DOC Compensation

[Unregistered]

PCU's 2016 Form 990 Schedule J shows base compensation for Jeff Enquist (who now calls himself a CEO btw) of $187,385 and total compensation of $218,361. This seems wildly out of line with other clubs particularly for a club that really doesn't win anything or play in any bigger leagues or tournaments. Why aren't people more upset about this? Why has their board let this happen?

[Unregistered]

Certainly an eye popping number, but look around at the other Form 990s from different clubs. You will likely not find this level of transparency from others. As for tying that level of compensation to winning... not sure that connection makes sense. PCU sometimes has as many as 5 teams at younger age groups. They are clearly doing something right.

(Not a PCU family. Not a PCU director fan boy. No affiliation. Just my thoughts.)

[Unregistered]

Not sure I agree with the premise that having 5 teams at an age group justifies that level of compensation -- particularly when you are cramming them in at Buckman. Perhaps you're right that winning isn't the right metric either, but then what is? All I know, is that when you offer 5 teams at an age level and make that salary, it lends to the narrative that it is just a money making venture for the DOC/CEO. This board is full of parents decrying the "con-artists" for selling winning/development/college placement etc., to their kids to get them to their club. Here, there is a club peddling an "elite" "premier" soccer experience for their own bottom line -- more kids = more revenue. As for the transparency piece, it goes on the 990, so yes all non-profit clubs report it. I can say I'm not aware of any DOC in the area who comes anywhere near that salary.

[Unregistered]

Not sure I agree with the premise that having 5 teams at an age group justifies that level of compensation -- particularly when you are cramming them in at Buckman. Perhaps you're right that winning isn't the right metric either, but then what is? All I know, is that when you offer 5 teams at an age level and make that salary, it lends to the narrative that it is just a money making venture for the DOC/CEO. This board is full of parents decrying the "con-artists" for selling winning/development/college placement etc., to their kids to get them to their club. Here, there is a club peddling an "elite" "premier" soccer experience for their own bottom line -- more kids = more revenue. As for the transparency piece, it goes on the 990, so yes all non-profit clubs report it. I can say I'm not aware of any DOC in the area who comes anywhere near that salary.

I know 2 guys (DOC) that are very close, if not more.

Disguised under their roles at 3 different clubs.

they re-brand the HS girls/boys ages & the Boys little DA into (1) club.

then they pick up there paycheck from their two separate local rec/classic K-8 traditional clubs.

Clever stuff, devil is always in the details my friend..

[Unregistered]

I know 2 guys (DOC) that are very close, if not more.

Disguised under their roles at 3 different clubs.

they re-brand the HS girls/boys ages & the Boys little DA into (1) club.

then they pick up there paycheck from their two separate local rec/classic K-8 traditional clubs.

Clever stuff, devil is always in the details my friend..

You are clearly referring to NEU/FC/BSC and while you try to sound knowledgeable on the subject, you don’t provide any details. Reason being that you are flat wrong.
Now why would you go and say something like that when it’s not true.
You are a mischevious little imp, aren’t you. Either that or you have a stiffy for the guy you are referring to.

[Unregistered]

Not sure I agree with the premise that having 5 teams at an age group justifies that level of compensation -- particularly when you are cramming them in at Buckman. Perhaps you're right that winning isn't the right metric either, but then what is? All I know, is that when you offer 5 teams at an age level and make that salary, it lends to the narrative that it is just a money making venture for the DOC/CEO. This board is full of parents decrying the "con-artists" for selling winning/development/college placement etc., to their kids to get them to their club. Here, there is a club peddling an "elite" "premier" soccer experience for their own bottom line -- more kids = more revenue. As for the transparency piece, it goes on the 990, so yes all non-profit clubs report it. I can say I'm not aware of any DOC in the area who comes anywhere near that salary.

Look south. LOSC/WU + Crossfire + Crossfire United Hs gigs

[Unregistered]

It’s a business.
Where are you seeing the 990s?
Link please.
Is this why one of clubs was sinking?

[Unregistered]

I know 2 guys (DOC) that are very close, if not more.

Disguised under their roles at 3 different clubs.

they re-brand the HS girls/boys ages & the Boys little DA into (1) club.

then they pick up there paycheck from their two separate local rec/classic K-8 traditional clubs.

Clever stuff, devil is always in the details my friend..

Flat wrong. You literally have no idea of what you're talking about. There is no other way to say this. I provide factual details out of an IRS filing and you provided ... well, nothing but made up facts out of your head. Besides that, even to assume you were correct (which you clearly are not), if you had 3 separate entities paying one person that would presumably involve 3 decision-making bodies making independent decisions about comp. I will take that any day over a Board that seems to be someone's rubber stamp.

[Unregistered]

It’s a business.
Where are you seeing the 990s?
Link please.
Is this why one of clubs was sinking?

You can find them on GuideStar.

[Unregistered]

Flat wrong. You literally have no idea of what you're talking about. There is no other way to say this. I provide factual details out of an IRS filing and you provided ... well, nothing but made up facts out of your head. Besides that, even to assume you were correct (which you clearly are not), if you had 3 separate entities paying one person that would presumably involve 3 decision-making bodies making independent decisions about comp. I will take that any day over a Board that seems to be someone's rubber stamp.

You didn't provide anything.

On the guidestar site with little effort you can look up the 3 clubs, 2 of them have the dirt clear as day for the last 3 years, the 3rd one requires a stiff annual fee to see. Which you can't afford. But these guys can.

Sorry you can't figure this out.

3 clubs

Club #1 Pays Coach A

Club #2 Pays Coach B

Club #3 Pays Coach A & B.

Club #1 & Club #2 have no control or knowledge about what Club 3 is paying since they have no formal connection or board presence.

This isn't a new thing this shell game has been going on for years. Parent Boards have no clue about these backroom

deals. But now, the IRS & DOJ do. Just wait what happens next.

[Unregistered]

You are clearly referring to NEU/FC/BSC and while you try to sound knowledgeable on the subject, you don’t provide any details. Reason being that you are flat wrong.
Now why would you go and say something like that when it’s not true.
You are a mischevious little imp, aren’t you. Either that or you have a stiffy for the guy you are referring to.

You are truly clueless in addition to being an ignorant tool and not well informed. But, that's beside the point. NEU/BSC couldn't afford to plug a parking meter and FC Portland is above this noise. Way off.

[Unregistered]

You didn't provide anything.

On the guidestar site with little effort you can look up the 3 clubs, 2 of them have the dirt clear as day for the last 3 years, the 3rd one requires a stiff annual fee to see. Which you can't afford. But these guys can.

Sorry you can't figure this out.

3 clubs

Club #1 Pays Coach A

Club #2 Pays Coach B

Club #3 Pays Coach A & B.

Club #1 & Club #2 have no control or knowledge about what Club 3 is paying since they have no formal connection or board presence.

This isn't a new thing this shell game has been going on for years. Parent Boards have no clue about these backroom

deals. But now, the IRS & DOJ do. Just wait what happens next.

As long as the coach pays his taxes due, the IRS generally doesn't care where a coach gets his money.

[Unregistered]

As long as the coach pays his taxes due, the IRS generally doesn't care where a coach gets his money.

IRS & DOJ care about this:

When a member of a board of directors assumes office, the law requires that the best interest of the nonprofit prevail over the director’s personal or business interests.

A conflict of interest is an actual or perceived interest by an officer, board member, DIRECTOR, or STAFF MEMBER in an action that results in, or has the appearance of resulting in, personal, organizational, or professional gain.

A conflict of interest most commonly arises when a person in a position of authority over an organization (like a board member or director) could benefit financially from a decision he or she makes in his or her role as a member of the nonprofit. Conflicts of interest can arise in many situations, including leasing property or buying services from a board member.

Uncle Sam & the state will always get it's income tax, in cases of conflict of interest at non-profits they tend to get a pound of flesh.

[Unregistered]

You didn't provide anything.

On the guidestar site with little effort you can look up the 3 clubs, 2 of them have the dirt clear as day for the last 3 years, the 3rd one requires a stiff annual fee to see. Which you can't afford. But these guys can.

Sorry you can't figure this out.

3 clubs

Club #1 Pays Coach A

Club #2 Pays Coach B

Club #3 Pays Coach A & B.

Club #1 & Club #2 have no control or knowledge about what Club 3 is paying since they have no formal connection or board presence.

This isn't a new thing this shell game has been going on for years. Parent Boards have no clue about these backroom

deals. But now, the IRS & DOJ do. Just wait what happens next.

What are the names of the three clubs?

[Unregistered]

IRS & DOJ care about this:

When a member of a board of directors assumes office, the law requires that the best interest of the nonprofit prevail over the director’s personal or business interests.

A conflict of interest is an actual or perceived interest by an officer, board member, DIRECTOR, or STAFF MEMBER in an action that results in, or has the appearance of resulting in, personal, organizational, or professional gain.

A conflict of interest most commonly arises when a person in a position of authority over an organization (like a board member or director) could benefit financially from a decision he or she makes in his or her role as a member of the nonprofit. Conflicts of interest can arise in many situations, including leasing property or buying services from a board member.

Uncle Sam & the state will always get it's income tax, in cases of conflict of interest at non-profits they tend to get a pound of flesh.

The IRS doesn't care about alleged conflicts of interest among the board of directors of nonprofits. It cares about taxes. That's it's job. IRS records might be used as evidence by other law enforcement agencies, but the IRS itself is only concerned with collecting taxes.

The US DOJ does care about various types of corporate fraud, but generally only if it's interstate. The DOJ probably doesn't care that a soccer coach working for two clubs might be putting the interests of one ahead of the other.

The tort you seem to be thinking of is "breach of fiduciary duty". Fiduciary duty doesn't attach to all employee/employer relationships--in most cases of a conflict there, the recourse of the employer is to terminate the employee. It does attach to the relationship between a director and a corporation; the director is supposed to put the interests of the corporation (in this case, a nonprofit) above his or her own. Other professionals (accountants, realtors, lawyers, etc.) also have fiduciary duties to their clients.

However, proving that can be tricky; you generally have to show that the agent in question was knowingly betraying the interests of his/her client. Note that "breach of fiduciary duty" (the tort that you can sue for, or which may subject someone to professional discipline or even criminal penalties) is a much higher standard than "conflict of interest" or appearance thereof--many things that may look unethical or downright dirty may be in fact perfectly legal.

In the case of soccer coaches who are working for more than one club: generally, both clubs are aware of (and approve of) such relationships, and the parties who have standing to assert claims of BoFD or CoI are the clubs themselves, not the parents.

If there is a club that a) has a self-perpetuating board, b) such board is captive to a DoC or other principal employee, and c) tolerates said employee enriching himself to the club's detriment--the recourse of the public, in these cases, is generally to take your business elsewhere. If a club's board is publicly elected, another recourse is to try and oust the existing board.

But unless there is obvious fraud, the cops are generally not going to get involved in youth soccer disputes. Particularly of the sort "he's employed by Team X, but spends all his time with (and steers players to) Team Y, who he is also employed by". It is the duty of the management Team X, not the parents of its players, to ensure that the relationship is satisfactory.