In a mailing just received today, Gospel for Asia’s fund solicitation still carries the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability seal. The letter is dated October 15, which is nearly two weeks after the ECFA board voted to terminate GFA’s membership.
Here is the pledge card with the seal and “Enhancing Trust” slogan (click to see letter and other materials):
Along with the ECFA charter member seal, the pledge card carries the meaningless ICA “Best in America” Seal.
According to the ECFA standards, this GFA mailing violates Standard 7.1 which relates to “Truthfulness in Communications.” According David Carroll, GFA’s COO, GFA will seek membership in the future. Continuing to violate a standard doesn’t seem like the best way to make a case for reinstatement.
By continuing to claim membership in the ECFA, GFA is in violation of ICA standards and the standards for qualification as a charity for inclusion in the Combined Federal Campaign.
The ICA requires truthful and non-deceptive fundraising materials (see the next to last bullet point in the image below):
The Office of Personnel Management’s standards also require truthful materials.
Category: ECFA
Gospel for Asia Claims Highest Level of Financial Integrity and Public Accountability to Federal Employees
Gospel for Asia is participating in the Combined Federal Campaign going on now. This campaign allows federal employees to give via their paychecks to charity. For some charities, this is a windfall; for others it brings in enough to make it worth doing.
I give GFA credit for not including the ECFA seal on the recent promotional literature aimed at federal employees (see a part of it below). However, the rest of it is brazenly and tragically misleading.
If GFA operated with the highest standards of financial integrity, the organization would not have been kicked out of the ECFA. GFA’s leaders would answer donor and media questions. Financial matters wouldn’t be shielded behind excuses. GFA’s CEO K.P. Yohannan would be available for comment.
If GFA operated with the highest standards of integrity and accountability, celebrity pastors (yes, you Francis Chan) would state publicly what your position is regarding GFA. You have removed your endorsements from the GFA webpage, but you told Christianity Today you are still on the GFA board.
GFA now banks on the Independent Charities of America Seal of Excellence to claim the “highest standards.” However, GFA paid ICA and Maguire and Maguire a little extra to use it. Maguire and Maguire make money when donors give to GFA through the CFC. So it is to ICA’s and Maguire and Maguire’s advantage for GFA and other charities to look good with the Seal given by MM/ICA for pay.
Gospel for Asia and the Independent Charities of America: Many Questions, Few Answers
Now that the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability has terminated Gospel for Asia’s membership due to violations of multiple standards, GFA is using the Seal of the Independent Charities of America as a badge of financial integrity.
When I called the ICA, I was connected to Mike May with Maguire & Maguire, an association management firm. May told me that organizations approved by the Office of Personnel Management for inclusion in the Combined Federal Campaign are allowed by ICA to display the ICA Seal. GFA is approved as a charity for the 2015 campaign in progress now.
At the time, I asked why GFA was allowed to display the seal since GFA is a proselytizing organization. In contrast to the federal standards, the ICA adds a provision barring “proselytizing organizations.” See the image below:
Beyond explaining ICA’s use of CFC approval, May had no comment about any of the other questions put to him. At this time, I don’t know why ICA has the restriction on proselytizing organizations or why GFA, as a proselytizing organization, is allowed to display the Seal of Excellence.
In any case, my research, the recent actions of the ECFA and the recent statement of former board member Gayle Erwin call into question the compliance of GFA with most of the eligibility standards of ICA (and more basically with the federal standards for participation in the Combined Federal Campaign). Click the image below to go to a pdf chart with supporting links.
ICA is now aware of the discrepancies between their criteria and GFA’s performance and it remains to be seen if ICA will investigate or take any action.
Believers’ Church Constitution Contradicts K.P. Yohannan’s Claim that He Has No Legal Authority in Indian Church
In a May 14, 2015 staff meeting, K.P. Yohannan and David Carroll disclosed to the Gospel for Asia staff that in 2013 Believers’ Church in India gave $19.8 million toward the construction costs of the new Wills Point. TX headquarters. When the gift came in back in 2013, GFA leaders told staff that the money was given by an “anonymous donor.”
For those new to this story, Believers’ Church is the church started by Gospel for Asia founder K.P. Yohannan. Yohannan is CEO and International Director at Gospel for Asia and he is the supreme Metropolitan Bishop in India for the Believers’ Church. Although undisclosed in their 2013 audit, GFA sent just over $20 million to Believers’ Church in 2013. Believers’ Church in India received far more than Gospel for Asia India which was not disclosed in the audited financial statements.
Within the last year, questions arose among staff about the accuracy of the “anonymous donor” story and Carroll and Yohannan addressed those questions during the May 14 staff meeting. In that meeting, Yohannan asserted that he had nothing to do with the Believers’ Church’s decision to send nearly $20 million back to Texas. A major part of his defense was his claim that he does not sit on boards or trusts in India and has no legal authority in Believers’ Church. Yohannan claims he didn’t have authority to direct the donation and didn’t have anything to do with it.
Here is what Yohannan said about his membership on boards and trusts in India and his legal authority.
Transcript:
And by the way, just so you know, I am not legally on any boards, any trusts, anything in any of these countries. I have no powers to make decisions or sign money, or release money, or make decisions, I am completely legally…why? Because anybody who work in the United States or overseas countries have a board membership or have legal membership should not be part of their legal entities in India. It’s a conflict of interest and therefore we send the funds and it is immediately under the government watch care and the government of India is responsible and investigative agencies and tax divisions to make sure that is carried out within the time frame or whatever they do, that is a public thing.
In previous posts, I have shown government and church documents which contradict his claim. Today, I provide portions of the Believers’ Church Constitution which describe the massive authority and power of the Metropolitan Bishop, His Grace the Most Reverend K.P. Yohannan. It is clear that Yohannan misled his staff. If Believers’ Church follows the church Constitution, there is no way Yohannan did not approve the gift to help complete headquarters construction.
Click the link for the first two chapters of the Constitution, and this link for chapter three. Images describing the power of the Metropolitan are below. See the boxes for especially relevant sections:
Yohannan is President of all church trusts, he has discretionary power over governance of the church, he is the final authority of spiritual and administrative matters and he is the managing trustee of the church. It is inconceivable that Believers’ Church could spend $19.8 million dollars without his approval. Sections from chapter three make this even clearer. Buying and selling movable and immovable property and any management matter can be overruled by Yohannan. Committees can suggest actions but they must be cleared with Yohannan first.
Yesterday, Gayle Erwin said this about the transfer of $19.8 million from India to GFA-US:
If you read the ECFA report, you discover what we (board members–USA) had begun to know–we were kept in the dark and limited to pedantic decisions. As I saw this, I began intense confrontations with KP which I thought were gaining traction. The surprise revelation of foreign deposits and monies returned from the field (and previously described as from an “anonymous donor) pushed some of us over the edge and made our board membership untenable.
David Carroll and K.P. Yohannan told staff that the transfer of funds was completely legal and there was no conflict of interest since Yohannan had no control over the decision. He also said the $19.8 million was not a related party transaction.
DC [David Carroll] – It’s completely legal, thank you. There’s a board member, board documents as I understand it, I don’t live in Asia, but there’s board documents on the other side. The whole thing was done in complete legality.
By the way, one question, one part of that question was, is this a related party transaction? And the answer is no. It is not a related party transaction because the board members here, they’re not the same board members as there. In other words, the leadership here did not influence that decision there. Brother KP mentioned it but it was not his decision. He had to get permission, actually they told…
KP [K.P. Yohannan]– I think David, it is important for people to know the person I am. It’s like Paul said in one place he’s a doulos, he’s a servant, another place he’s an apostle, another place he’s a brother, and my role is being a spiritual father of right now about 2.7 million people scattered throughout all these nations and I do not have any legal say or decision about legal matters. My role is a spiritual leadership. You may not have asked that but there are hundreds of trusts and entities in all these countries. I don’t sit on any of those things. There are their own people. And my role is the spiritual leadership. And I hope to some extent that is here also.
It is hard for me to understand how David Carroll could make this statement:
It is not a related party transaction because the board members here, they’re not the same board members as there.
I publicly ask David Carroll: Have you ever read the Believers’ Church Constitution? You are ordained in that church. Is this like Mars Hill Church and the officers and clergy don’t have access to the Constitution? You told staff on May 14 that Yohannan wasn’t on a board under the Believers’ Church umbrella. Carroll told staff:
And so, what the people in Asia did, and it is a board that is under Believers’ Church umbrella, but Brother KP’s not on that board, it wasn’t his decision.
K.P. Yohannan is CEO and leads the Gospel for Asia board here and he is by Constitution the managing trustee and President of Believers’ Church and all other Believers’ Church trusts.
I can’t see how these claims by Yohannan and Carroll and the Believers’ Church Constitution can be true at the same time.* David Carroll said there are “board documents on the other side.” Well, the board documents that I have seen don’t support what they told staff in May. Might be time for GFA leaders to produce those documents. It is already too late for three board members who quit over this matter.
*I suppose it is possible that Believers’ Church approved a new Constitution prior to the 2013 gift. However, my source denies that and tells me that this Constitution was binding at that time and is binding currently. I am certainly open to hearing from GFA and BC with new information.
Former Gospel for Asia Board Member Gayle Erwin Comments on Board Resignation
Earlier today, I saw a private Facebook posting from former Gospel for Asia board member Gayle Erwin which contained some new information about GFA and the ECFA. Erwin was responding to my post about the resignations of Damian Kyle, Skip Heitzig and Erwin from GFA’s board. I wrote to Erwin with a request to cite the quote here. He agreed with the condition that I highlight his positive comments about GFA staff. About GFA and ECFA, Erwin said:
If you read the ECFA report, you discover what we (board members–USA) had begun to know–we were kept in the dark and limited to pedantic decisions. As I saw this, I began intense confrontations with KP which I thought were gaining traction. The surprise revelation of foreign deposits and monies returned from the field (and previously described as from an “anonymous donor) pushed some of us over the edge and made our board membership untenable. The staff of GFA in Texas, despite some inferences in the discussion on your page above, are some of the finest, most ethical and loving people I know. I marvel at how well commenters on your page have combined ignorance and hostility. I thought I was making progress in ways that would have solved and prevented this heartbreak and replaced it with victory, but I was wrong but not wrong in the ways your commenters infer. (emphasis from Mr. Erwin)
Erwin later added:
I was shocked when informed that GFA had failed all 7 of ECFA criteria for membership and had consequently been removed from membership.
In his first comment, Erwin referred to the transfer of $19.8 million from India’s Believers’ Church to GFA in Texas for the purpose of completing construction on their new Wills Point, TX headquarters.
This comment provides some insight into the perceptions of board members regarding the issues I have been raising for months. It seems they (at least Erwin) have of late felt they were kept in the dark. Erwin says he and the other board members were not aware of the source of the nearly $20 million.
I think it is important to consider Mr. Erwin’s wording regarding the donation from the field: “The surprise revelation of foreign deposits and monies returned from the field (and previously described as from an “anonymous donor) pushed some of us over the edge and made our board membership untenable.”
Those foreign deposits were funds given by donors for mission work which were sent to India and deposited into accounts of the K.P. Yohannan controlled Believers’ Church. Then nearly $20 million were authorized by Believers’ Church to be sent back to Texas to help finish construction of the palatial Wills Point, TX headquarters.
Like Mr. Erwin, I suspect donors will find that to be untenable.