Future of Good article – Investigation: Ontario Trillium Foundation ‘Muzzled’ Charities with Changes to Advocacy Policy

Recently the Future of Good had an article written by Gabe Oatley entitled Investigation: Ontario Trillium Foundation ‘Muzzled’ Charities with Changes to Advocacy Policy. The article raises two primary questions – does the OTF refuse to fund groups who are involved in any political activities? In other words, does the OTF not just refuse to fund the work of political activities but also refuse to fund a group if it does any political activities? Second, is there too much partisan involvement of the Ontario PCs in the running of the OTF?

The first question is easier to dispose of. The OTF has an eligibility policy for grants and also has agreements with each grantee. There was an inconsistency between these two documents and the OTF says they will try to clarify in future agreements.

Here is the OTF’s Eligibility Policy:

https://www.otf.ca/who-we-are/our-policies/eligibility-policy

Here is what the OTF’s eligibility policy says on political activities:

All organizations participating in the collaboration must not be:

• engaged in political activity supporting or opposing any political party, elected representative, or candidate for public office

• organizations whose major activities or major resources are used to bring about change in law or government policy.

The OTF also has certain ineligible activities for funding namely:

The Grantee represents and warrants that it has read and agrees to comply with the Foundation’s “Eligibility Policy” published on the OTF website, including that Policy as it may be amended from time to time, and represents and warrants that it will not engage in political activity supporting or opposing any political party, elected representative, or candidate for public office, or engage in any activity meant to bring about change in law or government policy, including public policy dialogue and development.

There is clearly an inconsistency between the eligibility policy and the sample wording above in the agreement. Both prohibit partisan political activities – but while the eligibility policy says OTF will not fund “activities for the purpose of bringing about change in law or government policy, including public policy dialogue and development”, the agreements provided that the charity will “not engage in any activity meant to bring about change in law or government policy, including public policy dialogue and development“. There is a big difference in that the eligibility policy presumably allows for a charity to use other funds to engage in any activity meant to bring about change in law or government policy, including public policy dialogue and development.

A good takeaway for all charities. Certain issues are more sensitive than others. Make sure you focus particularly on those sensitive issues. Make sure that your policies and agreements align. This is a common problem with charities. They either don’t have policies, they have outdated policies or the other cases the central documents don’t align with their policies. This can lead to confusion, recrimination, negative media publicity etc.

The article notes:

Asked by Future of Good about this clause in their grant contract, Ontario Trillium Foundation’s director of communications Marzena Gersho said, by email, that there are “a few words missing” in the clause and that therefore “the expectation is not clear.”

She directed Future of Good to the foundation’s current eligibility policy which says only that grantees cannot use the foundation’s funds for advocacy activities. She said she had noted down the edit required for future grant contracts.

But while future contracts may provide grantees with more clarity, a Future of Good investigation found that since 2020, contracts used for 15 of the foundation’s 20 granting programs have used the same or similar language as was found in Good’s contract, requiring grantees to agree not to engage in any advocacy.

Hopefully, OTF will clarify to its grantees the intention of the provision and that it does not forbid an organization from being involved in non-partisan political activities.

The second issue raised in the article is the partisan affiliation of some of those involved with the OTF.

The article notes:

In 2020, the foundation’s advocacy policy was changed under the volunteer board leadership of Michael Diamond, the current president of the progressive conservative party of Ontario; and a board committee briefing note from that time, prepared by staff, expresses concern about the potential for foundation funds to flow to charities whose advocacy “could oppose government direction.”

…

When Premier Ford took power, things weren’t quite so subtle anymore.

In January 2019, about six months after the Progressive Conservatives formed government in Ontario, Michael Diamond was appointed to OTF’s board. The year prior, Diamond was the campaign manager for the Premier’s successful Progressive Conservative leadership bid; and in 2010, he served as director of operations for the mayoral campaign of Rob Ford, Premier Doug Ford’s brother.

Additionally, in April 2020, when the foundation’s advocacy policy was changed, Diamond was joined on the foundation’s board by three volunteers who had previously run for or represented the PCs in the provincial legislature, one volunteer who was subsequently nominated to run for the PCs in the 2022 provincial election, and a longtime federal Conservative staffer who served in the prime minister’s office under Stephen Harper.

So what is wrong with the OTF having a large number of very partisan people involved in its board and being officers? Fundamentally, it is about perception. The OTF is an important agency in Ontario and it needs to not only act appropriately but be perceived to be acting appropriately. Funding of non-profits and charities is vitally important and should not be tied, or be perceived to be tied to party affiliation or party preferences. These appointees may be more involved in policy and not the actual choice of grantees but good luck explaining that to a person on the street.

As an aside, I have been critical of the Trudeau Foundation for having a large amount of taxpayer money and essentially having that money controlled by the family of the current Prime Minister. While this arrangement was questionable when it was set up and none of the Trudeau family were involved in partisan politics, it became far more questionable when Trudeau ran for office and then even more so when Trudeau became Prime Minister. The Trudeau Foundation only gives out about $5 million per year. Many Conservative politicians have vehemently criticized this arrangement. There are many concerns including that such a governance structure might result in decisions that are more partisan than impartial and also it gives a lot of power, credibility, etc., to a particular family.

OTF on the other hand gives out about $100 million per year which is far more funds than the Trudeau Foundation.

Just a cautionary note to the PC Party of Ontario that OTF funding is important to the sector and it is unfortunate that people who are so partisan are being appointed. These people may be very capable but how would you react if the President of the Liberal Party of Canada was made the head of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC). If you don’t respect public perception and concerns that having party officials in the OTF apparatus, then you should not expect that other political parties will do so. More importantly, you should not criticize other political parties when they do similarly questionable things.