May 24, 2012

New York State Not-For-Profit Entities Task Force Asks for Compensation Details

On August 3, 2011, Governor Cuomo created the New York State Not-For-Profit Entities Task Force (“Task Force”), to conduct a comprehensive review and audit of current compensation levels of organizations that receive taxpayer funding from the state. The Task Force is chaired by the Superintendent of the Department of Financial Services, Benjamin Lawsky, and includes representatives from relevant state agencies.

On August 25, 2011, the Task Force sent a letter to the boards of directors of not-forprofit organizations seeking detailed information about compensation for their executives, administrators and board members. Organizations receiving the letter include entities serving people with disabilities, mental health providers, hospitals and clinics and social service providers and were selected based upon the organization’s receipt of state funds.

Much of the information requested in the letter is factual and seeks aggregate information related to compensation paid by the organization. Some of this information may already be accessible to the public through IRS Form 990 submissions. In particular, the IRS Form 990 requires an organization to list the five highest compensated employees that are paid more than $150,000. Significantly, however, the letter also seeks detailed information on:

  • Compensation paid to every individual who is an executive, administrator, board member or received compensation of $100,000 or more;
  • Identification of the number of employees who receive any compensation, bonus and or incentives greater than $200,000; and
  • Identification of the top twenty-five highest paid executives, administrators, and/or board members.

Importantly, the letter does not define “compensation” and asks for quantitative valuations of “other compensation” including incentives, benefits of any kind, or perks such as apartments, cars, or tickets to events. In addition, boards are also asked to provide more subjective information such as:

  • What justified the compensation to executives?
  • What is the organization’s view regarding recoupment and/or claw-back of executive and/or board compensation?
  • Does the organization believe that recoupment and/or claw-back of executive and/or board compensation is necessary?

These questions appear to seek the opinion of a board of directors on compensation practices that may not even be part of the organization’s own compensation program.

Importantly, responses to the questions can raise potential legal issues and risks. For example, the responses almost certainly are subject to disclosure under the Freedom on Information Law (FOIL), except to the extent that the information falls under a specific FOIL exemption. Notably, the letter asks for compensation structures, use of consultants, and how compensation is tied to performance. Even if certain information is public, many organizations may be of the view that the additional information sought by the letter is proprietary.

The information requested of board members may raise complex issues of fiduciary duty as boards weigh the legal and political obligation to cooperate with the Task Force against the possible negative consequences that disclosure of sensitive business information could have. Such fiduciary duty concerns may also arise concerning board conduct in establishing executive compensation levels or other governance policies and procedures as well as the integrity of the governing body itself.

Accordingly, responses submitted to the letter require careful planning. Given the nature of the information requested and that it is unclear how the Task Force will use the information, it is important to consult with counsel experienced in not-for-profit board governance and executive compensation matters prior to submitting a response.

©2012 Greenberg Traurig, LLP. All rights reserved.

About the Author

Associate

 

Lynelle Bosworth is an associate in the Health & FDA Business Practice of Greenberg Traurig's Albany office, focusing on health care, regulatory and governmental affairs matters. She served as the former Associate Counsel for the Health Committee of the New York...

518-689-1469

About the Author

Managing Shareholder

Harold N. Iselin focuses his practice on governmental affairs and health care matters, representing diverse clients before the Executive Branch and State Legislature. Additionally, he handles complex civil litigation matters, litigating a broad range of civil cases. Previously, Harold was a trial attorney in the U.S. Department of Justice from 1984 to 1986, following which he became assistant counsel to the Governor of New York with responsibility for transportation, education, veterans affairs and freedom of information matters.

518-689-1415

Contributors

Shareholder

 

Pamela A. Madeiros focuses her practice in the area of legislative and regulatory affairs. Previously, she served as senior counsel with the New York State Legislative Bill Drafting Commission and was responsible for introducing several Latin American delegations to the state legislative process through...
518-689-1412

About the Author

Shareholder

Candace Quinn is a shareholder in the Global Benefits & Compensation Practice of Greenberg Traurig’s New York office. 

212-801-2164

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.