TLG Managing Partner Jeff Tenenbaum Quoted in Chronicle of Philanthropy Article, “Why Removing a Problematic Donor’s Name Is Harder Than It Looks”

TLG Managing Partner Jeff Tenenbaum was quoted in the Chronicle of Philanthropy article, “Why Removing a Problematic Donor’s Name Is Harder Than It Looks.”

Some experts say the drawn-out process on college campuses isn’t surprising — especially since the donors under scrutiny for affiliating with Epstein haven’t been charged with crimes.

“If we were talking about Jeffrey Epstein as a donor, it would be one thing,” says Jeffrey Tenenbaum, a lawyer who counsels nonprofits. “But we’re talking about people who have been alleged to have been associated with him but have not been found guilty of criminal conspiracy to facilitate crimes. It makes these situations much more difficult to navigate.”

The risk of removing a name, Tenenbaum says, is not only a potential lawsuit from an aggrieved donor — and the possible reclaiming of the donation — but also the message that the removal sends to future donors.

“Donors have certain contractual rights, and institutions have to be very cognizant of those rights, and they have to act accordingly,” Tenenbaum says. “Otherwise, they put themselves not only at legal risk, but they also put themselves at risk of alienating future donors who might say, ‘Well, I’m not going to give to this institution because they have a history of taking people’s names down from buildings.’”

Donations that provide naming rights include language related to morals that are “some of the most heavily negotiated provisions” in gifts agreements, Tenenbaum says. Most include language similar to Haverford’s broad gift acceptance policy, which states that names can be removed from campus spaces if “circumstances change substantially so that the continued use of the name may be deemed detrimental to the College.”