Hello, IWP board members! Now that you know this, what are you going to do?

Share Button

Hello, IWP board members!

We’re hear from many sources, including some of you directly, that you have been following ActiveMeasures.org and have found this to be an informative and credible site.

As of today, we have counted that every single one of you has been reading our humble blog.

We know that you find it credible, because so many of you on the IWP board are talking about ActiveMeasures.org to one another and to your friends, and express amazement at what you didn’t know.

RealityWe hope this alternative source of information will help you make the right decisions to save a wonderful graduate school from self-destructing.

It’s gratifying to see the board and management taking steps to correct problems that we have highlighted in this blog. Perhaps there is hope for the school yet.

Please continue to follow ActiveMeasures.org so that you can stay adequately informed about some real problems that need addressing, but that won’t be addressed as long as the Board of Trustees is kept out of the loop.

And don’t be so reticent to avoid raising your concerns to the Gang of Five that’s allowing IWP to falter the way it has been. Tell them your concerns so that they can be addressed.

Just ask yourselves: Why would IWP board Chairman Owen Smith instruct you not to talk to IWP staff? What is he afraid about you learning? Why has he retained that redneck from Florida to ruin the collegiality of the Institute?

Franke quoteWhy did John Lenczowski, Owen Smith, Frank Ryan and Ty McCoy retain a lawyer – Ann Franke – to keep everything under wraps, rather than discovering the facts and correcting them? Of the thousands of lawyers in Washington, why did they pick one who defends pedophiles and backs an advocate of the al Qaeda hijacking of American Airlines flight 77 into the Pentagon?

Don’t you feel dirty going along with all this?

Is this really why you agreed to join the IWP board?

You have a fiduciary responsibility to do what you know must be done. You can’t avoid reality any more.

With knowledge comes responsibility. Please use your responsibility wisely. Please save the school before it’s too late.

Share Button

Full text of the $30,000,000 memo

Share Button

Over the past few days, ActiveMeasures.org has run excerpts from a February 17, 2013 memo from a prominent IWP board member to Board Chairman Owen Smith, outlining years of mismanagement under President John Lenczowski.

We indicated that we would reprint the full text. We are doing so now.

The original February 17, 2013 memo from a senior IWP board member to Chairman Owen Smith. Personal portions are redacted. Click on image to enlarge.

The original February 17, 2013 memo from a senior IWP board member to Chairman Owen Smith. Personal portions are redacted. Click on image to enlarge.

We removed the names of the author and recipients, deleted a personal salutation line, and redacted the name of a third party and replaced the name with his initials in brackets. Otherwise, the full text, as well as a screen shot, appears below:

Obviously we are at another crossroads. In the past year we have made 4 steps forward and now 3 backward. I am very disappointed [D.M.] was unable to fulfill our hopes. I thought a strong manager would be able to gain John’s confidence, recognize and overcome all the shortcomings Mike has enumerated, and take IWP to the next level (an overused expression, but descriptive enough).

With good management in place, and credibility therefore established, we should have been able to hire a world class development team.

I think Mike’s comments about our fundraising experience are perceptive and mostly on target. A VP of development should lead the charge, spend 60-70% of his time on the road, calling in John as needed.

The need for a pro in this role has been clear to me for the last 4 years, but I felt
we needed to get management fixed first.

The lack of a strong EVP, a well-defined strategic plan, and good development leadership and support, makes me reluctant to sponsor events or ask other trustees to do so,

What strikes me is that if by some chance we were to receive a $30,000,000 donation, I am not sure we would be capable of investing it wisely!

Clearly we need steady and inspired hands at the helm, who can manage a positive relationship with our founder and move us forward; leaders who can delegate effectively and take full advantage of the faculty and other resources Mike describes.

Ideally, we will find a new EVP and an Academic Dean who can work collaboratively together (a term invoked frequently, but seldom realized, it seems, at IWP. Successful collaboration is a great sign of a healthy, open work environment inspired by good leadership).

As we consider our options, I wonder if it is time to find a successor; someone who John agrees has the potential to eventually run the place, vision and all. The accreditation agency would like us to Identify someone for this role.

Given our track record, any candidate would want assurances the Board would back him, and there would be complete transparency.

John is the inspiration, but he is not the only keeper of the light. The Trustees have an obligation to support him towards the goal of providing leaders urgently needed for our country. We are not succeeding anywhere close to potential or to meeting the need.

This may be impossible, given the control John exerts. He will feel threatened. But if Mike is right, IWP is running out of time unless we can solve the management challenges. I think the Board has to look carefully at its responsibilities and all options.

Share Button

Lenczowski’s EVP hired after assurance he wasn’t Jewish

Share Button

Some of my best friends are JewishEver wonder why IWP, as a graduate school of national security and international affairs, has avoided offering courses about the Arab-Israeli conflict?

Or why IWP President John Lenczowski, who fancies himself as a Middle East expert, has been so guarded in his public comments about Israel?

We don’t dare to venture in writing what that concern might be. But we do note that no Jew has ever held a management position at IWP, even when the best candidate for the job was Jewish.

In May, 2013, the Board of Trustees was made aware of perceptions of an apparent unofficial policy to prevent Jews from holding certain positions of authority at the Institute. A senior faculty member made concerns known to Board Chairman Owen Smith in a personal message. ActiveMeasures.org is not alleging that the policy is true, but we cannot say definitively that such an allegation would be false.

In early June, as IWP was considering Noah Rudolph to become Executive Vice President (EVP), the IWP leadership discussed whether or not he was Jewish. Some thought he might be, because his first name is Noah.

A Jewish professor tries to defuse a potentially awkward situation

Seeking to be helpful and avoid an awkward situation that would embarrass the Institute, an IWP professor, who is Jewish, asked an IWP alumnus about Rudolph’s heritage. She did this on her own, without consulting the leadership.

The alumnus is a friend of Rudolph’s who recommended him to IWP. We will identify the alumnus by his initials, L.C.

keep-calm-i-m-not-jewishOn June 4, the professor wrote L.C.,”By the way, I was just wondering. Is Noah Rudolph Jewish?”

Less than a minute later, L.C. wrote back cheerfully, “Negative – he’s a WASP from New Jersey…but there is still hope…!  Mazel Tov!”

On June 12, the Jewish professor informed IWP Chairman Smith. She had not discussed the matter with him previously.

“Dear Owen,” she wrote, “I just wanted to let  you know that [L.C.] (old friend, and former student) told me his good buddy Noah Rudolph is not Jewish.”

Chairman Smith: I don’t care because some ‘of my best friends are Jewish’

Smith replied that he didn’t care, because some “of my best friends are Jewish.” Here is the IWP board chairman’s exact response, with typos appearing as written:

i-am-not-a-jewI never said I thought he was nor
Do I care if he is Jewish  doe of my best friends are Jewish . I only
know that because two of them teach Hebrew in the temple
Yesterday I attended the retirement of David Steinberg president of Long
Island university. I guess his name gives him away. If not the fact that
his father was Rabi of the Park Avenue Jewish center, one of the most
prestigious  conservative temples in New York. He was also a scholar
writing about The religion  I could not read his material because oit
is in Hebrew
Owen

Share Button

Trustee laid out fundraising woes in memo to Chairman

Share Button

Lady B's moneyIWP’s leadership under John Lenczowski was so poor, a member of the Board of Trustees said in February, that “if by some chance we were to receive a $30,000,000 donation, I am not sure we would be capable of investing it wisely!”

The trustee, a wealthy businessman who remains on the board, admitted being reluctant to sponsor fundraising events and to invite other high-net-worth people to make large donations to the Institute.

The trustee has been very generous to IWP with his financial support and his time.

Lenczowski has dominated relations with donors and potential donors. Yet he has earned a reputation – inviting ridicule on himself and the school – for not wanting to make the ask of people willing to help fund the Institute. The trustee voiced concern that “IWP is running out of time unless we can solve the management challenges.”

The board member said that getting top talent to run IWP “may be impossible, given the control John exerts.”

He made the fundraising woes and management problems known to Board Chairman Owen Smith in a memo dated February 17, 2013.

Few IWP trustees do much to help raise funds

Nonprofit organizations rely heavily on their board members to sponsor fundraising events, and to help raise funds in other ways. With few exceptions, IWP current board members donate relatively little to the school.

IWP’s institutional weaknesses have become so severe that some wealthy board members are either unwilling to donate as much as they could, or unwilling to host fundraising events to attract their wealthy friends.

Board member said poor IWP leadership made him ‘reluctant’ to do more

In his February memo, the board member, whom ActiveMeasures.org will keep anonymous for now, said that IWP’s poor leadership “makes me reluctant to sponsor events or ask other trustees to do so.”

The Institute’s credibility crisis required not only first-rate leadership, but a world-class fundraising staff capable of raising many millions of dollars a year. Apparently, the credibility crisis drove away professional fundraisers.

The board member was responding to concerns raised by a faculty member whom the board executive committee would name interim Vice President and Provost in an emergency meeting on February 22. In his February 17 memo, the board member wrote of his general agreement with the professor’s concerns: “I think Mike’s comments about our fundraising experience are perceptive and mostly on target.”

Blame-shifting for fundraising failures

The fundraising staff who remained at IWP did what they could, but found constant roadblocks when Lenczowski refused to make – or passively avoided making – daily phone calls to donors and potential benefactors.

Lenczowski became the butt of jokes and scorn from donors and staff by needlessly delaying approval of proposals to philanthropic foundations, and repeatedly asking donors to fund proposals that they explicitly did not want to support.

Sometimes he would delay, for up to a year, signing staff-written thank-you letters to donors.

In conversations with other staff and with trustees, Lenczowski placed the fundraising failures on his loyal staff, to divert negative attention from himself. Several trustees have recognized Lenczowski’s blame-shifting pattern.

The board member wrote in his February 17 memo, “The need for a pro in this [fundraising] role has been clear to me for the last 4 years, but I felt we needed to get management fixed first.”

In October, a top IWP fundraiser resigned under circumstances not made public. Lenczowski made a decision to make a spirited in-house person, Travis R., IWP’s top fundraising staffer.

IWP went years without a real strategic plan

As of last February, IWP lacked a “well-defined strategic plan,” according to the board member.

An interim management, whom the board retained in late February and whom Lenczowski fired in July, began drawing up a staff-driven strategic plan in response to the board’s concerns. Lenczowski fired the staffer most closely involved, but took the staffer’s ideas as his own in a rushed strategic plan to show accreditors.

ActiveMeasures.org will publish the full text of the board member’s February 17 memo soon.

Share Button

Chairman warned by board member: ‘IWP may be running out of time’

Share Button

After the President of IWP fired a popular executive vice president last February, a prominent member of the board worried in writing that “IWP may be running out of time.”

IWP out of timeThe board member, who is still an IWP trustee, wrote of his concerns in a note to Chairman Owen Smith on February 17, 2013.

ActiveMeasures.org published some of the points in the memo yesterday. More details appear below.

The Institute, according to the board member, lacked “steady and inspired hands at the helm.”

Also absent, he said, were “leaders who can delegate effectively and take full advantage of the faculty and other resources.”

It would be very difficult to find top-flight talent to run IWP effectively and professionally, according to the trustee. The memo to Chairman Smith acknowledged that IWP’s professional track record was so bad that “any candidate [for executive vice president or COO] would want assurances the Board would back him, and there would be complete transparency.”

Under President John Lenczowski, IWP has had 9 EVP/COO-level managers in 10 years, or a turnover of about one every 13 months.

‘We are not succeeding anywhere close to potential’

As a businessman, the trustee saw IWP falling far short of accomplishing its mission. He admitted in the memo that the board as a whole had not been diligent about the school’s leadership. “John is the inspiration,” the trustee said about Lenczowski, “but he is not the only keeper of the light. The Trustees have an obligation to support him towards the goal of providing leaders urgently needed for our country. We are not succeeding anywhere close to potential or to meeting the need.”

The trustee conceded in his memo that, if faculty criticism of Lenczowski was right, “IWP is running out of time unless we can solve the management challenges.”

Share Button

Being a Knight of Malta lets me be more moral than you

Share Button

Moral leadership

Share Button

Board member to Chairman: Capable management of IWP ‘may be impossible, given the control John exerts’

Share Button

A very influential member of the present IWP Board of Trustees told the board Chairman that getting a capable person to run the Institute “may be impossible, given the control John [Lenczowski] exerts.”

Ecole JohnThe board member made the statement in a February 17, 2013 memorandum to IWP board Chairman Owen Smith. The writer is still on the Board of Trustees. ActiveMeasures.org is withholding his identity for the moment.

The assessment of IWP’s prospects for sound, professional leadership came during the uproar over the sudden firing earlier that month of the Institute’s popular executive vice president.

Top board members were wondering what to do and looking for solutions. There was even discussion of removing Lenczowski as IWP president.

Lenczowski, and more recently Smith, went to significant lengths to isolate board members from IWP faculty and staff.

Board leaders aware all along

The February 17 message is one of many that clearly show that senior board members, including the chairman, knew that Lenczowski was the main reason why IWP has been so poorly run, and that the board had been lax in confronting the problem.

Many, if not most board members, appear to have been kept in the dark.

Trustee admitted to chairman that board had allowed problems to become a crisis

The board member’s comments are revealing, in that they acknowledge that the board had been aware, for at least four years, that IWP was in serious management trouble. They show Excerpt 2013.02.17that senior board members have felt for years that Lenczowski was no longer capable of running the school, yet they did not act.

The revelation of the February 17 memorandum is important, as Lenczowski is in yet another round of blaming former underlings for the school’s chronic management and fundraising problems.

Lenczowski has had 9 second-in-commands in 10 years – a sign of unhealthy governance under the President and CEO, who founded the school. The IWP chief’s behavior as CEO is consistent with what is called founder’s syndrome.

Main points, as seen from inside the IWP Board of Trustees

Some of the main points in the board member’s February 17, 2013 memorandum to Chairman Smith are:

  • Agreement with most of the faculty and staff general criticisms of Lenczowski’s leadership.
  • Acknowledgement of the lack of “steady and inspired hands at the helm.”
  • Recognition that IWP lacked “leaders who can delegate effectively and take full advantage of the faculty and other resources.”
  • A sense that Lenczowski should be replaced as IWP President.
  • Admission that IWP had such a bad track record that “any candidate would want assurances the Board would back him, and there would be complete transparency.”
  • Appointing a capable person to run IWP effectively “may be impossible, given the control John [Lenczowski] exerts. He will feel threatened.”

ActiveMeasures.org will publish more points from the February 17 memo soon, along with the full text.

Share Button

Half of IWP’s accreditation assessment committee was either fired or quit

Share Button

IWP says it’s in compliance with the necessary standards to maintain its accreditation, but its website, as of today, gives a false impression about the faculty and staff involved in working up to those standards.

Truth to powerFully half of the vital Institutional Research and Assessment Committee (IRAC) either has been fired or resigned since July.

But the present IWP page about IRAC describes the committee as it stood early last summer, when the staff was united in preparing the monitoring report due last October 1 to the accreditors.

[NOON UPDATE, OCTOBER 30: This morning, IWP removed the names of the 3 people on the 6-person committee who were fired or resigned. The above link now shows only 3 members. See screenshot below for the page as it looked on the morning of October 30.]

Suppressing honest assessment of leadership?

Coincidentally, those now-departed individuals were the only ones on IRAC involved with preparing the required assessments to the accreditors about the performance of the IWP president and board.

That was part of their job to help the school maintain its accreditation. MSCHE considers independent, internal assessments of leadership to be important measures of good governance.

The registrar, vice president for student affairs, and interim dean are the only ones on IRAC who are still employed by IWP. But you wouldn’t know it from iwp.edu today.

The other members are gone: the vice president for institutional assessment and the vice president for professional affiliations and external affiliations and external programs apparently resigned for reasons not publicly disclosed, and the former vice president and provost was fired.

Purge anyone who tells truth to power

The problem doesn’t appear to be a mere oversight. Somebody seems to have modified the IRAC page to remove the latter’s title of vice president and provost, but kept his former professorial title.

To tighten his grip as calls mounted over the summer for his removal as IWP president, Lenczowski promoted his own daughter in September to control IWP’s public information. She is also the webmaster of iwp.edu, with day-to-day responsibility for the content.

One of the departed vice presidents on IRAC was the Chief Academic Officer listed with the Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE), which accredited IWP. Another of the ex-VPs was the designated Accreditation Liaison Officer (ALO) for MSCHE.

QuietDr Lenczowski fired the IRAC member who, as vice president and provost, had been preparing drafts of three important self-assement reports for MSCHE: (1) a faculty assessment of the IWP president, (2) a staff assessment of the IWP president, and (3) a faculty-staff assessment of the performance of the IWP board.

Under MSCHE guidelines, the faculty and staff were to have submitted their independent assessments of the IWP leadership to the accreditors with the October 1 report.

The MSCHE-required staff and faculty assessments of Lenczowski and the board were never written.

Lenczowski was also to have submitted to MSCHE a self-assessment of his own performance as IWP president, but he is not believed to have done so.

Those reports are required by MSCHE under the terms of IWP’s accreditation.

Lenczowski also stripped ALO duties in July from the other vice president, who later resigned, but he did not inform MSCHE until October, after ActiveMeasures.org raised the issue publicly.

The two IWP vice presidents on IRAC who resigned were also believed to be assisting with the drafts of the faculty and staff assessments of the IWP president and board, as was a faculty member whom Lenczowski demoted.

Lenczowski had been indiscreetly telling people for months that he had wanted each of the three vice presidents “fired” because they challenged his capability as president and CEO. Staff and faculty who exhibit slavish loyalty to Lenczowski personally are assured of their jobs and have even been promoted.

IRAC Oct 29 2013

Screen shot of the IRAC page the night of October 29-30, 2013, falsely showing that the members who had been critical of the IWP leadership – and who were either fired or resigned – were still on the committee. Click on image to enlarge.

We have a datestamped screenshot of the page from the night of October 29-30.

The image is proof that, a month after IWP’s monitoring report was sent to accreditors, IWP was still conveying the false impression to the public that all was well on the compliance side of the house, and that the vice presidents and faculty most critical of Lenczowski’s mismanagement were, indeed, still on IRAC.

The names of the departed faculty and vice presidents, which appear on the screenshot, were removed from the IWP page after this article was posted.

Credibility gap with accreditors?

This represents a second major faux pas concerning the IWP leadership’s credibility with the accreditors.

Last month, IWP’s new executive vice president, Noah Rudolph, falsely told the accreditors that he was the “chief academic officer” of the Institute, when he is not a member of the faculty and does not have an advanced degree. After ActiveMeasures.org publicized the matter, Rudolph issued a statement that he had made a mistake.

IRAC is a key faculty & staff committee

The MSCHE accreditors are examining five areas of concern in which IWP’s status might be at issue.

IRAC, as the staff and faculty accreditation assessment committee, was responsible for addressing those concerns for the October 1 report.

Its chairman is widely regarded as highly professional and diligent. However, word on the IWP staff is that IRAC was not the principal author of the monitoring report that IWP ultimately sent to accreditors in late September. The IRAC chairman was methodical and thorough, but the report IWP sent to MSCHE has been described as a rush job.

According to the official Institute description of IRAC, “IWP’s Institutional Research and Assessment Committee organizes and analyzes institutional and other data to support planning, assessment and decision making at IWP.  The office’s major responsibility is compiling and filing reports required by the Middle States Commission on Higher Education, the U.S. Department of Education and other state and federal agencies.”

The objectives of IRAC, according to IWP, include the following:

  • To meet District of Columbia and federal external reporting requirements “on time and with accurate information”;
  • To “organize, maintain and disseminate” IWP internal data “for . . . accreditation. . .”
Share Button

Consistencies and inconsistencies in IWP’s leadership

Share Button

IWP President John Lenczowski likes to deflect responsibility for the Institute’s problems on others. Usually he heaps the blame on hard-working people whom he fired, pressured to resign, or demoralized until they couldn’t take it any more.

SeatingPeriodically rearranging the deck chairs is Lenczowski’s way of remaining the big fish in his little pond, giving himself credit for successes while making others take the fall for his failures.

Usually he blames people behind their backs, so they can’t know the accusations against them.

And so they can’t refute what he says about them.

But no matter how many times Lenczowski reshuffles the management, the Institute remains plagued with problems at the top.

9 COO ‘equivalents’ in 10 years

By our count, the person running IWP on a day-to-day basis has changed nine times in 10 years.

These nine chief operating officer (COO) “equivalents” had whimsically differing titles. They were variously called executive director, management consultant, vice president for finance and administration, executive vice president, chief operating officer, interim fill-in-the-blank, etc.

Out of deference to their privacy and the fictions surrounding their abrupt departures, we will list them only by their initials. We’re not counting periods when there was no formal EVP or COO equivalent.

  • E.O. (resigned)
  • J.D. (fired)
  • F.O. (fired)
  • J.H. (removed but remained on staff)
  • T.L. (de facto until J.H. was restored)
  • J.H. (restored until fired in 2012)
  • D.M. (fired in 2013)
  • M.W. (fired from faculty after his 4-month interim VP term expired)
  • N.R. (not fired yet)

ActiveMeasures.org apologizes in advance for anyone we forgot to mention.

Musical chairs with academic leadership

In the past seven years or so, Lenczowski has named at least 4 people as academic dean on about 8 different occasions, often in an ad interim capacity, as is presently the case. [Update: the  ad interim dean is presently on leave, so there is no dean at all.]

Musical chairsThe board executive committee named another individual as acting dean in February 2013, but Dr Lenczowski blocked her from taking the position.

He later fired her as acting faculty chairman, in which she performed most of the functions of dean and devised most of the academic reforms that Lenczowski recently announced as his own.

Nearly everyone but Lenczowski agreed that she was doing an exemplary job.

Lenczowski rejected the February executive committee meeting as that of a “rump group” and a “faction,” even though that group included the board chairman, vice chairman, secretary-treasurer and himself, and he voted with them in the affirmative.

Again, we’ll just use the initials of the deans and deans-equivalent. Because so many reshufflings were informal or not publicly announced, we might have erred in the exact order. We also may have forgotten someone. By our count, they are:

  • J.T. (Lenczowski removed him without telling him; J.T. found out secondhand)
  • M.C. (removed but remained on faculty)
  • J.T. (restored and later removed)
  • D.K. (fired)
  • M.C. (restored, in acting capacity, but it wasn’t official so there’s some confusion here)
  • J.T. (restored, ad interim, and later either resigned or was removed)
  • C.S. (ad interim; later resigned)
  • J.T. (restored yet again, ad interim)
  • J.P. (was appointed dean ad interim in February 2013 by board of trustees executive committee, but Dr Lenczowski blocked the appointment; JP was named interim faculty chairman and performed most of the functions of a dean, but Lenczowski removed her four months later)
  • J.T. (resumed official dean responsibilities on ad interim basis)
  • Vacant, with ad interim dean placed on leave
  • We are told that a headhunting firm may be retained to recruit a new dean, but we’ve heard that story before.

Three IWP vice presidents are out in 4 months

Since summer, the pace of top personnel changes has quickened. Three vice presidents of IWP left between July and October. One was fired, and two abruptly resigned under circumstances that Lenczowski never officially made clear.

This ActiveMeasures.org listing may differ with the recollections of others, as Dr Lenczowski has a propensity to take such actions unilaterally, and to demote people without telling them to their faces. And to keep as few written records as possible. The listing is our best attempt to illustrate where the consistencies have and have not been in the IWP leadership.

So: If all those people are to blame for IWP’s problems, what does that say about the IWP president? And what does it say about the board of trustees?

Share Button

Lenczowski makes Travis R. the top fundraising staffer at IWP

Share Button

TravisIn a surprise move, IWP President John Lenczowski has made Travis R. the top fundraising staffer at the Institute.

Lenczowski made the change October 25, in yet another senior-level personnel shakeup. ActiveMeasures.org has redacted Travis’ surname at his request.

The IWP president issued an announcement about the shakeup in an email to staff.

He has fired or prompted the resignations of three vice presidents in four months, and removed the faculty chairman.

Travis is pictured here doing his famous Glow Stick Dance as a contestant in the 2013 Mr. D.C. charity pageant.

The spirited employee finds himself in the top fundraiser staff position at a difficult time. It has widely been known that:

  • IWP’s revenues are down;
  • few major foundations are willing to give to the Institute any more;
  • contrary to expectations, IWP’s landlord, the late billionaire Don Bently, did not leave the IWP campus – or anything else – to the school in his will when he died last year;
  • Don Bently’s heir has no interest in making major gifts to IWP;
  • IWP’s largest donor resigned from the board this summer;
  • the Institute failed to repay $140,000 it borrowed from the Kosciuszko endowment;
  • IWP lost a six-figure sum from the Army after Lenczowski failed to ensure an orderly transition during his summer personnel shakeups;
  • Lenczowski’s personal appeal letters to donors have been flopping;
  • Lenczowski has alienated major donors and potential donors from supporting the school; and
  • the philanthropic foundation community is buzzing with questions about what is wrong at IWP.

Word is that few members of the IWP Board of Trustees are making significant donations any more, and almost none are recommending new potential contributors. This is a huge red flag about insider confidence in the IWP leadership.

We all like Travis, and wish him well. He has a huge job ahead of him.

Share Button