CONFIDENTIALITY

A couple of weeks after I published DEJA VU ALL OVER AGAIN, I received a call from Mark Wilf who wanted me to have a heads' up that a letter was going out to advise me that I had breached the confidentiality of The Bridgespan Group's Report to JFNA. I had linked the Report in the body of the Post and at least one of you found when you hit the link that the Report had been taken down by JFNA. As if it no longer exists; as if it never existed.

I went back and read the Bridgespan document and found no "Confidential" label on it though I should have recognized that JFNA would not want TBG's "findings," quoted in the Post, to be public -- and for good reason. I should have been more sensitive. And, asI promised Mark, I will be.

Of course, this episode raises once again the entire ad hoc nature of JFNA's determination of "confidentiality." On these pages we have highlighted/lowlighted the continuing determinations -- seemingly seriatim -- that: consulting agreements...confidential; acting as a conduit...confidential; allocations write-offs...confidential: non-payment or partial payments of JFNA Dues...confidential; communities receiving FRD consultants...confidential; White House invitations...confidential; now, The Bridgespan Group Report...confidential; and on and on it goes, where it stops nobody knows.

And, nobody knows what the criteria are for declaring any JFNA matter confidential -- because there are none...none. I've asked for them -- I've received none, I have jokingly suggested that's because the criteria for confidentiality themselves are "confidential." But, obviously, there are no such criteria. This makes it all the easier to just assert "confidentiality" and walk away.

There seems to be no understanding at 25 Broadway that JFNA is a public charity -- its "public" is, at the very least, its members and its Board and, in the broadest sense, those who support it -- the federation donors. Too often JFNA leaders act like they are running a "mom and pop store" -- the lay and professional leaders of the organization act as if they have no responsibility to any others than themselves. The laws and best practices say they are just plain wrong.

The lack of any criteria for determining what matters might be deemed properly confidential has played into the hands of professionals at 25 Broadway -- the CEO, the COO, the CFO -- who, if the past is prologue, would deem all things confidential hiding themselves behind an all too eager lay leadership strangely anxious to please the professionals in all things.

For many of us, most of us  Justice Louis Brandeis is a hero for so many reasons. We also remember him for his suspicion of the "confidential label." Here is what he wrote:

"Publicity is justly commended as a remedy for social and industrial diseases. Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants; electric light the most efficient policeman." 

JFNA has been able to turn off the lights and keep the sunshine out for too long, far too long on too many matters, far too many matters.

The Board Chair has assured me that he is committed to transparency. I have great faith in Mark Wilf's leadership. 

Time will tell.

Rwexler