At least 80 companies have collectively pledged over $120 million to "Black Lives Mater" related organizations, and $200 million to internal corporate programs addressing African American advancement through the company. The major industry pledges include: 

Apparel: $47 million

Tech: $42.5 million, plus $100 million internal programs

Retail Chains: $11 million,  plus $100 million internal programs

And more from Beauty, Food, Gaming, Health, Media companies 

Corporate giving programs are pledging to organizations directly affiliated to Black Lives Matter (BLM, BLM Global Foundation, individual BLM chapters, NAACP Legal Defense & Educational, etc). But they are also pledging to groups that are not affiliated, including in Social Justice, Traditional African American advancement groups like Thurgood Marshall College Fund, Black-Owned Businesses, and local groups. In all, there are 47 groups publicly named - many of which are not affiliated to "Black Lives Matter" organization. Additionally, 32 corporate giving programs are pledging to "unidentified" organizations to advance related causes. 

Of these companies, 19 corporations have operations, manufacturing, sales, or relations in China. China is notorious for slavery, including child slavery, to date. As a result of the Chinese slavery issue, and other matters in U.S.-China economic tensions, many companies are reviewing their current operations in China, in effort to reduce exposure to related risk. 

There are brewing suggestions that China is behind the "Black Lives Matter" initiatives, but no concrete evidence in "open source" (public information) found, as of the date of this podcast. However, China has reached out to Black Lives Matter and Antifa welcoming talks... China has also been attempting to send weapons and weapons parts to the United States, including in Seattle, but those shipments have been blocked and seized by Customs Border Protection (CBP). 

This podcast also stresses the differential between "Black Lives Matter" and "Antifa" which, as explained in earlier podcast, are two (2) separate networks, however intermingled on the basis of incidents, initiatives, individuals. The distinction has in no way prevented the predominantly White "Antifa" members from exploiting the "Black Lives Matter" brand in the name of their excessive violence.   

This podcast also encourages anyone to denounce the Violence, and be wary of the "semantics game" that can enable continue risks to Public Safety.

From 2018-2019, I was blessed with welcome in a Historical Black Church, which was founded by ex-slaves, and maintains multiple generations of membership to this day. This podcast is the story of how I became involved with the church, but more importantly, how the church was founded and was part of the early champions of civil rights, from liberation of slavery to advocacy for human rights for the Black community - beginning over 150 years ago. 

In this podcast, I read the following essay of this Historical Black Church:

Standin' On Faith

A Historical Walk Through the Galloway United Methodist Church Story

Established in 1867

Author: Tanya Hardy, Church Historian

Exhibition: Church Museum and Fellowship Hall, Galloway United Methodist Church

https://www.academia.edu/43696049/Standin_On_Faith_A_Historical_Walk_Through_the_Galloway_United_Methodist_Church_Story_Est._1867_-_Current_

The objective of this report is to provide a reference for nonprofit administrators, public sector administrators, and philanthropists in consideration of stability for any partnerships, endowments, pension fund, gifts of stock, or other programs that may be impacted by increasing tensions in U.S.-China Relations. This white paper covers the following topics, in summary sections: 

What follows is a series of appendices detailing U.S. and Chinese companies by name: 

The intended audience for this report is Nonprofit Institutional CFOs, Government Agency Financial Directorate, Philanthropists, and other interested professionals. 

Corresponding GHC Report: 

U.S. - China Market Entanglements - Considerations for Social Investment and Corporate Social Responsibility under U.S.-China Relations Uncertainty

Click Here for the GHC Report

#China #chinamarket #chinamanufacturing #investingnews #endowment #endowments 

Abstract

As of the latest collective 990 filings to the IRS Charities Division, there are 1,979,044 nonprofit 501c3 tax exempt organizations in the United States. 

The total 1.98 million organizations collectively maintain $5.45 Trillion in Assets, and $3.77 Trillion in Gross Revenue on an Annual Basis.

As of the latest filed 990 forms to the IRS, collectively, Main Street and Institutional nonprofits maintain $5.395 Trillion in Assets, of which $1.382 Billion are Securities (25.63% of Assets are Securities). 

Of the $1.382 Billion in Securities between both Main Street and Institutional nonprofits, $1.348 Trillion in Securities are held by 501c3s with over $3 Million in Assets per tax exempt entity (Institutional tax exempt entities hold 97.5% of the collective securities). 

Collectively also, Main Street and Institutional nonprofits maintain $276 Billion in Stocks, which comprise nearly 20% of their securities portfolios. Main Street 501c3’s hold Stocks at a level of 48% of the securities portfolio, whereas Institutional securities portfolios include Stocks at a rate of 19.26%. 

Main Street nonprofit investment income totaled $785 Million as of the latest fiscal year end filed, at a rate of 0.64% of gross revenue on average. 

Institutional nonprofit investment income totaled $39.2 Billion, at a rate of 1.1% of gross revenue on average. 

In comparing the total Main Street and Institutional securities against the DJIA adjusted close on the last date of the standard fiscal calendars, weighting the majority of latest filers collectively reported as of Fiscal Year 2018, the $1.38 Trillion in securities held by Main Street and Institutional nonprofits accounts for 5.2% - 5.9% (5.4%) estimated share of the total U.S. securities market.

-----

Source: Total 501c3 filings submitted to IRS, as financially assessed through licensed search engine. 

Disclaimer: This executive summary and the backing "GHC Report" is for charitable market research purposes, and as such, is strictly a broad analysis of publicly available financial information on the U.S. nonprofit 501c sector. This report is in no way a substitute for financial or investment advice.

About: Velma Anne Ruth, M.Ed. is Founder of Founder, Global H Codes (GHC), a classification system established for advancing internal administrative, operations, compliance, accounting and information technology systems. Velma is President & Founder of ABS Community Research (est. 2001), and President of Independent Review, Inc (est. 2010)

-----

Click Here for White Paper: https://www.academia.edu/43627998/Nonprofit_Finance_and_Investing_Community_and_Main_Street_Charities_and_Institutional_Nonprofits

GHC White Paper: 7/15/20

GHC Report: 5/20/20

It never fails. Whenever I work with NGOs and related diaspora simply seeking to provide humanitarian assistance and advocacy to their communities in their home countries, they always ask if I am tied to some intelligence agency. The answer is unequivocally, no. However, it is consistently perplexing when I am repeatedly told that the information I am able to derive from given communities and open source, is somehow beyond that which certain officials and institutions maintain. How is that? In this data driven era, it is imperative upon us to take the time to think for ourselves, to review and consider independently, and to move through civil discourse. There are groups around the world believing in the United States as the beacon of Freedom and Liberty, calling for our ear and support, even moral support such that our elected officials may heed. Yet, it is the silenced majorities who are against corruption, against terrorism, who are never heard, and never reached. At what point do our elected officials and respected institutions take heed to the Populous, in Public Service? The proud, the few, but by God, we need more.

Antifa and Muslim Brotherhood were both founded in 1928 and established in the late 1930s between Europe, Middle East, and Latin America. Since the early 1990s terror cells on U.S. Soil have been growing and festering. The Chinese apparently exploited our vulnerability to bioterrorism. Around the world, Iran/China/Russia/North Korea, et al partner in reeking havoc, seizing natural resources as commodities, and leaving people for dead. There is a vast and longstanding network of relationships going on almost 100 years that isn't new, but has been long awaiting to hit the United States harder than 9/11. Here we are. So how do we defend ourselves and push back, since taking the threat to their homeland apparently didn't work as well as intended...

This podcast is dedicated to Law Enforcement.

Antifa launched publicly in the United States in the late 1980s under a different name. They were a driving force behind the "Occupy" protests and subsequent activities across the United States. Black Lives Matter was established through the "Occupy" protests, but focused solely on activities in direct response to police involved deaths of Black community members. To date, Antifa and Black Lives Matter share multiple relationships domestically and around the world, including fundraising platforms that are shared with the Democrat Party. 

This podcast is dedicated to Law Enforcement.

Global H Codes (GHC) Models

Global H Codes (GHC) is a classification system supporting high level administrative oversight and related executive practices in finance, operations, policy, and technology.  The core structure provides a bridge in data management and reporting between each area, maximizing public and charitable initiatives to the administrative capacity as equivalent to the business sector.  

To date, GHC has been most often utilized for financial analysis, grant writing, annual reports, strategic planning, market research, marketing, partnership development, technology development, compliance audits, and due diligence projects. 

In the field, results from GHC applications have been most valued by bankers, accountants, philanthropists and fundraisers, market research firms, law firms, nonprofit and philanthropic consultants, and information technology developers.  

The core GHC hierarchy upon establishment is maintained today, including the following sample categories: 

PRO: Industry, Professional Field

REG: Location, Regional Jurisdiction 

SIT: Entity Type

POP: Population Group 

X: Specialization, Issue or Subgroup 

L: Leadership, Professional Level

ACT: Professional Activities, Operational Functions  

HCO: Data, Case Information or Research 

Additional 

GHC classifications are typically integrated into multiple cross-referencing matrices, capturing the complexity and often frequently changing nonprofit environment in response to beneficiary demand. Resulting analytics are typically applied to finance and operations administration.

GHC in Communications

The primary objective of any GHC analysis or report is to maintain transparency and accountability in communications regarding any given nonprofit organization, or group of organizations. 

Whether for public or internal purposes, GHC applications are intended to serve nonprofit stakeholders, in a manner to maximize the individual entity or wider sector impact in service to given target beneficiary groups. 

There is strong overlap between sectors surrounding and intersecting with charities, namely: the General Public, the given Charity and any related nonprofit groups, the beneficiary or Consumer, Sponsors, Government officials and related leadership such as association-based accreditors.  

Because of competition within the sector for funding and attention, because of the role of U.S. taxpayers in the tax-exemption of U.S. nonprofit entities, and the subsequent larger interests and objectives in the government and corporate sectors for nonprofit performance in given areas, data resulting from GHC analysis and reporting is at high-risk for politicization, exploitation, and weaponization.

There are a series of laws and ethics restricting nonprofits from engaging in political discourse, political campaigns, and obligating charities to maintain nonpartisan (or bipartisan) practices in order to maintain focus on the charitable mission and beneficiaries. 

In effect, as a fixed standard, any GHC related communications are geared towards the objective, nonpartisan assessment and reporting on actual, fact based, evidentiary bases, specifically to maintain the integrity of nonprofit transparency and accountability obligations to stakeholders. 

Introduction to Global H Codes (GHC)

Global H Codes (GHC)

Vision:

One of the largest challenges for nonprofits in achieving and growing their charitable missions is maintaining and advancing administration, financing, and related executive functions required to achieve operational objectives. This is true especially for smaller organizations, volunteer-dependent charities, and start-up programs, both domestically and overseas. In a highly competitive sector, GHC offers nonprofits at all levels with administrative tools for structuring and advancing growth, outcomes and impact.

Mission:

Provide fundamental analytical tools, a classification system, coding language, and interdisciplinary translation apparatus that supports technical advancements in administration, operations, finance, compliance, and information technology across nonprofit fields, economic levels, foreign and domestic bases.

Objective:

As a data modeling, data analytics, and strategic planning tool, GHC functions as an intermediary between comparable standardized classification systems, and as a development agent for lower-economic projects that may lack implementation of advanced classification, to support best practices, program development, innovation, and audits.

Applications:

The GHC classification system is applicable to the following executive functions, as exemplified by a series of GHC projects since founding in 1999:

PODCAST TRANSCRIPT

Velma Anne Ruth, M.Ed.

President & Founder

ABS Community Research

In founding research for ABS and DLS (1999 - 2001), I was requested by multiple advisors to address the policy and financial hurdles that present challenges against practitioners in community justice fields from doing their jobs in a manner of resourcefulness and resulting effectiveness in crime prevention and reducing recidivism. In direct response to that request, I drafted a coding hierarchy for "offender management" which is consistent with "client management” in the human professions. This framework is applicable to administrative and compliance analytics across relevant subsectors of Health & Human Services, Education, Labor, and Criminal Justice. These categories were deliberately aligned to U.S. federal hierarchies and respective federal agencies.

In order to establish an effective interdisciplinary classification system to complete the analysis, in a manner conducive to any potential advancement of professional standards, the multi-disciplinary nonprofit and public sector apparatus required compatibility across all nonprofit sectors. To meet this requirement, the "offender management" and "client management" analytic system evolved into "Global H Codes (GHC)."

In order to determine the swath of the nonprofit sector, between 2007-2009 I conducted an initial assessment of the U.S. nonprofit sector, with advisory support of senior level CFOs of a major investment bank. I also began an analysis of the current standard nonprofit sector economic classification codes (NTEE, NCS, NAICS) against GHC. Upon discovering that the U.S. nonprofit sector at the time was over $4 trillion in assets, and global nonprofit sector estimated at $15 trillion in assets, the size was frankly bewildering to any and all finance advisors, who had each guessed that the U.S. nonprofit sector must not be more than $200 billion in assets. I was then referred to the philanthropic investment banking offices, which sought to establish advanced internal market research and special banking products for the philanthropic and nonprofit sectors.

The results fueled initial dialog with agencies including UN National Accounts, U.S. Congress, professional associations, respective leading economics related institutes, and additional investment banks. Discussion generated consensus that the nonprofit sector classifications appeared to lack a strict economic hierarchy (i.e., industry, specialization, etc), but were rather muddled mixing populations, individual entities, and regions. This lack of structure, when applied also to the international nonprofit landscape, created certain wide gaps and “gray areas” in financial analysis and reporting, and was coined a “Black Hole” of nonprofit finance.

Discussion further lead to consensus on the need for public conferences on nonprofit finance and risk assessment, whereas individual seminars would be dedicated to the specifics of each nonprofit field, addressing both accounting, operations, outcomes reporting, technology, policy, and related advancements.

This publication provides a summary of original methodologies that have been applied in a broad array of fields and economic levels, over a period of ten (10+) years with an equal range of grassroots, government and diplomatic cohorts, in alignment to the International Standards Organization (ISO) requirements for standards advancement in finance and classifications.

Follow-up white papers exhibit applications of GHC in “real world” scenarios both domestically and overseas, on industry-specific bases, towards consensus development and ISO proposals. The objective of this literature is to support establishment of a formal Nonprofit Economic Council (NEC) to support advancements in nonprofit sector classifications and its implications for nonprofit and philanthropic administration.