjustment entry for an overpayment of taxes.  There were no disagreements, and they appreciated the full cooperation of the staff.  We need to send a letter to them showing that we have provided them with complete information to the best of our knowledge, and that we accept the adjustments that they suggest that we need to make.  They are waiting for an approval of the financial statements.

We also received a list of recommendations.  Although they found no issues that would require us to take these suggestions, they seem like good recommendations:  In order to segregate duties, copies of brokerage statements and bank statements should go to more than one person.  We should record the fair market value of stocks on the ledger.  We should record our investments at fair market value on our financial statements.

They charged us $8,500 (after quoting us $10,000).

Mary will read through the final text of the audit this week, and make sure everything is correct.

Finance & Investments Committee – Mary Wilson
We under budgeted by $65,034.51 which is only 3.5% off budget.  The biggest thing off was bank charges.

The asset allocation is still skewed, but it is due to the large donation of Berkshire that is still in the process of being liquidated.  It will take 18 months to two years for that to be worked out.  Everything is performing well and above benchmarks currently.

We need to update our spending policy based on the realities of our current situation.  When the foundation started, the policy stated that there was a minimum of 5% distribution per year.  The first year we were in compliance with that, and that made sense.  After that, we decided to reduce our tax liabilities by increasing our grants.  This locked us into a higher minimum which far exceeded the 5%.  A calculation was made so that minimum distribution that would be required to retain the 1% tax rate.  This brought the minimum distribution to 8.3 %.  This has solved one problem, but has presented another.  In order to appease the government, we are granting more, but the problem is that we are limiting the life of the foundation.  So now it is not cost effective to keep us in the 1% range.  So, at least for now, we should probably take the 2% hit, and stop granting as much money.  The current grant budget is at 900,000 for the year.  The 5.3% would bring us back to 655,000.  We should change the policy to be no less than 5.3% and no more that 10%.  This way as time goes on, we can adjust things to make the right decisions.  This fluctuation is being caused by the sale of stock and the payment of capital gains.  As time goes on, the investments will stabilize, and the yearly spend percentage will stabilize.

A vote was taken to update the spending policy to spend no less than 5.3% and no more than 10%.  This motion was unanimously approved.

A vote was taken to reduce this years spending budget to $700,000, the a little over 5.3% level, the lower end of the new range.  This new budget was unanimously approved.

Benefit 1: overall expenses decrease
Benefit 2: if we bring it back dramatically, the averages that are used for taxes come down.

Grant Review

The board was asked if anyone has any personal connection to any of the following organizations: Cerebral Palsy Center for the Bay Area, Challenged Athletes, Clausen House, Connecticut Institute for the Blind (Oak Hill), National Institute of Art and Disabilities (NIAD), Pacific Autism Center for Education (PACE), Supported Employment Enterprise Corporation (SEEC) or Stepping Stones Growth Center. 

No members had any affiliations or contact with them.

Cerebral Palsy Center for the Bay Area
They are a very well established organization, and the location of the organization headquarters is beautiful.  They have a well established fundraising program.  The funding might partially cover one or more consultants.  These are people who are cognitively intact, so it is very frustrating for them.

A motion was made to fund the Cerebral Palsy Center for the Bay Area for $15,000, and was unanimously approved by all who were attending.

Challenged Athletes
They asked for $10,000 a year for 3 years for repeat funding for sports equipment for athletes.  They definitly meet our mission since they are very innovative and greatly challenge the perception of the disabled to the public.

Although Challenged Athletes requested three years of funding, a motion was made to fund Challenged Athletes for $10,000 (only this year) and was unanimously approved by all who were attending.  They can submit a request for more funding next year.

Clausen House

Supportive employment providers are typically not innovative in today’s standards.  It is social contact, not productivity that makes a difference in their lives.  Programs that extend the social interaction to things outside the workplace would be more beneficial.  The programs can actually perpetuate their isolation.  This program is not particularly innovative, but the program is certainly working.

Funding Clausen House was moved to a vote and the trustees declined to fund this proposal.

Connecticut Institute for the Blind (Oak Hill)
They are requesting funding for a curriculum for sexual awareness.  This one is innovative because there is currently nothing comprehensive in this area, and is a mature discussion on this subject.  The whole purpose is to give the disabled an awareness of what is okay and not, and who to go to if they need help.  The curriculum has a focus on setting healthy boundaries.

A motion was made to fund Oak Hill for $75,000, and was unanimously approved by all who were attending.

National Institute of Art & Disabilities (NIAD)
A site visit was made to NIAD, and they were found to be a well-run organization that is doing great work.  It doesn’t perfectly align with our goals, but they are successful and making a positive impact.  Not only are the program participants in the studio, but they also attend art shows.  The art itself shows the talent of the disabled artists and certainly challenges public perception, but perhaps lacks innovation.

A motion was made to fund NIAD for $25,000 and it was declined unanimously due to a lack of innovation and decrease public impact.

Pacific Autism Center for Education (PACE)
PACE is an inclusive pre-school (inclusive preschools are becoming more and more common).  Inclusion still hold some weight, because it’s still innovative.  The degree at which it challenges public perception is somewhat limited however.  The involved children and adults are already involved with the disabled.

Funding PACE was moved to a vote and the trustees declined to fund this proposal due to a lack of public impact.

Supported Employment Enterprise Corporation (SEEC)
Most supportive employment spend 25% time doing job development then 75% helping them on the job.  Instead, SEEK does 75% of the work prior to the job.  They provide a thorough job assessment, figure out exactly what the limitations the individual has, and then find an appropriate job that would meet the individuals problems.  By finding the proper fit, and laying a strong foundation prior to beginning work, there isn’t the need for so much help on the job.  This program definitely challenges public perception, because the ability to succeed in the real world is great.

A motion was made to fund SEEC for $25,000, and was unanimously approved by all who were attending.

Stepping Stones Growth Center
We have funded them before, and they have improved dramatically since that time.  They are trying to find more ways to include program participants in society and mainstream life.  They are realizing that this population is at a higher risk than the mainstream population for many health issues.  The goal is education and opportunities to improve their health.  They challenge public perception by encouraging participants to get involved in programs out in the community.

A motion was made to fund Stepping Stones Growth Center for $15,000, and was unanimously approved by all who were attending.

New Business

The Disabled Funders Network are in the process of raising funds for a couple of initiatives.  They want to bring in a new CEO who is capable.  Although it doesn’t mesh seamlessly with our mission, this could be a good long-term investment for us since we are members.

A motion was made to donate a token amount of $2,500 for their youth transition initiative since it most closely matches our mission, and was unanimously approved by all who were attending.

Next meeting, May 8th, 2007 at the office boardroom at 5:00 p.m. for dinner.

Adjournment

There being no further business to come before the meeting, upon motion duly made, seconded and unanimously carried, the meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m.

________________________________________

Lynne O’Hara, President

________________________________________

Ed Hoskins, Secretary