STATEMENT TO CORRECT AND RESPOND
TO THE
JANUARY 22, 2010 ARTICLE THAT APPEARED
IN THE ST. PETERSBURG TIMES
The National Center for Missing & Exploited Children is issuing
the following statement regarding the January 22, 2010 article that appeared
in the St. Petersburg Times written by Susan Taylor Martin. Key
facts and information that were provided to Ms. Martin were omitted and
the resulting story contained inaccurate and misleading information surrounding
three important issues.
Executive Compensation
The salary for Ernie Allen, the president & CEO of NCMEC, was not
$1.3 million and he did not earn $1.3 million in 2008 as the story and
the various sensational headlines used to promote the story over the
weekend stated. The article grossly exaggerates and misstates his
compensation.
As was explained to Ms. Martin, each year the IRS changes the instructions
for what is reported on the 990 as compensation and how the number is
calculated. What an organization is required to report as compensation
can vary from year to year. And what an organization is required
to report on the 990 can be very different from the amount that an employee
actually receives. Further, what an organization reports on the
form 990 can be very different from the income reported on the annual
W-2 that an individual is required to report on the form 1040. There
is also a difference between salary and compensation. Salary includes
wages. Compensation includes salary and employee benefits, but
can also include other items depending on the instructions for that year.
Mr. Allen’s involvement with NCMEC goes beyond the traditional
CEO. He was one of the co-founders of both NCMEC and ICMEC. Mr.
Allen serves as the full-time chief executive and manages two nonprofit
organizations with separate boards of directors, one domestic and one
global, and he played a significant role in building both organizations.
Mr. Allen’s salary as president of NCMEC was $365,000. The
additional $145,000 in salary that he received was as president of ICMEC
which is a separate 501(c)(3) organization. Mr. Allen does not
receive bonuses or perks that many other executives receive. And
he chose not to accept contracted salary increases he was entitled to
for the last four years, choosing instead to maintain his salary at the
2006 level except for the same modest cost of living increases that all
NCMEC employees receive. His salary and benefits are not paid with federal
money. They are paid solely with private funds.
In 2008, the compensation reported on the form 990 also includes the
cost of insurance premiums paid by his employer as well as the cost of
actual medical claims paid by his employer for him and his family. It
also includes retirement benefits that have accumulated for more than
20 years, including amounts that have already been previous reported
as compensation, but due to a vesting schedule and 990 instructions were
reported a second time in 2008. As a result, nearly half of the
$1.3 million reported on the 990 is for 20 years of retirement benefits
earned prior to 2008. It should also be noted that in less than
one year, at age 65, Mr. Allen will reach the age of full vesting of
all retirement benefits and the compensation reported on the form 990
will be less confusing.
The bottom line is the St. Petersburg Times story left readers with
the wrong impression that Mr. Allen made $1.3 million in 2008. The
compensation reported on the form 990 is confusing and misleading and
what was reported is different from the income Mr. Allen actually received
that year.
Ms. Martin was also advised that the NCMEC board underwent an extensive
process to determine compensation for all of the NCMEC executives, including
the president. An extensive amount of comparability data was considered
and a top employee compensation benefits firm was consulted to determine
compensation levels that were appropriate, comparable and reasonable
to similar positions in the U.S.
In determining compensation a broad range of factors is typically considered
including: scope of responsibilities, expertise required, type
and level of professional experience, length of service, institutional
knowledge, policy and issue knowledge, performance, type and complexity
of organization, where the organization is located, budget, number of
employees, nature and scope of the programs and services offered by the
organization and other items.
Further, Ms. Martin’s comparison Mr. Allen’s salary to the
CEOs of the American Red Cross and the Smithsonian is not a valid comparison. Both
are fine people heading remarkable organizations. However,
both are new to their positions, while Mr. Allen is a co-founder of NCMEC
and has served as its CEO for over 21 years.
NCMEC is a Nonprofit Organization and Not a Government Agency
The National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC) is
not a government agency and is not subject to the Freedom of Information
Act (FOIA). NCMEC is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. It
is an information clearinghouse. It assists law enforcement, but
does not engage in law enforcement action itself.
When NCMEC was created in 1984, the President and Congress specifically
did not want the organization to be a government agency. It needed
to be a private organization with strong government support. The
government would provide access to key databases and financial support
for specific responsibilities, and the private sector would provide support
in a myriad of other ways.
The public-private partnership is a model has been used in the U.S.
for more than 200 years. It combines the efficiency and technological
advantages of the private sector with the legislative authority and public-focus
of the public sector. A familiar example of a private-partnership
model in law enforcement is the contract between local law enforcement
and the private company that operates and maintains speed cameras used
to enforce traffic laws.
The organization receives federal funding for nineteen specific programs
and services NCMEC is mandated to provide. However,
the organization also receives a large amount of private sector support
to greatly expand the work of the organization. One of NCMEC’s
strengths is the ability to multiply the value of public dollars with
a massive amount of private sector support. For example, 400 companies
disseminate missing child photos at no cost, technology companies provide
NCMEC with cutting-edge technology, and database companies offer free
access to their public record databases. A government agency would
never receive the kind of donated support from the private sector that
NCMEC receives as a nonprofit. And if NCMEC were a government agency,
the cost to replicate what the organization does would increase the annual
budget by many multiples.
NCMEC’s Role in International Child Abduction Cases
In her story, Ms. Martin references the case involving Emmanuel Lazaridis
of Crete and states that he has never been convicted of anything. That
is because he left the United States before he could be arrested. What
Ms. Martin did not include in her story were other key facts about the
international child abduction case involving Mr. Lazaridis’s daughter
and the role of NCMEC in cases such as these.
In 2002, an international parental abduction case involving Varvara
Lazaridis, then 2-years-old, arose when the child was taken by her mother
from France to Michigan. The father, Emmanuel Lazaridis, initiated
proceedings under the Hague Convention to have the child returned to
France. During the proceedings, the court awarded temporary custody
of the child to Mr. Lazaridis pending resolution of the case, and ordered
him not to leave the jurisdiction with the child until further order
of the court.
Mr. Lazaridis fled the United States with the child. He traveled
to the Dominican Republic where he obtained a custody order for the child. He
then returned to France before moving to Crete.
Michigan issued a felony warrant for Mr. Lazaridis. France also
issued a criminal warrant. Interpol issued a Blue Notice for Mr.
Lazaridis. A Blue Notice is a request for Interpol’s 188
member countries to provide information about an individual’s identify
or activities in relation to a crime. Some countries may decide
to detail the subject of a Blue Notice even if no valid national arrest
warrant exists. Interpol also issued a Yellow Notice for the child. A
Yellow Notice is used to help locate missing persons, often minors, or
to help identify persons who are unable to identify themselves.
In 2005, based on the fact that the case met the necessary criteria
for media in that law enforcement had issued a missing child report,
the child had been entered into the FBI’s national crime information
center (NCIC), and there was a U.S. felony kidnapping warrant issued
for Mr. Lazaridis. NCMEC created a missing child poster that included
photographs of the daughter and of Mr. Lazaridis (pursuant to the felony
warrant) and posted it to the NCMEC website.
Michigan police continue to maintain an open, active missing child case
today and have asked NCMEC to continue its efforts to assist in locating
and returning the child to the United States. Michigan police have
also asked NCMEC to continue to post media on this case. The felony
warrant for Mr. Lazaridis issued in Michigan remains active today, as
do the Interpol yellow and blue notices. And it is our understanding
there is also still an active French warrant for Mr. Lazaridis’s
arrest.
NCMEC’s role in these cases is very clear-cut and defined. NCMEC
only issues posters regarding a missing child and an alleged abductor
when there is a police report, when the case has been entered into NCIC,
and when there is a felony criminal warrant issued for the arrest of
the abductor. Incidentally, this case involves exactly the kind
of forum shopping in international child custody disputes that the Hague
Convention was developed to prevent.
### |
Privacy Policy
