David Carroll – Page 12 – Warren Throckmorton

Gospel for Asia Appears to be Saving for a Very Rainy Day

In a recent staff meeting (May 14, 2015), Gospel for Asia leaders told staff that they had $7 million in cash balance in India. Responding to a question from a staffer about why GFA is sitting on so much cash in India, COO David Carroll answered:

That account will tend to build up over the year, it will ebb and it will flow and it will go down as money is spent. Currently, is there 94 million dollars in there or someone asked is there $150 million dollar fund on the field? No, currently the balances from what I understand from India are around 7 million dollars in that particular, those particular accounts. The reason that they are there is because we have to report all foreign contributions that come in. Money will swell and as we spend the money the money will go. We cannot spend the money until we can spend it on the project for which it was designated.

This puzzled me because it seems to contradict the financial contribution reports filed with the Indian government every year. Something isn’t adding up when one compares Carroll’s information to what is filed with the Indian government. According to the most recent report showing GFA’s use of foreign contributions for the Indian fiscal year ending March 31, 2014, GFA alone had $54,929,800 listed as a cash balance. If you include the other entities that receive money from U.S. based GFA controlled limited liability corporations, the balance swells to $158,165,400.*

GFA and Believers’ Church both receive money from several LLCs with Texas addresses (e.g., see this list). Two other groups do as well: Last Hour Ministry, and Love India Ministry. The image below shows the cash balances for each of those organizations in India. These numbers do not include U.S. operations, which are likewise substantial.

Carroll is correct that funds designated for a particular purpose cannot be used for another purpose and so if GFA receives a lot of money for something that is not needed on the field, then they have to wait until they need it to spend it. The report filed with the Indian government provides a reasonable amount of detail about where funds have been and are designated to be spent (see the entire report here). See below:

Note the red boxes on the right side of this chart. The cash balance GFA reported to the Indian government was (in rupees) 3,288,264,488.79. Using the exchange rate on March 31, 2014, this converts to $54, 929,800. Similar calculations led to the image above showing over $150 million. Also note that the previous balance was (in rupees) 2,984251885.50. At the March 31, 2013 exchange rate, that converts to $54,601,600 as a cash balance in 2013.

Donors might have a lot of questions after reviewing this information. For instance, what is a Corpus Fund, and why was $21,512,100 sitting in it as of March 31, 2014? It doesn’t appear that any foreign funds were spent on welfare of widows and orphans. There may be perfectly good explanations for all of the questions raised by these reports. However, given GFA’s promises, the massive amounts of money involved, and the other issues identified of late, there is no reason the public and staff shouldn’t ask.

To explore these reports, go to the foreign contributions portal, and then click on the years of interest. All data are not available for 2014-2015 as yet, so click 2013-2014 for the most recent data. Then also click on “Kerala” for the state and hit submit. There you will see all of the charities operating in Kerala. Find Gospel for Asia, Believers’ Church, Love India Ministry, and Last Hour Ministry. Historical exchange rates can be found here.

*I am using exchange rates from March 31, 2014.

Gospel for Asia Tells Staff Carrying Cash to India is Legal But They Won’t Do it Anymore

Last week, I reported the testimony of several former Gospel for Asia students and staffers who told me that GFA asked them to carry envelopes of cash into India.Some groups may have carried as much as $135,000 in cash to India via individual envelopes of cash packed in luggage or backpacks. According to U.S. law, more than $10,000 leaving or entering the country must be declared and cannot be split up among co-travelers to evade declaration. No source I spoke with filled out any customs forms to declare the cash as required by law.

I asked GFA COO David Carroll for comment or explanation before that article was published with no response. I have reached out again this week but have not heard back.

In the mean time, I was given audio of a staff meeting which took place last week after my article was published where GFA leaders Carroll, KP Yohannan, and Danny Yohannan answered a staff question about the practice of various GFA travelers carrying money to India. In the meeting, the leaders acknowledged that students, pastors and staff had carried cash to India. Even though staff have complained for months, the staff were just informed last week that GFA leaders have decided to discontinue it. Listen to the segment in response to a question from a female staffer:

(Author’s note: During the week of November 13, 2015, GFA, through attorneys, demanded the removal of the audio from this post. Even though the use of the audio is in keeping with fair use of the material, I decided to post a link to the audio rather than embed it.)

Listen to the segment of the May 14, 2015 staff meeting (click the link)
Transcript:

Female staffer: Ok, so the money regarding the students taken over to India, you know we have to carry the money over. How is that audited? Because if I lost my backpack, all that money would have been lost, and that’s money from sponsors and donors. So why is that put in place, and if it was lost, how would you track that?

David Carroll: That’s a good question and actually that was going to be one of the next questions that we answered because someone wrote a very emotional question about that and said why we were endangering students by having them carry the money to India, and I just want to say that for whoever asked the question that I’m sorry we’ve given you, truly sorry that we’ve given you the impression that we were endangering students. A couples things you should know we would never endanger students or anyone else, we’ve had pastors carry money, we’ve had staff carry money, we’re always looking for ways to get money into India because the reality is that it’s getting more difficult to do that, and we are looking for other ways that we’re able to do that. But we checked with our auditors before we ever would allow such a practice. We actually called Bland Garvey, they’re our audit firm and said this is what we’re planning to do, this is what we are intending to do, and they told us how we get it receipted they said it’s completely legal, you’re under all limits, you need to get receipts, there need to be receipts here, there need to be receipts there which Lori has receipts from here. The Indian side also account for that money as received. If you were to lose it, they couldn’t receive it, and in that case, we would say it’s lost basically. We would have to tell the auditors we gave it and it didn’t get to the other side and I’m sure they wouldn’t be very happy, but is it receipted on the other side as received, and accounted for? Yes, it is on the other side of the pond.
So, we have stopped that practice, we feel that it put more emotional burden on people than we realized and then we wanted to and so…

KP Yohannan: It is a perception problem also. Like when I go to Burma and Nepal, I carry quite a lot of travelers checks and get into the country and cash it into local currency and I give it and then the border department, they account for that money in the local Burmese currency or wherever I’ve been to so (?). It’s a legal thing, you cannot carry any more than $5000 and not declare it but when you get India, Nepal, Burma, you can cash it, you can burn it, you can eat it, you can throw it away, you can give it, it is a local currency you are giving it and so receipts are accounted in the book are reported to the government (?) and that is an absolute thing because what I am trying to say, it’s not trying to be under the radar, or illegal smuggling money into the country, nothing like that.

Carroll: We had heard that one explanation you were given was that the tax rate is high, which would indicate that we’re trying to avoid tax on the money and that’s not the case. I’m sorry if that got skewed but that’s not the case. It’s actually reported on the other side legally so we can do everything we’re supposed to do in reporting that money to the Indian government.

Yohannan: But we don’t do that anymore.

Carroll: We’ve stopped the practice.

Danny Yohannan: We are always looking for legal ways to bring resources into the ministry, but also over there we’re trying to be as responsible to even raise funds on that side…

Shorter GFA: We did nothing wrong and we won’t do it again.

Several questions come to mind. If GFA is not trying to be “under the radar” then why are students given $4500 each? In India, customs would need to be informed in individuals bring in $5000 or more. Clearly, more than $5000 at a time was sent from Texas to India (the smallest group I have heard about so far is 10 people = $45,000; largest was 30 – $135,000). Thus, structuring the transfer among the students to avoid informing the Indian officials seems to be flying under the radar. Furthermore, on the U.S. side, the law requires aggregate amounts more than $10,000 to be declared. If there is no desire to hide the full amount being sent from Texas to India, then why give each member of the group $4500? Why give cash to students, ministry partners and pastors at all? Why not have the GFA staffer in charge simply declare the entire amount when leaving the U.S. and when arriving in India?

It is hard to understand the reason that GFA needs to get money to India. GFA sends millions to India through established channels. It seems hard to understand why donor funds have been risked in this manner.

None of my sources recall getting receipts in India.

A new source told me that a group of between 20-30 people traveled to India in April, each carrying $4500. If GFA has discontinued the practice, it happened just recently. At this point, very little of the explanation given by GFA can be verified. Emails to Bland Garvey and David Carroll have gone unanswered. However, it is now clear that GFA has been moving large amounts of cash from Texas to India via students, staff and pastors.

Money Travels With the Passengers on Gospel for Asia Mission Trips to India

Gospel for Asia sponsors frequent “vision trips” to India. These trips help inspire donors and prospective ministry workers to give time and money to the work of GFA. In Texas, GFA runs a School of Discipleship and the students at the school often go as a group to India as a part of their work. According to some former GFA travelers, they pack more than cameras and a toothbrush.
For over two years, some GFA travelers to India have been packing envelopes of cash designed to be taken into India and given unopened to GFA headquarters in Kerala, India. According to my sources, GFA staff in Texas have on multiple occasions given GFA travelers sealed envelopes filled with cash and said that the envelope contained $4500. The travelers — who were traveling together in groups of various sizes — were told the figure of $4500 was designed to avoid the need to declare the cash in India. Amounts of $5000 or more must be declared upon arrival. According to federal law, any amount of cash may be taken out of the country, but amounts of $10,000 or more must be declared when leaving or entering the U.S. According to my sources, the GFA groups were carrying far more than $10,000 per trip.
Over the last several days, I have spoken to five GFA travelers* who carried money to India in this manner and have examined GFA source information which described the practice. The sources said that most if not all members of their groups carried the envelopes filled with $4500. For instance, a group of ten people carried $45,000. I asked GFA COO David Carroll for comment but he has not replied.
Pushing the Envelope
One individual told me that a GFA leader told a group of travelers that taxes were high in India and by taking undeclared cash, the ministry would benefit. According to all sources, each individual in the GFA groups received a sealed envelope from GFA leaders in Texas. I was told that one group had ten people carrying cash ($45,000 at one time) and another source said there were 30 travelers in a group (a maximum of $135,000). The travelers were told that each package contained $4500 and that each member of the group would turn in the envelope to a GFA leader in Kerala, India. The money did not belong to the travelers and was not to be used for expenses. The envelopes were to remain sealed and turned over to a GFA leader at headquarters or a Synod office for the Believers Church. Some specifically named Siny Punnose, who works in finance for GFA in India. Some groups consisted of students, some of ministry partners, and at times, pastors have been asked to carry funds.
All sources felt odd about taking the money. One person said fear of losing it or having it stolen was a constant preoccupation. They worried they were doing something that didn’t sound right. Even though the leaders assured them that the practice was fine, it still didn’t seem right.
And, in fact, the travelers may have been right to worry.
Currency Structuring
One may leave or enter the United States with any amount of cash. However, a person who has $10,000 or more must declare it on a form designed by Customs and Border Protection when leaving or entering the U.S. As a recent CBP press release says, one may not split it up and have others carry it for you. In this case, GFA asked the travelers to carry much more than the $10,000 limit in total.

If travelers have someone else carry the currency or monetary instrument for them, they must file a currency report for the entire amount with CBP. Failure to report may result in seizure of the currency and/or arrest.

Another CBP press release tells of an Italian man who attempted to come into the country with more than $10k along with “co-travelers.”

During a secondary inspection, the man, who arrived from Italy, reported possessing $11,700. It was later discovered that the man had given money to two co-travelers in order to evade currency reporting requirements, an illegal practice known as currency structuring. In total the cash added up to $24,644. CBP officers seized the money, issued the man a $1,000 penalty, and then returned the remaining cash back to the man.

The reporting requirements apply to travelers leaving and entering the country.

International travelers who arrive or depart the United States in possession of more than $10,000 or equivalent foreign currency are required to report all currency to CBP officers and complete a Treasury Department Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) form. (emphasis added)

Federal law appears to forbid such undeclared money moves without declaration. None of my sources report any forms filed. Note that the relevant federal law forbids aiding, commanding, or requesting such moves in the aggregate:

§ 103.23 Reports of transportation of currency or monetary instruments.

(a) Each person who physically transports, mails, or ships, or causes to be physically transported, mailed, or shipped, or attempts to physically transport, mail or ship, or attempts to cause to be physically transported, mailed or shipped, currency or other monetary instruments in an aggregate amount exceeding $10,000 at one time from the United States to any place outside the United States, or into the United States from any place outside the United States, shall make a report thereof. A person is deemed to have caused such transportation, mailing or shipping when he aids, abets, counsels, commands, procures, or requests it to be done by a financial institution or any other person. (emphasis added)

(b) Each person who receives in the U.S. currency or other monetary instruments in an aggregate amount exceeding $10,000 at one time which have been transported, mailed, or shipped to such person from any place outside the United States with respect to which a report has not been filed under paragraph (a) of this section, whether or not required to be filed thereunder, shall make a report thereof, stating the amount, the date of receipt, the form of monetary instruments, and the person from whom received.

I am not an attorney and realize that there may be some unknown facts which make this all fine. However, it seems strange to me. GFA can wire money to India and does so frequently. There are many other ways to get money to the field which can be verified transparently. If these travelers are accurate in their reports, GFA is causing hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash to be transported without declaration. This practice seems risky and fraught with many negatives and potentials for abuse.
I want to repeat that on Tuesday I asked GFA’s David Carroll for comment and explanation.
*All sources spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation from GFA. None of the people I spoke with are affiliated with the GFA Diaspora.

Gospel for Asia Declines to Answer New Questions About Use of Funds

Up until yesterday, David Carroll of Gospel for Asia has responded quickly to questions regarding Gospel for Asia’s disputes with former staff and certain financial policies. However, recently, I asked Carroll questions about substantial reserves maintained by GFA in India and apparent reporting discrepancies in Canada and India. In response, Carroll informed me yesterday that responding to questions had “become a distraction from our mission work” and for that reason, his email would be his “final response.”
Earlier this week I asked Carroll about claims by former staffer Johnson George that GFA founder and Metropolitan Bishop K.P. Yohannan maintained multiple substantial homes (George called at least one them a “mansion”) in India. Then I asked about the existence of a reserve fund in India of about $150 million which is maintained as a balance by GFA. Carroll did not answer either of those questions. He did answer some questions about GFA’s corporate structure and nonprofit status. I reported those answers elsewhere.
Finally, I asked why a 2013 movement of GFA funds sent from Canada to India did not line up in Canadian and Indian public records as required by law. He initially responded by saying, “The Canadian funds were combined with U.S. funds by our auditor in India for various accounting reasons. There is no requirement that they be reported separately.”
I replied by asking for contact information for the Indian auditor so I could clear up what appears to me to be a conflict with Canadian and possibly Indian law. Carroll replied by saying:

No, Gospel for Asia has not violated the law.
When you first contacted us, I mentioned that we would not be able to respond to every question you put before us. Now, with the increased volume and frequency of your questions, it has become clear that this back and forth has become a distraction from our mission work. For this reason, this will be my final response. We understand that you will continue to explore issues around Gospel for Asia and continue to be fed accusations from former employees, and we accept that.
We continue to remain accountable to all applicable laws and regulations, to the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability and to independent auditors.

If GFA was accountable to the ECFA guidelines then they would not view transparency as a distraction. However, as we have seen, the ECFA isn’t transparent, nor will the organization disclose any problems it finds with a member organization.
A sizable number of former GFA staff have raised significant and troubling charges regarding leadership and financial practices at GFA. There are many more which I have not been able to look into as yet. Mr. Carroll’s response is not an encouraging sign.
Click here for all articles on Gospel for Asia.

Is There a Controlling Leadership Culture at Gospel for Asia?

The day before yesterday, I published correspondence between Gospel for Asia leaders and a group of nearly 80 former Gospel for Asia staffers. The former staffers have accused Gospel for Asia leaders of five major problems. From GFA’s perspective, a board investigation turned up no wrongdoing according the GFA COO David Carroll. The five charges are:

1. GFA leadership practices and teaches a false view of spiritual authority.
2. GFA leadership prioritizes ministry over family, and teaches the same.
3. GFA leaders lie or intentionally deceive people in order to “protect” the ministry.
4. GFA practices unbiblical shunning.
5. GFA prohibits or discourages staff involvement in bible studies, small groups and local churches.

Today, I want to examine the first allegation. In their letter, GFA former employees (GFA Diaspora – GFAD) accuse GFA leaders of asserting inappropriate control over the personal lives of employees. For instance, the GFAD letter says (K.P. refers to K.P. Yohannan, the founder of the organization):

K.P. once said at a prayer meeting that it would be sin to say “I’ll pray about it” instead of “Yes sir,” were he to request you move to Burma.

The letter also claims that GFA leaders believe they will be held accountable if their directives lead to negative outcomes.

They teach that God will not hold a staff member accountable if they sin in following GFA leadership. They teach that only GFA leadership would be accountable in the event that leadership steered them wrong. This is a false teaching, very similar to the the Shepherding Movement of the 1970s. GFA leaders have also told some staff who wanted to leave that they didn’t approve them leaving, as though they would be in sin by rebelling against the God-appointed leaders of their entire lives if they leave.

Another problem, say the GFAD, is the authority claimed by K.P. Yohannan while in India.

On the field, K.P. functions as an episcopal bishop, with the title, “His Eminence (or H.E.) Most Reverend Dr. K.P. Yohannan, Metropolitan Bishop,” and wears the robe, hat, ring and some other accompanying items. Staff and leaders there commonly kneel or bow and kiss K.P.’s ring in a sign of veneration (some of us are witnesses to this and one former field leader says “everyone” does it.)

As evidence, the GFAD show this picture of K.P. Yohannan in robes with a bishop’s staff.

I asked GFA COO David Carroll about this picture and he told me that “the picture you have was taken at an ordination service a few years ago, where it is a custom to dress in formal attire. This was a rare ceremonial occasion in India, and the special clothing was worn to honor local customs (much like is done here in the West for a graduation service).” Carroll told me that he has never seen anyone kissing Yohannan’s ring and was unaware of anyone doing it.
Regarding church structure in India, Carroll said the organization is “thoroughly evangelical.” He added that “our organization and church structure is specific and unique to the areas where we work most heavily. Additionally, K.P. Yohannan’s title is understood in the countries where we work to refer to the senior leader of the organization.” GFA’s website also addresses the reasons for a more episcopal form of governance as being helpful in the countries where they register as a church.
Regarding the charges of personal control, the GFA responses have denied the allegations. In a July email from GFA to GFAD, the spokesperson for GFA (identified as “David”) said:

This accusation is unfounded and false. Furthermore, the specific testimonies of these accusations by some of the signers of this letter differ greatly and/or lack key documented facts about the actual circumstances surrounding their testimony. Although we tried to contact every single one of you to discuss particulars and come to reconciliation, you refused to contact us back and give us that opportunity. With a clear conscience before God, we believe that GFA leadership regularly encourages staff (at morning and evening prayer meetings, new staff mentoring teachings, required readings, Sunday Bible studies, etc, etc) to have a vibrant daily walk with Christ, with the foundation of that being a few hours of daily Bible study, private prayer, and corporate prayer. The emphasis is always, if the tree is good, the fruit will be good also. In addition, GFA leadership will take the time to listen and to help staff with life issues when they are approached, but are careful not to control personal decisions, including where staff choose to worship, who they marry, where they live, etc. That said, Gospel for Asia is not a vocation or a job; it is a God-given calling. If someone chooses to serve at GFA (all of GFA not just Dallas), they also choose to follow the requests of leadership including where they will serve and what they will do, as long as they believe they are called by God to serve there. This is also true of secular companies (such as McDonald’s, IBM, Wal-Mart) or the Army, and anywhere that people are to do what is asked of them as a requirement of their job or service. We cannot call this sin, nor will we apologize for this commitment which is taught by our Lord Jesus, Himself, and is normal for many Christian as well as some secular organizations. Finally, in your original letter, you included a photo of Brother K. P. in his formal dress as the Metropolitan of the church during an ordination service. Since Believers Church operates under government approved church status as a constitutional episcopacy, it is required that he wear this uniform during the ceremony of ordination of pastors. This is done only for a few minutes; much like it is done during college graduation ceremony here in the west. We are NOT Catholic, nor are we Episcopalians, nor Anglicans, etc., etc. Rather, we are a Spirit-filled, evangelical church, born out of obedience to Christ’s Great Commission command to make disciples in all the world.

In a more formal response to GFAD, GFA again denied the substance of this claim. In the most recent statement from GFA, COO David Carroll said:

At the same time, our leadership team examined our HR policies and procedures, making improvements wherever possible, and affirmed the freedoms afforded to those called to the work of Gospel for Asia. While the board investigation concluded that there was no wrongdoing on the part of leadership, we recognize that, as humans, our leadership is not always going to be perfect.

This newest statement seems to recognize that some of the allegations may have some substance but did not admit to pervasive problems. A red flag for me in the GFA reply to the first letter is the following:

That said, Gospel for Asia is not a vocation or a job; it is a God-given calling. If someone chooses to serve at GFA (all of GFA not just Dallas), they also choose to follow the requests of leadership including where they will serve and what they will do, as long as they believe they are called by God to serve there. This is also true of secular companies (such as McDonald’s, IBM, Wal-Mart) or the Army, and anywhere that people are to do what is asked of them as a requirement of their job or service. We cannot call this sin, nor will we apologize for this commitment which is taught by our Lord Jesus, Himself, and is normal for many Christian as well as some secular organizations.

Comparing GFA to a secular job is what “David” said one cannot do (“…Gospel for Asia is not a vocation or a job…”). If an IBM employee refuses to re-locate, then that job might be in some jeopardy but the employee’s standing with God would not be. If GFA makes disagreement over personal calling a matter of disobedience to God, then there is a problem with that practice. If GFA claims to speak God’s will for individual employees, then the potential for abuse is obvious.
In GFAD’s follow up letter in September 2014, the concerns over leadership and authority continued:

However, each of us saw troubling signs. Authority was being abused, ministry was prioritized at the expense of family, the ministry’s image was protected through dishonesty, and isolation from believers in the local church was encouraged except to raise funds. Seeing these behaviors come from our respected leaders left us puzzled, as you might imagine.
One of the prevalent GFA teachings is that we should never share concerns with anyone but leadership. We were strongly discouraged from discussing issues with one another or with anyone outside GFA, which included our families and home churches, because we were warned that these people don’t understand our high calling and might pull us away. As a result, most of us did not share our concerns with anyone outside leadership until now.
At GFA, the teaching on submission to authority is strong. They say the Bible alone is authoritative, but in practice, it is the Bible as interpreted by Brother KP or other leaders. Because of this, searching the Scriptures like the Bereans did is not commended but is discouraged. To question or disagree with something on which GFA leadership has clearly spoken is generally labeled as murmuring, grumbling or rebellion. When we did voice our concerns to a leader, sometimes he listened and explained. But commonly he responded with anger because our honest questions were viewed as rebellion—and some of us were fired on the spot! If not fired, we faced ongoing suspicion and distrust from leadership that led to isolation and ostracism from staff families. Whether we resigned or were terminated, most of us did not receive an exit interview. A hint of fear remains whenever we question GFA because we have been taught that to question leadership is like the rebellion of Korah. This may be a reason our first letter was not well received.

According to GFAD, some GFA employees have reached out to make apology to individual members of the GFAD group. However, GFAD is looking for a more systemic response to their concerns. According to Carroll, the GFA board has taken their concerns seriously and made corrections where necessary. However, very little of what either side claims can be independently verified.
I have read quite a few testimonies from former workers which are not yet available publicly. These narratives do present a pattern of intrusion and an expectation that small details of life be cleared with ministry leaders. However, while they sound compelling, I have not been able to verify them as yet. Perhaps as more people come forward publicly, the picture will get clearer.
For now, interested readers can use these documents as a starting point for their research into GFA as a tool to help best steward their resources. Stay tuned for more.
I intend to cover the other four allegations and explore a few other areas of interest.