Vote in Poll: Should Gospel for Asia Disclose Financial Statements?

Today on Twitter I posted a poll in response to Gospel for Asia’s repetitive requests for donations. I simply asked:

If you have a Twitter account, I invite you to take part in the poll.

GFA constantly spins their work and solicits funds for India but has never disclosed to donors that their charity registration has been revoked in India. They have not released an audited financial statement since 2013. They promised to seek membership in the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability after they were kicked out in 2015 but have not done so.

Gospel for Asia and Compliance with ECFA’s Standards: The 2015 Letter, Part 6

After about a month break, I am resuming this series.

In CEO and founder K.P. Yohannan’s recent “exclusive personal response” to the fraud lawsuit settlement involving Gospel for Asia, Yohannan traces GFA’s problems to a 2015 “confidential letter from a financial standards association we were part of, and of which we were a charter member.” That letter was from the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability and outlined 17 potential violations of ECFA financial standards. In October 2015, ECFA evicted GFA from membership. To help donors understand the nature of the concerns ECFA had about GFA, I am posting the concerns one at a time with commentary. You can read all of the posts by clicking this link.

Read the entire ECFA letter on GFA’s compliance issues here.

From that letter, here is the sixth compliance issue:

6. GFA solicits funds for narrower purposes than the eventual expenditure of the funds.

During ECFA’s review on August 12, GFA staff provided a document to demonstrate the flow of funds from GFA to field partners. ECFA learned that donor-restricted donations are appropriately tracked by particular revenue classifications. However, we also discovered, and it was confirmed by GFA staff, that the disbursement of the gifts are tracked in much broader categories. For example, donations were received and tracked for 38 different specific items including kerosene lanterns, bio sand filters, chickens, manual sewing machines, blankets, bicycle rickshaws, and others, but related expenses were only tracked as “community development.” In other words, donations were raised for 38 specific items, with the donations pooled for expenditure purposes instead of expending them specifically for the purposes raised.

ECFA did not find any evidence that donors to the 38 different giving categories had awareness that their gifts were grouped and used in a broader category than the specific categories in which the gifts were raised. ECFA’s staff raised concerns regarding GFA’s compliance with ECFA Standard 4, 7.1, and 7.2 in raising funds for a particular purpose but then failing to document the actual use of those funds by the particular donor-restricted purpose.

Subsequent to this conversation, on August 16, GFA staff indicated that GFA field partners will begin tracking expenditures by specific item accounts to provide adequate transparency as to the use of designated funds.

Our review of the board minutes did not indicate the GFA board had approved, or even been notified, that gifts solicited for very specific purposes were not being expended with the same specificity as the gifts were raised.

GFA led donors to believe their funds had been spent for specific items but there was no way to know if such intent had been followed since there was no documentation of that use. This policy had not been approved by the board. However, after this the board would have been alerted via the letter.

Francis Chan was on the GFA board by this time and had reassured people that he had sent in personal auditors to make sure funds were being spent as intended. Here is a May 15, 2015 email from his organization Crazy Love to me:

He has even gone to the lengths of sending two different auditors/accountants to research their financial practices. Both have come back with glowing reports.

His auditors/accountants missed a whole bunch of violations of ECFA standards. Chan continues to use this story. However, we know that GFA was kicked out of ECFA in October for numerous violations. GFA promised that they would reapply for ECFA membership which they have not done. GFA has not released audited financial statements. They have not disclosed to donors that their charity registration in India has been revoked.

Next: GFA’s financial statements do not appropriately report transactions with foreign partners.

Gospel for Asia: Does This Look Evangelical?

In his recent video defense of Believers’ Church in India, Gospel for Asia CEO and Believers’ Church Metropolitan K.P. Yohannan told Francis Chan that his church was “hard core evangelical.” Below watch Yohannan lead what looks like a kind of mass.

A relative of Yohannan’s sent this video to me and said it was a mass of the BC. I can’t understand what is happening so I can’t say for sure what this is. I will say that it doesn’t look like any evangelical church service I have ever attended.

As I have said several times when commenting about BC, I don’t care what they do. The reason I point this out is because it seems to be a matter of great importance to GFA to portray the organization — here and in Asia — as evangelical. Donors who care about this designation and about what this means should know that it may mean something very different there than here. I also think that GFA should simply represent their field partner accurately.

Gospel for Asia’s Headquarters Funded by Canadian Donor Funds – Guest Post by Bruce Morrison

Bruce Morrison is a pastor in Nova Scotia, CA and a former Gospel for Asia supporter. In recent years, he has actively sought to bring to light GFA’s practices regarding fund raising and spending.

In this guest post, Morrison documents and describes the path of funds from Canadian donors to India and then the Wills Point, TX where they were spent to complete the GFA headquarters. The routing of money from Canadian donors who thought they were spending money to help poor India people to the Wills Point campus should be of interest to Canadian authorities. It makes me think that the source of funds to pay the court settlement will likely come from Canadian donors. Thanks to Rev. Morrison for this analysis.

…………………………………………..

Bland Garvey CPA, from Richardson, TX, was the accounting and auditing firm that prepared the financial statements for GFA-US in 2013.  In their audit notes they stated that $19.8 million was received from an anonymous donor to help fund the construction of the new GFA head office complex in Wills Point, TX. Later, it was disclosed that this money did not come from an anonymous donor, but instead came from Believers Church in India.  Apparently, the auditors did not research the validity of what they had been told by GFA as one would expect, especially given the large amount of money involved.

The idea that money sent to India designated to spread the gospel and help the poor was later returned to the US for an expensive building project was disturbing to donors who learned of this.

Three years passed.  In a US federal court hearing with plaintiffs Garland and Phyllis Murphy versus GFA defendants, a new and surprising revelation came to light. The $19.8 million for the US building project did not come from India – it came from Canada!

The court hearing took place on May 16, 2017.  On Pg. 32 of the hearing transcript, Judge Timothy Brooks referred to the $20 million that came from GFA-India and the plaintiff’s claim that this money was donor restricted, diverted away from donor’s intents, without donor’s knowledge, and was therefore used fraudulently.

In response, to assure the Court that US funds were not misappropriated, Robert Mowrey, lawyer for the defendants, on page 32, lines 4-19, stated:

The documents – – your Honor, this gets a little complicated, but the documents we have provided to the plaintiffs show that the $20 million did not come from any US donors.  This was $20 million that GFA-India had.  It was their money.  It was sitting in an account in Canada.

There were Canadian donors who had given this money to GFA-India to be used in various purposes.  GFA-India directed that money to be given for the campus and then GFA-India fulfilled requests, the specific requests from internal money in GFA-India to replenish the Canadian account.

The bottom line here is that – – and I don’t know if the Court followed that but the bottom   line here is that none of the $20 million came from any  US donors.

To this the judge replied:

Well, it says in the second sentence that GFA staff confirmed that the funds relating to this donation were originally received by GFA as gifts restricted for the field.

Thus, Mr. Mowrey attempted to avoid allegations of fraud by saying that US-donor money was not used to help fund the new GFA head office. The judge did not agree and contended that even if the $20 million came from Canadian donor-restricted funds they were still – donor restricted!  In other words, fraudulent use by GFA-US of Canadian funds was equally as fraudulent as if the money came from US donors.  For the judge, the country of origin was not an issue.

As incredible as it seems, the lawyer for GFA implied that GFA-US did not defraud US donors, only Canadian donors – as if to say Canadian donors didn’t matter – it’s OK to cheat Canadians!

It is amazing beyond words that unsuspecting Canadians gave close to $20 million USD to help build an elaborate GFA complex in the USA, all the while believing their donations were spent in India.

The idea that GFA-India money sent from Canada was later replenished by GFA-India in India is absurd.  Why not send the money to the US directly from India in the first place?  Even if GFA did replenish the Canadian fund, it would still mean that Canadian donor money was not used as donors intended.

More Evidence of Possible Canadian Violations

Later, at a February 16, 2018 hearing, evidence was given that GFA World in Canada possibly breached laws set forth in the Criminal Code of Canada on many counts and might also be guilty of non-compliance with several CRA regulations.  (GFA World was formerly known as GFA-Canada.)

On page 62, reference is made to GFA’s Indian bank account. Deposits to this account were made from GFA-Canada’s main bank account at a Royal Bank of Canada (RBC) in Hamilton, Ontario, and from there large sums were transferred into an “Indian account” which, in fact, was not located in India, but was actually just a separate account in the same RBC bank.  GFA falsely led donors to believe that their donations had gone to India and were used for the reasons the gifts were given.  The truth was exactly opposite to their claim – the money was still in Canada.

Also on page 62 of the transcript, reference is made to a letter sent by David Carroll from GFA-US to Sarah Billings of the RBC in Hamilton, requesting that she transfer $20 million from GFA’s Indian account to GFA’s head office in the US.  On page 63, Mark. Stanley, lawyer for the plaintiffs, referred to a document showing that this money was received at the GFA head office in Texas.

Apparently, money sitting in the GFA-India RBC account grew to tens of millions of dollars and sat there for an undetermined number of years.  These massive amounts of cash undoubtedly earned interest that aided growth.  No one other than KP Yohannan and a few of his confidants knew of this. Apparently, even Canadian board members were not informed

A search of FC-6 sites In India FYE 3/31/2015 and FYE 3/31/2016 shows that for the first time, GFA entities in India reported that they received money from Canada

CANADA TO INDIA FYE 3/31/2015
From To INR USD CAD 
GFA-Canada Ayana (GFA) 658457500       10,798,703    12,247,310
GFA-Canada Believers Church       933660000       15,312,024    17,366,076
GFA-Canada Last Hour       109840000         1,801,376      2,043,024
GFA-Canada Love India       110393900         1,810,460      2,053,327
Total     1812351400       29,722,563    33,709,737

This is the first year that GFA entities in India reported receiving money from Canada. For the year that ended 12/31/2015, GFA-Canada stated on their T-3010 Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) 2015 Registered Charity Information Return, that they sent $11,105,054 to India.  However, the amount reported as received by GFA entities in India from Canada for the period is vastly different – approximately three times the amount.  Such discrepancies are common practice for GFA.

      CANADA TO INDIA FYE 3/31/2016
From To INR USD CAD
GFA World Ayana (GFA)     219660000         3,294,900      4,393,200
GFA World Believers Church   1953422565       29,301,338 39,068,451
GFA World Last Hour     614395950         9,215,939    12,287,919
GFA World Love India     695898469       10,438,477    13,917,969
Little Hills Believers Church       44077968 661,170 881,559
Total from Canada   4027454952 52,911,824 70,549,099

The following year GFA-Canada, on their 2016 T-3010 Registered Charity Information Return, did not report to the CRA the huge $70,549,099 that was sent to India. They made no mention of their secret Little Hills Corporation. To say the least, their misstatements to the Canadian and Indian authorities are startling.

Follow the Money

In a recent article in the Christian Post, Francis Chan defended Gospel For Asia against allegations of fraud due to misappropriation of finances.

I have great respect for this man of God. He is a gifted Bible expositor and motivator to love and good works.  Bible study groups in my church use his study materials and benefit greatly from them.

I described to an elder in my church the position Francis Chan has taken regarding GFA.  He thought for a moment and then spoke of the gifts of the Spirit as described in the New Testament, comparing ministry gifts to gifts of administration.  He indicated that there is no doubt that Francis Chan is a gifted minister but added that this does not mean he has the same strength when it comes to functions of administration.  Discerning the true nature of GFA’s troubling practices, particularly those by KP Yohannan, cannot be made by one whose eyes are blinded to key facts, regardless of the esteem in which that person is held for other reasons.

I spent three weeks as a guest of GFA in India.  I spoke in Kerala at their seminary and later to their head office staff. I toured with some of their leaders and spoke at their Bible training centre and at some of their churches in Tamil Nadu. I travelled to Sri Lanka to speak at their Bible training centre in that country. My daughter, Sharlene, attended the GFA seminary in Kerala for two years and graduated with a bachelor’s degree in the year 2000. The teaching staff were well qualified and spiritually minded   Sharlene, along with two others, were the first students from the West to attend the seminary. Prior to this she served as a volunteer at GFA’s head office in Dallas, TX, for six months and after graduation she worked at GFA’s Canadian office. My church supported GFA for twenty years.

Nothing in our experience indicated that anything was wrong.  I was a strong supporter of GFA and an avid advocate of their ministry encouraging others to support them. As far as I knew there was every reason to applaud voices such as Francis Chan’s in endorsing GFA.

However, the day came when I began to learn that things might not be what I had thought they were.  I began to enquire.

Where Is The Field?

My first letter to GFA was dated March 27, 2015 and was followed by a series of letters.  When I questioned why $108 million GFA-Canada reported to the CRA they had sent to India over an eight-year period was not reported to the Indian government that it was received, KP Yohannan responded by email and said:

In Canada, GFA India has a bank account owned and controlled by them. When all field donations come into our Canadian office, they are entered according to donor and designation preference by our staff at GFA Canada, and then deposited into the same bank account in Canada controlled by GFA-India.  So once the funds are deposited into that account, they are considered received on the mission field and available to the field immediately.

That money deposited in a Canadian bank was considered to be “on the field” was both surprising and alarming.  The full impact of this did not become apparent until the Murphy v. GFA court hearings took place and until GFA entities in India reported their 2015 and 2016 foreign incomes.

“Love covers a multitude of sins” (1 Peter 4:8) is wonderfully true.  It is also true that, “Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth” (1Corinthians 4:6).

Essential to true love is a love of truth, and valid discernment cannot be devoid of truth.  The truth of GFA’s deceptive financial practices as evidenced by its use of Canadian donor money is but one example of a much greater picture that remains hidden from the view of many due to repeated denials of the truth.

I pray that someday soon this will end.

……………………………..

When the recent court settlement says that all moneys sent “to the field” were used on the field, it doesn’t mean much when “the field” is this loosely defined. Donors still need to be wary.

K.P. Yohannan Gives Himself a New Name

K.P. Yohannan has taken on a fancy new name in his role as head of Believers’ Eastern Church. The K.P. formerly known as Metropolitan will now be known as Moran Mor Athanasius Yohan Metropolitan. The reason for the change is described on the church Facebook page:

I wonder if they kept the same secret handshake and hand kissing ceremony.

Mor in Syriac is a title of Lordship or sainthood. Various eastern churches use Mor and/or Moran in titles of religious leaders and Believers’ Church has followed the pattern.

Whatever he is called, he will still have to face a class action RICO suit in federal court and perhaps more over the next year or so as various cases and investigations progress in the U.S. and perhaps in Canada.