The rules governing what non-profits are allowed to do with respect to legislation can be confusing and downright frightening with the threat of losing your non-profit status if you do the wrong thing. Anne will cover the basic definitions and rules of advocacy and lobbying. She will highlight some of the main considerations each group should make and encourage discussion on why non-profit groups should take advantage of lobbying.
Financial Accountability for Board Members. Sponsored by the Lafayette Community Foundation and the Indiana Nonprofit Resource Network, this program provides basic information and tools to help nonprofit board members understand and comply with their fiduciary responsibilities
Financial Accountability for Board Members. Sponsored by the Lafayette Community Foundation and the Indiana Nonprofit Resource Network, this program provides basic information and tools to help nonprofit board members understand and comply with their fiduciary responsibilities
A transparent decision-making process in which leadership of a civil society organization, in an effective and accountable way, directs resources and exercises power on the basis of shared values.
Presentation from ICNL's Workshop 'Developing Civil Society Law in Bahrain' . This and many other presentations on the subject can be downloaded at http://www.icnl.org/programs/location/mena/bahrain/
**Presented by Robin Singh**
Common Pitfalls While Implementing an Anti-corruption Program
1. Management's today, in their hunger for success and appreciation of shareholders equity tend to forget the core essence behind the words in their vision and mission statements, corporate social responsibilities, duties towards employees, third parties etc.
2. Today companies around the world plagued with challenges associated with corruption. While strong leadership from the top is necessary. It has to be one joint effort.An Anti-corruption program success requires changes in behaviour from your senior and middle managers, employees, contractors, suppliers, and all related parties that play a part in forming a living entity.
3. This presentation describes several reasons why anti-corruption programs often fail and provides practical recommendations to strengthen and improve an anti-corruption practice that needs to be incorporated.
What Every Lawyer Should Know about Political Law ComplianceQuarles & Brady
The laws regulating state lobbying, ethics and campaign finance compliance are ever-changing. All lawyers who work for, or with, corporations should understand how to spot these compliance challenges in their organization. We will give a basic overview of political compliance laws, and present an array of policy and procedural solutions if issues do arise.
Vince Brisini, Olympus Power, LLC, “Making Sense of the SENSE Act”Michael Hewitt, GISP
The Satisfying Energy Needs and Saving the Environment Act or “SENSE Act” addresses the sulfur dioxide (SO2) Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) allowance issue and the Mercury and Air Toxics (MATS) acid gas standard issues for bituminous coal refuse to energy plants. This is accomplished in a fashion that preserves the CSAPR SO2 budget by reallocating SO2 allowances from retired units and units fuel switched from coal to natural gas to the bituminous coal refuse fired units. The MATS acid gas issue is accomplished by providing an alternative, additional performance-based SO2 standard. The SENSE Act does not permit SO2 allowances allocated under the SENSE Act to be transferred to any other facility and requires the surrender of those SENSE Act SO2 allowances upon retirement or fuel switching of the unit. By preserving the CSAPR SO2 budget, the Clean Air Act Section 110 “Good Neighbor” provisions for particulate matter are protected, the “CSAPR is better than BART” decision for regional haze is protected and because the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) monetized benefits are based on the same SO2 emission rate as CSAPR, the MATS monetized benefits are also protected. The only air toxic that has been identified by EPA with a monetized benefit in MATS is mercury and a number of these coal refuse-fired facilities were used to set the mercury standard required by MATS. Under the SENSE Act, all of these regulatory and monetized benefits are protected while allowing the bituminous coal refuse fired facilities to continue their efforts in cleaning up coal refuse and remediating and reclaiming mining affected lands. Plus, the communities in which these facilities are located and where the coal refuse is removed will continue to experience the economic benefits of these facilities.
Elizabeth Ricketts Marcus, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, “Profits, Prom...Michael Hewitt, GISP
Increased demand for coal during World War I brought industrial expansion and robust profits for coal operators, while miners were asked to make patriotic wage sacrifices in return for promises of post-war economic prosperity. Soaring inflation exacerbated by a sharply contracting demand for coal in the immediate post-war period culminated in an explosive clash between labor and capital in 1919 over wages, unionism, and the definition of Americanism.
A transparent decision-making process in which leadership of a civil society organization, in an effective and accountable way, directs resources and exercises power on the basis of shared values.
Presentation from ICNL's Workshop 'Developing Civil Society Law in Bahrain' . This and many other presentations on the subject can be downloaded at http://www.icnl.org/programs/location/mena/bahrain/
**Presented by Robin Singh**
Common Pitfalls While Implementing an Anti-corruption Program
1. Management's today, in their hunger for success and appreciation of shareholders equity tend to forget the core essence behind the words in their vision and mission statements, corporate social responsibilities, duties towards employees, third parties etc.
2. Today companies around the world plagued with challenges associated with corruption. While strong leadership from the top is necessary. It has to be one joint effort.An Anti-corruption program success requires changes in behaviour from your senior and middle managers, employees, contractors, suppliers, and all related parties that play a part in forming a living entity.
3. This presentation describes several reasons why anti-corruption programs often fail and provides practical recommendations to strengthen and improve an anti-corruption practice that needs to be incorporated.
What Every Lawyer Should Know about Political Law ComplianceQuarles & Brady
The laws regulating state lobbying, ethics and campaign finance compliance are ever-changing. All lawyers who work for, or with, corporations should understand how to spot these compliance challenges in their organization. We will give a basic overview of political compliance laws, and present an array of policy and procedural solutions if issues do arise.
Vince Brisini, Olympus Power, LLC, “Making Sense of the SENSE Act”Michael Hewitt, GISP
The Satisfying Energy Needs and Saving the Environment Act or “SENSE Act” addresses the sulfur dioxide (SO2) Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) allowance issue and the Mercury and Air Toxics (MATS) acid gas standard issues for bituminous coal refuse to energy plants. This is accomplished in a fashion that preserves the CSAPR SO2 budget by reallocating SO2 allowances from retired units and units fuel switched from coal to natural gas to the bituminous coal refuse fired units. The MATS acid gas issue is accomplished by providing an alternative, additional performance-based SO2 standard. The SENSE Act does not permit SO2 allowances allocated under the SENSE Act to be transferred to any other facility and requires the surrender of those SENSE Act SO2 allowances upon retirement or fuel switching of the unit. By preserving the CSAPR SO2 budget, the Clean Air Act Section 110 “Good Neighbor” provisions for particulate matter are protected, the “CSAPR is better than BART” decision for regional haze is protected and because the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) monetized benefits are based on the same SO2 emission rate as CSAPR, the MATS monetized benefits are also protected. The only air toxic that has been identified by EPA with a monetized benefit in MATS is mercury and a number of these coal refuse-fired facilities were used to set the mercury standard required by MATS. Under the SENSE Act, all of these regulatory and monetized benefits are protected while allowing the bituminous coal refuse fired facilities to continue their efforts in cleaning up coal refuse and remediating and reclaiming mining affected lands. Plus, the communities in which these facilities are located and where the coal refuse is removed will continue to experience the economic benefits of these facilities.
Elizabeth Ricketts Marcus, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, “Profits, Prom...Michael Hewitt, GISP
Increased demand for coal during World War I brought industrial expansion and robust profits for coal operators, while miners were asked to make patriotic wage sacrifices in return for promises of post-war economic prosperity. Soaring inflation exacerbated by a sharply contracting demand for coal in the immediate post-war period culminated in an explosive clash between labor and capital in 1919 over wages, unionism, and the definition of Americanism.
Mark Killar, Western Pennsylvania Conservancy, “Sewickley Creek Cost/Benefit ...Michael Hewitt, GISP
Throughout Pennsylvania, many non-profit organizations have developed restoration plans for AMD impaired watersheds. To secure federal AML funding through Pennsylvania’s Abandoned Mine Reclamation Program and with other federal programs, those plans must include a cost/benefits analysis to assure that funds from the program are spent wisely. In an effort to assist in the development of a cost/benefit analysis for AMD projects being proposed for a qualified hydrologic unit watershed, Western Pennsylvania Conservancy worked with Hedin Environmental, through a technical assistance grant provided by Trout Unlimited’s Eastern Abandoned Mines Program, to develop a treatment cost calculator, which could compare costs on a variety of AMD treatment types. This presentation will demonstrate how it was used to develop a cost/benefit analysis for priority AMD discharges within the Sewickley Creek watershed in Westmoreland County.
Brian Bradley, PA DEP, “Pennsylvania AML/AMD Program and Funding Overview”Michael Hewitt, GISP
The presentation will provide updates on the status of PA’s AML/AMD program and the outlook of current and future funding. The topics presented will include: BAMR’s Fund Management Responsibilities and Balances; Re-unification of the AML and AMD programs under BAMR’s umbrella; Present status of the AMD program and plans for moving forward; Updates on new and developing AML/AMD programs including the $90 million AML Economic Enhancement and Reuse Pilot Program, PA’s AML Emergency Program, and the RECLAIM Act (H.R. 4456); and, highlights on a few of the major AML hazard projects BAMR currently has underway.
The 114th Congress has featured a significant amount of legislative activity related to Abandoned Mine Lands (AML). The Gold King Mine Spill in August of 2015 brought AML to the forefront of national attention, invigorating consideration of the many-faceted dilemma posed by the AML sites. The state AML programs have long endeavored to educate lawmakers and inform debate on potential solutions, bringing their practical experience and technical expertise to bear on the search for policies that best address the wide range of effects felt by AML-impacted communities. The National Association of Abandoned Mine Lands Programs (NAAMLP) and Interstate Mining Compact Commission (IMCC) provide a forum for state AML program managers to discuss contemporary issues in AML policy and enables them to make concerted recommendations to policy-makers. This presentation will review and provide state regulatory perspectives on the AML-related topics under consideration during the 114th Congress, including: Hardrock AML, Reauthorization of the AML fee, Response to the Gold King Mine Spill, Good Samaritan Liability Protection, AML Appropriations, Economic Revitalization, and others. This presentation will also include a review of specific bills and legislative proposals put forward in the current Congress and provide an account of the positions and actions taken by state AML regulatory authorities through NAAMLP and IMCC.
Melissa Meade, Temple University, “Dialogical Communication and Digital Citiz...Michael Hewitt, GISP
Emerging from doctoral research and adding infrastructure to the fragmented digital footprint of the Anthracite Region, Melissa created the “Anthracite Region” Facebook page (now with 7,700 members) and the anthracitecoalregion.com website as a public digital collaboratory wherein residents engage in community dialogue. This talk will discuss issues of environmental and economic concern expressed by residents: What is the socio-economic legacy of the Anthracite Coal Industry? What does extraction mean to residents in this single-industry area? How do residents relate to local landscapes and ruins?
Tiff Hilton, “Manganese—Misunderstood, Mis-Regulated, & Mistaken for a Problem”Michael Hewitt, GISP
Manganese limits set forth by the Clean Water Act were not based on the toxicity of Manganese. And, as it turns out, the side effects from the treatment for manganese removal is a problem, not the Manganese. West Virginia adopted what is known as the “Five Mile Rule”, which stated that the human health criterion for manganese would only apply within a five mile zone up-stream from a public intake. This action, along with the existing available tools such as Alkaline Mine Drainage limits (No manganese) and Post Mining Limits (Report Only Limits) helped to substantially reduce the adverse effects created from the treatment itself.
The cleanup of AMD itself presents economic opportunities in addition to, of course, all the environmental benefits that result from cleaner streams and restored lands. It is vitally important that key policy makers understand the importance and benefits of AMD cleanup, and in particular the economic benefits. This presentation will highlight the findings from a recently completed study that focused on job creation around the long-term maintenance of passive treatment systems across Pennsylvania.
Joe Pizarchik, OSMRE Director, “Future of AML Funding and Changing Prospects ...Michael Hewitt, GISP
Joe Pizarchik is the 10th Director of the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Office of Surface Mining. An Indiana County, Pennsylvania native, Joseph Pizarchik attended the Pennsylvania State University, first at the Altoona Campus and then graduating from University Park in 1979. Pizarchik was one of the authors of Pennsylvania’s Environmental Good Samaritan Act and provided counsel during the development and implementation of the Good Samaritan program. Pizarchik is also credited with helping clear the way for the sale of private mining property to the Families of Flight 93 to enable the construction of the national memorial, a project to which he remains committed.
Len Lichvar, Somerset Conservation District, “Economics of Conservation Recre...Michael Hewitt, GISP
Investing in natural resource conservation provides an economic return that is not always easy to determine or confirm and is not often focused on or fully realized by those who pursue resource conservation and all those who benefit from that return on investment. This program will provide a few different methods and view points and data to understand and appreciate that return on investment in simple everyday terms.
Melissa Reckner, Kiski-Conemaugh Stream Team, “State of the Kiski-Conemaugh R...Michael Hewitt, GISP
The Conemaugh Valley Conservancy is working to update the Kiski-Conemaugh River Basin Conservation Plan, published in 1999. It is documenting the status of the 121 recommendations made in the Plan and is quantifying chemical and biological changes in key waterways over the last 16 years due to the numerous restoration projects that transpired as a result of the Plan and watershed initiatives. This presentation will highlight significant findings, trends, and areas of concern.
Mr. Korb presents the case for an organization dedicated to marketing, preserving, and interpreting the anthracite region’s industrial heritage, cultural diversity, the labor traditions and capitalist innovations, creation of landscapes and ecosystems, and its people and their stories.
Kevin Kraus, Saint Francis University Environmental Engineering Department, “...Michael Hewitt, GISP
Ancient technology that found its roots in the Catalan Forge in Spain, has seen a revival in recent years to treat acid mine drainage. This technology harnesses the power of hydraulics and hydrology by passively compressing air via the use of falling water, using no moving parts. A group of recently-graduated students from Saint Francis University have done extensive research in attempt to procure sizing guidance and parameters for the installation of this passive technology.
The Rock Tunnel Passive Treatment System is located in Somerset County, PA and was one the first of its kind to be constructed in the Stonycreek River watershed. The original system was completed in 1993, however site conditions were a limiting factor to appropriately size the system to the volume of mine water flows. Since 1993 the system has undergone two major alterations to enhance water treatment. The Somerset Conservation District has been involved with this project since its inception and has worked diligently to utilize new technologies at this site. The 2014/15 reconstruction of the Rock Tunnel PTS is an example of how these efforts have allowed move closer to our goal.
Luke Monette, OSMRE, “Drones and their use in Environmental Monitoring”Michael Hewitt, GISP
The Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM), in cooperation with the US Geological Survey and BLM, conducted aerial inspections over the past several years, using a small unmanned aerial system (SUAS). This was part of an ongoing project to determine if SUAS may be used effectively, efficiently, and with reasonable cost to assist in OSM’s mandated oversight duties. The products derived from the SUAVs sensors: spatially accurate mosaicked images and a derivative 3D representation of the surface; demonstrated technology that can be used effectively to measure features within active coal mines. With the mosaicked images and 3D model at their fingertips, SMRCA personnel can easily determine if features meet applicable State and Federal laws and regulations or need further investigation. This presentation will provide participants a brief overview of this work, future plans, emerging technology and some of the rules and regulations in use of SUAS.
The Bolivian highlands (Altiplano) are host to some of the world’s richest mineral deposits. The Department of Potosí, Bolivia has been intensively mined for nearly five centuries, resulting in extensive environmental degradation and contamination of soil and water resources. In order to demonstrate a way to begin to restore this highly degraded landscape, a demonstration project has been established in a valley south of Cerro Rico (the world’s richest silver deposit). The past and current activities have had to surmount a myriad of challenges from purely technical (e.g., lack of suitable equipment, road failures, work on extreme slopes, rainy season earth instability) to purely non-technical (e.g., general strikes, road blockades, inter-partner communication issues, volunteer workforce management). Despite the difficulties involved, this transfer of technology born in Appalachia to the land of the Inca has been worthwhile both for the residents downstream receiving improved waters as well as regional officials noting a more cost effective and sustainable option with which to address longstanding environmental degradation.
Patrick McDonnell, PA DEP Acting Secretary, “Economics and Environment”Michael Hewitt, GISP
Patrick McDonnell was most recently the director of policy for the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, where he oversaw the agency’s regulation and policy development processes. In addition, Mr. McDonnell ran the State Energy Office and was charged with coordination of renewable energy and energy efficiency issues.
Prior to returning to DEP, Mr. McDonnell was executive policy manager for former Commissioner Pamela A. Witmer of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, focusing on electric, natural gas and water issues as well as cybersecurity and the impact of environmental regulation on energy markets.
Previously, Mr. McDonnell spent 13 years with DEP in a variety of roles. As deputy secretary for administration, he managed the budget, human resources, information technology and oversaw the facilities management functions of the agency. He also previously served as policy director and as an assistant to the special deputy secretary. He began his career at DEP working in the State Energy Office on energy efficiency, renewable energy, and green building projects.
Mr. McDonnell received his Master’s degree in Political Science from Lehigh University and his Bachelor’s Degree in Politics from DeSales University.
Because of the extent of AMD impacts in Pennsylvania, the Commonwealth has become, by necessity, a leader in the development of passive treatment technology. People from around the world travel to Pennsylvania to learn about the successes we have collectively achieved, including the installation of over 300 passive treatment systems. In recent years, the capabilities of passive systems to treat highly acidic mine discharges with high concentrations of dissolved metals has been questioned. It is important to remember that with any treatment system, whether passive or active, proper design, suitable land characteristics, quality construction, proper maintenance and sufficient funding, are needed to provide a long-term, cost-effective approach for watershed restoration. This presentation will provide mini case studies that demonstrate, by example, that passive systems can and are effectively treating acidic, high-metal, discharges in Pennsylvania.
Terry Schmidt, Skelly & Loy, “Big Run Restoration: A Success Story”Michael Hewitt, GISP
In the late 1990’s, a watershed assessment was completed for Blacklegs Creek and its Big Run tributary, which was the first step to development of a restoration plan. Design and construction activities were initiated around 2000. A four phase approach was developed to address the significant acidic pollution contributors in the watershed. Phase 1 consisted of treating “Big Run #2,” aka. the Sporanza discharge. The water was piped about ½ mile under Blacklegs Creek and treated using an open limestone based system. Phase 2 consisted of treating “Big Run #7” also using a limestone based system. Phase 3 was the biggest challenge due to the discharge location, water quality, water flow, and available space. To combat these challenges, a mine seal constructed in a drainage tunnel that effectively raised the water head approximately 30 feet to a location where some space was available. Partial treatment was accomplished using limestone which required frequent mixing to prevent clogging. Phase 4 was constructed to address “Big Run #3” (emanating from a location without property owner coordination) as well as providing for seasonal and supplemental treatment of Big Run #7 and #8. Through numerous grants of all types and 15 years or so of hard work, bugs and fish returned to lower Big Run and Blacklegs Creek below the confluence.
Eric Cavazza, et al., PA DEP, "Preparing for SMCRA Reauthorization in 2021"Michael Hewitt, GISP
Preliminary discussions and efforts have begun to reauthorize Title IV of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA) to continue to provide funding for AML and AMD work across the country. Pennsylvania has been working with the National Association of Abandoned Mine Land Programs (NAAMLP) and the Interstate Mining Compact Commission (IMCC) to frame the issues and identify interested partners for the effort. A brief update of the efforts to date of these organizations and committees coupled with a brief presentation of the current state of SMCRA Title IV and the PA AML Program will be conducted followed by a question and answer session.
Good Governance Practices for 501(c)(3) Organizations PYA, P.C.
PYA Tax Manager Elizabeth Wright presented “Good Governance Practices for 501(c)(3) Organizations” at the Accounting and Financial Women’s Alliance (AFWA) Luncheon in Knoxville, TN. The presentation provides an overview of good governance practices to assist any size 501(c)(3) organization in complying with IRS governance guidelines.
Are you looking for ways to build the capacity of your grantees to achieve policy change and leverage your funds for maximum impact? Do you worry about whether your grantees will be able to attract other funders? Do you work for a funder that has been nervous about funding projects that involve lobbying or grassroots advocacy? If the answer to any of these questions, is yes, then this webinar is for you.
In this session, we will challenge traditional notions of legal support for grantees. Grantees should be using foundation funds to advance advocacy that leads to legislation – it’s crucial to achieving policy change. And grantees need to know how to leverage foundation funds strategically, to maximize their impact, without crossing the line into lobbying. Learn how giving grantees on-going access to legal counsel can be a game-changer through the real-life experiences of program staff and the lawyers who support them.
The Stand for Your Mission campaign is a challenge to all nonprofit decision-makers to stand up for the organizations they believe in by actively representing their organization’s mission and values, and creating public will for positive social change.
IRS Regulations-Charities & Nonprofits Conflict of InterestMichael Wyland
Few nonprofit and charity leaders are familiar with the IRS regulations known as "intermediate sanctions." These rules govern conflicts of interest and compensation in nonprofit and charitable organizations, including churches.
Gene Takagi had the pleasure of guest lecturing for an MBA class on nonprofit management. His thanks to Professor Michael O'Neill for the invitation and to the students at USF.
2022 PA AMR Conference Domestic Production of Critical Minerals 9:30AM 6/22/22Michael Hewitt, GISP
Abandoned Coal Mine Drainage Cleanup Through Domestic Production of Critical Minerals for National Security – Sarma V. Pisupati, Mohammad Rezaee, and Dr. Barbara Arnold, Penn State University
Sullivan County Conservation District Watershed Specialist, Corey Richmond, gave this presentation to schools and involved them in testing on abandoned mines. He covered the history and location of old mines and the company towns.
Colin Lennox, Eco Islands LLC, “Metal Reclamation Units for AMD and Nutrient ...Michael Hewitt, GISP
Metal Reclamations Units (MRUs) are passive, modular, scalable, rapidly deployed wetland bioreactors. The biofilm which grows upon the support matrix inside the MRUs is self-selecting and determined by the introduced pollutants and how they are attenuated throughout the treatment process. Currently, our systems function as tertiary treatment at six sites removing Mn and Al, pH<7,><5.5> minimum, demonstrated rates up to 4kg/day of Fe captured using two MRUs Mk1.5s in series, residence 20-25 minutes, flow 280Lpm (5).
The Department of the Interior’s Office of Surface Coal Mining Reclamation and Enforcement presented Northampton Fuel Supply Company, Inc. (NFS) with the “Excellence in Surface Coal Mining and Reclamation” National Award in September 2016 for the land reclamation at the Loomis Bank Operation off of Middle Road in Luzerne County, Hanover Township, PA. The Loomis site was an abandoned culm bank that covered over 100 acres of land. NFS started operations at the site in the late nineties and processed over a million tons of the culm material converting it to a viable fuel for power generation at Northampton Generating Company, LP’s (NGC) power plant located in Northampton, PA.
Matt MacConnell, Lehigh River Stocking Association, “Lausanne Tunnel Remediat...Michael Hewitt, GISP
The Lausanne Tunnel in Jim Thorpe was installed in 1906 to dewater the coal fields in this area. The tunnel discharges about 6000 gal/min of drainage that is relatively high in iron and manganese but fortunately, the pH is relatively high and aluminum content is low. The remediation installed in 2004 was a two part passive wetland system that has been the focus of the conservation efforts by a number of conservation organizations since that time. My involvement has been to engage the local Sierra Club as well, the local trout stocking clubs and other organizations to provide funding and manpower for upgrades at the site. In 2007, two 5ft rectangular weir flow monitors were installed, one in the wetland and the other in the bypass flow, which consists of 2/3rd of the tunnel discharge flow. Pressure transducers and solar powered data loggers were installed to record both flows so that further hydrological engineering could be applied to optimize the wetland treatment while also devising a treatment plan for the bypass flow. In 2011, artesian aerators were added to the feeder pipes to improve aeration of the water entering the wetland. The aerators, however, did consume some of the available head pressure and reduced wetland feed flow so in 2014 a 3rd 14” feeder pipe was excavated and installed bringing the wetland flow rate back to the 1800 gal/min design rate. In 2016, a solar powered compressor was installed with two aerator heads added to the wetland to further boost dissolved oxygen. Iron test kits and dissolved oxygen monitors have been used to evaluate the iron removal effectiveness of the wetland and the extent of oxygen saturation. The next steps at for further improvement are the installation of cascading settling basins in the bypass flow as well as optimization of the wetland flow distribution. This presentation will feature presentation of technical flow and composition data as well as drone video of the site.
Presentation by Jared Jageler, David Adler, Noelia Duchovny, and Evan Herrnstadt, analysts in CBO’s Microeconomic Studies and Health Analysis Divisions, at the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists Summer Conference.
What is the point of small housing associations.pptxPaul Smith
Given the small scale of housing associations and their relative high cost per home what is the point of them and how do we justify their continued existance
This session provides a comprehensive overview of the latest updates to the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (commonly known as the Uniform Guidance) outlined in the 2 CFR 200.
With a focus on the 2024 revisions issued by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), participants will gain insight into the key changes affecting federal grant recipients. The session will delve into critical regulatory updates, providing attendees with the knowledge and tools necessary to navigate and comply with the evolving landscape of federal grant management.
Learning Objectives:
- Understand the rationale behind the 2024 updates to the Uniform Guidance outlined in 2 CFR 200, and their implications for federal grant recipients.
- Identify the key changes and revisions introduced by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in the 2024 edition of 2 CFR 200.
- Gain proficiency in applying the updated regulations to ensure compliance with federal grant requirements and avoid potential audit findings.
- Develop strategies for effectively implementing the new guidelines within the grant management processes of their respective organizations, fostering efficiency and accountability in federal grant administration.
1. Non-Profit Lobbying Rules
An Outline of the Rules and Regulations for
Non-Profits to Influence Federal Legislation
By: Anne Daymut, Watershed Coordinator
March 2016
2. Non-Profit Lobbying Rules
• Focus on the Federal Rules for 501(c)3 non-
profits
• Why your organization should Lobby
• General Definitions
• How the amount of lobbying is measured
• The role of funders
• Brief overview of PA’s Lobbying Laws
• Quiz
3. Why Lobbying is Important to Your
Organization
• Legislative actions directly impact your
organization’s ability to achieve its goals
• No one is going to lobby on your behalf
• Who knows your community’s issues better
than you?
• If you aren’t lobbying, you are missing out on
the most effective way to promote your
organization’s missions.
• It’s your right and responsibility!
4. General Definitions
• Advocacy – Publically supporting and/or
recommending a particular cause or policy
• Lobbying - Attempting to influence legislation
by contacting, or urging the public to contact,
members or employees of a legislative body
for the purpose of proposing, supporting, or
opposing legislation, or by advocating the
adoption or rejection of legislation.*
5. 501(c)3 Non-Profit Status
• In general, no organization may qualify for
section 501(c)(3) status if a substantial part of
its activities is attempting to influence
legislation. *
• A 501(c)(3) organization may engage in some
lobbying, but too much lobbying activity risks
loss of tax-exempt status.*
6. Lobbying Definition (Repeated)
• Lobbying - Attempting to influence legislation
by contacting, or urging the public to contact,
members or employees of a legislative body
for the purpose of proposing, supporting, or
opposing legislation, or by advocating the
adoption or rejection of legislation.*
7. Influence
• Contacting, or urging the public to contact,
members or employees of a legislative body
for the purpose of proposing, supporting, or
opposing legislation, or if the organization
advocates the adoption or rejection of
legislation.
8. Legislation
Action by Congress, any state legislature, any
local council, or similar governing body, with
respect to acts, bills, resolutions, or similar
items (such as legislative confirmation of
appointive office), or by the public in
referendum, ballot initiative, constitutional
amendment, or similar procedure. It does not
include actions by executive, judicial, or
administrative bodies.
9. Lobbying Exemptions
• Nonpartisan analysis, study or research that presents
all sides of an issue
• Conducting educational meetings
• Preparing and distributing educational materials
• Responses to written requests for assistance from
committees or other legislative bodies
• Challenges to or support for legislative proposals that
would change the organization’s rights or its right to
exist
• Examinations and discussions of broad social,
economic, and similar problems
10. 2 ways to Measure Amount of
Lobbying Activity
• Substantial Part Test
• Insubstantial Part Test, aka Expenditure Test,
aka 501(h) election
11. Substantial Part Test
• IRS considers time devoted (by both
compensated and volunteer workers) and the
expenditures devoted by the organization to
the activity, when determining whether the
lobbying activity is “substantial”.
• Must report on Form 990 activities of all staff
and volunteers with regards to lobbying
• But…What is Substantial?
12. Penalties of Too Much Lobbying
• Losing tax-exempt status, resulting in all of its income
being subject to tax.
• Excise tax equal to five percent of their lobbying
expenditures for the year in which they cease to qualify
for exemption.
• Tax equal to five percent of the lobbying expenditures
for the year may be imposed against organization
managers, jointly and severally, who agree to the
making of such expenditures knowing that the
expenditures would likely result in the loss of tax-
exempt status.
13. Expenditure Test*
If the amount of exempt purpose
expenditures is:
Lobbying nontaxable amount is:
≤ $500,000 20% of the exempt purpose expenditures
>$500,00 but ≤ $1,000,000
$100,000 plus 15% of the excess of exempt
purpose expenditures over $500,000
> $1,000,000 but ≤ $1,500,000
$175,000 plus 10% of the excess of exempt
purpose expenditures over $1,000,000
>$1,500,000
$225,000 plus 5% of the exempt purpose
expenditures over $1,500,000
• may not exceed $1,000,000
• 25% of your limit may be spent on Grass Roots
Lobbying
14. Expenditure Test
• Easier
– Form 5768, less detailed reporting
• You don’t have to record, prepare, or file a detailed
description of activities
• Allows for better planning of activities and finances
15. Expenditure Test
• Safer
– More precision/less guessing
– More freedom
– Does not increase likelihood of audit
– Less frightening penalties for exceeding allowance
• Lose tax exempt status after 4 years of excessive lobbying
• After first year, excise tax equal to 25% of the excess
• No personal penalty for individual managers of an electing
charity that exceeds its lobbying expenditures limits (not so
for those in non-electing charities)
16. Expenditure Test
• Additional Exemptions not included in the substantial test
– Making available the results of nonpartisan analysis, study, or research;
Providing technical advice or assistance (where such advice would otherwise
constitute the influencing of legislation) to a governmental body or to a
committee or other subdivision thereof in response to written requests by
such body…;
– Appearing before, or communicating to, any legislative body with respect to a
possible decision of such body which might affect the existence of the
organization, its powers and duties, tax-exempt status, or the deduction of
contributions to the organization [otherwise known as “self-defense
communications”];
– Communications between the organization and its bona fide members
regarding legislation or proposed legislation of direct interest to the
organization and such members [other than communications that “directly
encourage” the members to engage in direct or grass roots lobbying]; and Any
communications with a government official or employee” that are not for the
purpose of influencing legislation. (See 26 USC Section 4911)
17. Expenditure Test
• No limit on lobbying activities that do not
require expenditures, such as unreimbursed
activities conducted by bona fide volunteers
(not true for non-electing charities)
• Higher lobbying dollar limits and fewer items
which count toward the exhaustion of those
limits (unlike the miniscule and artificial
restrictions adopted by some nonelecting
charities)
18. Expenditure Test*
If the amount of exempt purpose
expenditures is:
Lobbying nontaxable amount is:
≤ $500,000 20% of the exempt purpose expenditures
>$500,00 but ≤ $1,000,000
$100,000 plus 15% of the excess of exempt
purpose expenditures over $500,000
> $1,000,000 but ≤ $1,500,000
$175,000 plus 10% of the excess of exempt
purpose expenditures over $1,000,000
>$1,500,000
$225,000 plus 5% of the exempt purpose
expenditures over $1,500,000
• may not exceed $1,000,000
• 25% of your limit may be spent on Grass Roots
Lobbying
19. Types of Lobbying
• Direct - In general, any
attempt to influence any
legislation through
communication with a
legislator, an employee of a
legislative body or other
government official, which:
• (1) refers to specific
legislation; and
• (2) reflects a view on such
legislation.
• Grassroots lobbying -- any
attempt to influence any
legislation through an attempt
to affect the opinions of the
general public or any segment
thereof. A grassroots lobbying
communication is one which:
• (1) refers to specific
legislation;
• (2) reflects a view on that
legislation; and
• (3) encourages the recipient to
take action with respect to the
legislation
20. Encourages the recipient to take action
with respect to the legislation…(cont.)
• (a) directly urging the recipient to contact legislators or other
government officials in order to influence legislation;
• (b) including the address, phone number or similar information
about a legislator or government official;
• (c) providing a petition, postcard or other prepared message to
send to a legislator or government official in order to influence
legislation; or
• (d) identifying one or more legislators who will vote on the
legislation as opposing the organization's view; being undecided;
being the recipient's representative in the legislature; or being a
member of the legislative committee that will consider the
legislation. Encouraging the recipient to take action does not
include naming the main sponsor(s) for the purposes of identifying
the legislation.
21. Exempt Purpose Expenditures
• include everything a charity spends to accomplish
its exempt purpose, but excludes certain
expenditures for fundraising, capital expenses,
unrelated business activities, and other purposes
not connected to carrying out the organization’s
charitable purposes. For many organizations, all
of the organization’s expenditures qualify as
exempt purpose expenditures.
• https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/26/56.4911
-4
22. The Role of the Private Foundation
• Foundations are allowed to prohibit the use of their funds for lobbying.
• Foundations are not allowed to earmark or designate funds for lobbying!
• Foundations may make general support grants to charities whether or not
the charities are currently lobbying, have lobbied in the past, have made
the 501(h) election, or even use the grant for lobbying purposes. The
grants will not be taxable expenditures by the foundation as long as they
are not earmarked for lobbying. The regulations do not require a private
foundation to seek information about a charity’s lobbying budget when
the charity applies for a general support grant.
• Foundations can give specific project grants to fund projects that include
lobbying, so long as an individual foundation’s total grants for the same
project and year do not exceed the amount the grantee had budgeted for
the nonlobbying portion of the project. In making this determination,
foundations may rely upon the budgets provided by grantees.
23. Other Funding Considerations
• Community Foundations are treated like all
other 501c3, with the same limits and
penalties
• All other funding sources are allowed to
prohibit the use of funds for Lobbying
– EPA 319 grants
– State Grants
24. Prohibited Activities
• strictly prohibited by the IRS from
participating in campaigns for (or against)
political candidates to public office
• No partisan political activities
25. State and Local Lobbying
• State and municipal lobbying disclosure laws
impose additional reporting requirements on
all organizations—not just on 501(c)(3)
organizations—that lobby a certain amount at
the state or local level.
– Pennsylvania Lobbying Disclosure Law – Only
applies to PAID lobbying at the State Level
26. PA Lobbying Disclosure Law
• Paid Lobbying does not include volunteers or
Board of Directors but does include paid staff
and reimbursement of expenses.
• Requires Registration and Reporting
(depending on time and money spent)
• Definitions, allowances, and penalties go well
beyond the Federal Law
28. QUIZ
• Organization M writes to its Congresswoman
requesting that she contact an administrative
agency regarding a proposed regulation.
29. Quiz
• A pamphlet distributed by organization Y states that the
“President’s plan for a AMD-Free America” should be
passed, and encourages readers to “write or call your
senators and representatives and tell them to vote for the
President’s plan.”
• Assume the same facts as above except that the pamphlet
encourages readers to “write the President to urge him to
make the bill a top legislative priority” rather than
encouraging readers to communicate with members of
Congress.
• Assume the same facts as above, except that the pamphlet
does not encourage the public to write or call legislators or
the President, but does list the members of the committee
that will consider the bill.
30. Quiz
• In each edition of its newsletter, Organization
E, an environmental organization, routinely
summarizes and reports on the status of
environment-related bills pending in Congress.
The newsletter identifies each bill by a bill
number and the sponsor’s name. Although
the summaries and status reports refer to, and
often reflect a view on, specific legislation,
they do not encourage readers to take action
with respect to any of the bills.
31. Quiz
• Organization Z prepares a paper on a
particular state’s environmental problems. The
paper does not reflect a view on any specific
pending legislation nor on any specific
legislative proposal which Z supports or
opposes.
32. Quiz
• The President nominates X for a position in
the President’s cabinet. Organization Y
opposes this nomination and sends a general
mailing requesting recipients to write to four
Senators on the Senate Committee that will
consider the nomination.
33. Quiz
• A pamphlet distributed by organization L
discusses the dangers of drugs and encourages
the public to send their legislators a coupon
printed with the statement, “I support a drug-free
America.” The term “drug-free America” is not
widely identified with any of the many specific
legislative bills regarding drug issues. The
pamphlet does not refer to any of these bills, nor
does the organization support or oppose a
specific legislative proposal.
34. Quiz
• Organization B researches, prepares and prints
a code of standards booklet of minimum
safety requirements for electrical wiring. B
sells the booklet to the public and it is widely
used by professionals in the installation of
electrical wiring. Occasionally, B lobbies state
legislators for passage of the code of
standards for safety reasons.
35. Quiz
• Organization R’s monthly newsletter contains
an editorial column that refers to and reflects
a view on specific pending bills, but does not
encourage readers to take action with respect
to these bills. R sends the newsletter to
10,000 nonmember subscribers, including
Senator Doe.
36. Quiz
• The Organization places an advertisement that
specifically identifies and opposes a bill that it
asserts would harm the Waste-Coal industry. The
ad is not a mass media communication described
in the special rules for certain mass media
advertisements, but it does state that Senator Y
favors the bill.
• Assume the same facts as above except that
instead of identifying Senator Y by name, the
advertisement identifies the “junior Senator from
State Z” as favoring the legislation.
37. In Closing
• Lobbying is your Right and Responsibility!
• The Federal Rules of non-profit lobbying have
recently become more clear and safe with the
ability for 501(h) election
• Just be careful how much of each type of
lobbying you do
• Consider who your funding sources are and if
they have placed lobbying restrictions on the
funds
• And look into the state and local laws if your
mission is impacted by state and local policy
39. Additional Resources
• Worry Free Lobbying for Non-Profits: How to
Use the 501(h) Election to Maximize
Effectiveness, Alliance for NonProfits
• Lobbying by NonProfits in Pennsylvania: The
Rules of the Road, 2014, Philadelphia Bar
Association
We are not including information for CD’s rules for lobbying but we encourage you all to continue to participate in outreach and education of your legislators as you always have. We are focusing on Federal law because most of the legislation that impacts the missions of our constituents is at the federal level, so our constituents’ lobbying is at the federal level.
Examples of state, federal, and local levels of lobbying that went on recently.
Most restricted type of non-profit but they can legally lobby, as long as they know the rules, which can be complicated
The expenditure test requires the “electing organization” to file a 1 page form with IRS and is meant for non-profits with smaller budgets who do not do a lot of lobbying
The expenditure test requires the “electing organization” to file a 1 page form with IRS and is meant for non-profits with smaller budgets who do not do a lot of lobbying
Foundations will not suffer penalties if the grantee exceeds allowable limits
Advocacy. The communication to the Congresswoman is not lobbying because administrative rules are not “legislation” as defined in and limited by the IRS lobbying regulations.
the pamphlet refers to, and reflects a view on, and encourages readers to take action with respect to specific legislation. The pamphlet is a grassroots lobbying communication.
This is advocacy
Z’s paper is not a lobbying communication, even if it is sent to a legislator.
Grass Roots Lobbying
This is advocacy
Because the primary purpose of creating the code was to promote public safety and the standards were specifically used in a profession for that purpose, separate from any legislative requirement, the research, preparation, printing and public distribution of the code of standards are not lobbying expenditures. Costs, such as transportation, photocopying, and other similar expenses, incurred in lobbying state legislators in support of the code are expenditures for direct lobbying communications.
The editorial column in the newsletter sent to Senator Doe is not a direct lobbying communication because the newsletter is sent to Senator Doe in her capacity as a subscriber rather than her capacity as a legislator.
Because it refers to and reflects a view on specific legislation, and also encourages the readers to take action by specifically identifying a legislator who opposes T’s views on the bill, the advertisement is a grassroots lobbying communication.