[...] Democratic Diva » Something Funny is Going on at ASU Foundation [...]

It’s unfortunate that the Democratic Diva hasn’t done a bit more digging on the issue before posting. If so, Dana would have uncovered that the report has a significant number of misrepresentations and is using their “report” to promote an agenda that has little to do with the ASU Foundation.

Among the false and misleading statements in the report:
• Falsely reporting the ASU Foundation’s overhead expenses at 56 percent when they are 20 percent, an excellent percentage for any fundraising organization.
• Made it falsely appear that the Foundation was at times keeping more than 50% of the money it was raising for the university when, in fact, the university only paid the Foundation $8.8 million for more than $124 million raised in 2007.
• In an attempt to substantiate its claims, the Coalition created a fictitious ASU Foundation invoice in the report, complete with a fake invoice number, to make it appear the Foundation had billed the university an exorbitant administrative fee.
• Inaccurately claims that Sybil Francis was working two full time jobs and inaccurately reported that employee’s compensation. It also implied that it might be inappropriate for the spouse of a senior university officer (in this case, Dr. Crow) to be engaged in fundraising when engagement in fundraising is obligatory for spouses in those positions and they are often compensated for their work.
• Misrepresenting the purpose of a group called the Sustainable Endowments Institute. This group does not evaluate the sustainability of endowments but rather the percentage of funds raised that a spent on sustainability programs.

The drafters of the report — the Coalition for Justice at Great Western Erectors — has made numerous unfounded and inaccurate accusations about the labor practices of Great Western Erectors, a firm that has been the target of a multi-year, unsuccessful union-organizing attempt. Both Arizona State University and the ASU Foundation have investigated all charges that have been brought to their attention regarding Great Western Erectors’ labor practices and have found them to be false. The Foundation recently commissioned a detailed, independent investigation into these allegations, which confirmed all allegations were groundless.

Great Western Erectors worked as a subcontractor on the construction of SkySong, a project with which the Foundation is associated.

“And the fact that it is the President’s wife? I’m speechless. I’ll be lucky to earn a quarter of what she makes when I graduate.”

Well, Naisha, if you want, you can earn a PhD from MIT, teach at Harvard, and work in both Congress and the White House as an advisor on energy, security and the environment. That’s what Dr. Francis has done. ASU is lucky to have her on board.

Looks like someone is doing crisis control. $160,000 is a lot of scholorships. When you work for a non-profit you don’t have such a lavish salary. Explain away.

So you’re an expert on non-profits as well as the market worth of a PhD from MIT?

No need to look down on me.
I have worked in non-profits my entire career and do have a masters from a university across the river from MIT and would never feel entitled to take a salary of 160,000 knowing the students are funding it. But that is not the real issue is it. I am not motivated by money. But that is just me!
If she is entitled to this salary then no one would need to defend it.
Sure many wives do fundraising for universities where their husbands are Presidents they just usually don’t make a salary to do it! How many people are being paid to do crisis management – that the students are paying for damage control?
This business model of higher education is making a lot of people rich. Like the people running the university, the businesses they contract with, the financial institutions that give loans. Oh yeah, and Crow and his wife.

I think its great that this topic has been posted. We need to open up this discussion – and try to make sure things actually get looked into and addressed. I see some serious issues here and I will not give to this foundation until it becomes more transparent. As ASU Alumni, I want to help others attend ASU, but I want to do this in the most effective way possible… something doesn’t seem “right” here. I have not been pleased with Crow running things, and now Im not too fond of the Wife either.

VW Gal- a discussion is what was needed. The researcher sent a letter asking for verification and no one ever responded. Now they are threatening her with legal action for her report. I have no problem with people being fairly compensated but the salaries of the people working for the foundation a “non-profit” rather high-
Andrew Wooten $179,000
Jason Sydow, 161,000\
Sybil Francis (wife ) 160,000
Kenneth Lewis, $150,000
Teresa Romy Schlect $132,000
A quick look a non-profits and this is 2-3 times what most people make at a non-profit
Now if it was for profit with the whole intent to be for profit pay them as much as you want. This is a non profit connected to a private university.
Something to think about!
Meanwhile the student fees go up and up and up.

Isn’t it interesting that when a blogger posts information s/he receives without doing any research it is for the good of the public. But when an informed source responds to shed light on the situation it is called crisis control.

Regardless, a discussion is always a good idea. The researcher didn’t have this intention, however. The “report” had a cover letter addressed to Dr. Crow dated March 24. It arrived by mail on the 24thth, prior to the scheduled press conference at 9 a.m. on March 25. A copy was never received by the ASU Foundation.

The coalition’s stated intention to “make every effort to include any corrections in the final version” was entirely bogus evidenced by printed copies of the report already distributed to press contacts throughout the United States by that time.

Regarding the salaries mentioned above, they are for staff at an LLC wholly owned by ASU Foundation that manages the technology transfer process for ASU. Translation: they take the research that is being done at ASU and get it to market to bring back revenue to benefit the university. The salaries of these positions are at market rate for the positions they hold with these responsibilities.

As for Sybil Francis, you mention “$160,000 is a lot of scholarships.” Perhaps. But the students benefit more by the $50 million that she has helped bring to the Foundation in gifts in just the last 4 months. Additionally , she co-chairs with Rep. Ed Pastor a $3-million scholarship campaign in which she personally raised $1 million from a single donor. She also co-chairs the Foundation’s Women in Philanthropy Group, helping the membership grow to 230 and raising close to $1 million in scholarship and program funding for ASU students and programs.

Cathy,
As for the letter I mentioned there was a letter sent in January that no one responded too. Not the letter that was delivered to Crow with the report.

As for Sybil,
She is an extremely accomplished professional woman- no doubt. Her salary is just part of the “discussion’ it should not be just about her – but it seams to be since her husband is the President.
Part of the problem is the “business model” intesecting with a “non-profit” model. MOST non-profits struggle to pay the rent and bills. Most non-profits want the biggest bang for their buck to go to the mission of the organization. I guess this all comes down to philosphy and when the foundation spends over $2 million on meals and entertainment, and $617,0000 on gifts, flowers and trophies- huge red flags go up. HUGE. In the future, hopefully the foundation will look at it’s spending and redirect it’s resources to the mission. 100 bucks may be small change to the foundation but it is a nice meal out to a graduate. And 10 meals for a student or a book for a class. That should always be the thought process when spending someone’s money – which it is when you work for a non-profit.

Definitely need to take this discussion further. It is obvious, based on the report, that the ASU Foundation is squandering money. There are several documented instances of worker mistreatment by ASU sub contractors, Great Western Erectors and Aramark.

Although many “non-profits struggle to pay the rent and bills” there is a broad range of nonprofit organizations — small community organizations to national and international organizations, from hospitals and research institutions to the largest of the foundations – and the range of expenses and salaries varies just as widely.

The Foundation, too, wants the “biggest bang for the buck to go to the mission of the organization.” Although $2.5 million spent on meals, entertainment and gifts sounds extravagant, it represents two percent of the $125 million raised that year – two percent. That year, $47.6 million in grants and allocations went to ASU.

Our mission (link: http://www.asufoundation.org/history/index.asp) is always at the forefront of all of our activities.

More on Francis- she was being paid by two organizations even though they said the report was wrong. These are all pubic documents.

http://www.azcentral.com/members/Blog/WATCHBLOG/20228

Tax returns differ on salary for Crow’s wife
Just who is paying Sybil Francis?

As The Arizona Republic’s Anne Ryman reported, the wife of Arizona State University President Michael Crow works at two nonprofits: the ASU Foundation and the Center for the Future of Arizona.

Both organizations filed federal tax returns stating they paid Francis a salary during the 2005-06 year. The foundation’s returns show it paid Francis $160,000 a year as a senior adviser for an estimated 65 hours of work each week. The center reported it paid her a salary of $114,230 the same year as executive director, and $114,370 the following year. (The foundation’s returns for 2006-07 haven’t been filed yet.)

So what gives?

Former ASU President Lattie Coor, chairman and CEO of the Center for the Future of Arizona, tells Ryman his center’s reporting is inaccurate.

“I didn’t realize (the center reported her salary),” he says. “We clearly had made an error.”

Coor says the center paid Francis’ salary for three years from January 2002 through December 2004, and then the foundation began paying her. Francis remains the center’s executive director but she earns no salary, Coor says.

“She works here, and she’s an employee of the (ASU) foundation,” he says.

A coalition of unions and community members who have wrestled with ASU over labor issues released a report this week criticizing the foundation’s spending. The report questioned whether Francis should be employed by the foundation, whose board of directors includes Michael Crow. It also questioned how one person was “simultaneously employed” by two non-profits.

The tax-return error raises one other question that perhaps only accountants can answer: If the Center for the Future of Arizona didn’t cut Francis a check after 2004, how was it able to reconcile the reported expense in its IRS return? If the money was spent, it went somewhere else.

Those accountants may need to doublecheck documentation that apparently eluded them for two straight years.