Sister Jenny's UCM: Zero Accountability, Family Control, and Financial Alarms
Matthew Porter
5
9-28Mia: We're looking at a Pennsylvania nonprofit today, United Christian Ministries, or UCM. It's known for its founder, Sister Jenny. Publicly, UCM is a 501c3 with a really strong mission—emergency housing, counseling, community outreach. I mean, they worked with the Central Pennsylvania Food Bank and served 456 cars in a single post-COVID food drive. But internal documents paint a deeply concerning picture, suggesting the organization's structure might be fundamentally compromised, despite all its visible community impact.
Mars: Right. It's that classic two-faced scenario, isn't it? On one hand, they seem to be a beacon of help, a pillar of the community. But on the other, the internal mechanisms, the very things that are supposed to keep it honest, appear to be in serious disrepair.
Mia: The critical question here is how an organization with such a clear public mission can harbor such significant internal governance and financial issues. You know, this isn't just about minor oversights; it's about the very foundation of trust that public charities are built on.
Mars: Exactly. The public sees the good work, the food drives, the housing. But the internal documents suggest a systemic failure in accountability. If that's left unchecked, it can completely erode that trust and put the entire mission at risk.
Mia: So, we have this stark contrast between UCM's outward-facing mission and the internal concerns. This leads us directly to the core issue: accountability, or I guess, the profound lack of it. How did this structural deficiency show up in their governance and financial reporting?
Mars: Well, the institutional structure itself is flagged as the main problem right away by Charity Navigator. It gave UCM a dismal one-star rating based entirely on accountability and finance metrics.
Mia: I saw that. And digging into their filings, UCM's board reports having zero percent independent members. That just seems like a critical failure point that industry standards are designed to prevent, to ensure objective oversight and stop self-dealing. And this lack of independence is made worse by missing foundational policies: no conflict of interest, no whistleblower, and no document retention policy. It feels like an environment where problems are guaranteed to fester, and it shows in their consistent conflict of interest transactions in tax filings going back to at least 2011.
Mars: Zero independent board members? I mean, that's not just failing a metric; that's being structurally incapable of objective oversight. It just can't happen. And the absence of basic policies like conflict of interest and whistleblower protection... well, that's a recipe for disaster.
Mia: So, the governance structure is clearly deeply flawed, with no independent oversight and a lack of basic policies. This directly ties into the centralized family control model and the financial issues that have been consistently reported.
Mars: That's right. The control at UCM seems extremely tight, resting with the founder, Virginia E. Boley, Sister Jenny, and her son, David Kenner Boley, who is the board chairperson.
Mia: And there's that line from the internal emails where David says decisions are his mother's and will one day become his. That's practically the definition of a single point of failure, especially for an organization handling public funds. On top of that, they're on shaky ground financially. In 2023, 89.1% of their revenue came from donations, yet they frequently reported deficits—a loss of over $27,000 in 2023 and over $52,000 in 2022. That has to make them incredibly vulnerable.
Mars: You've got it. That family control dynamic, coupled with consistent financial losses and a heavy reliance on donations, creates a perfect storm for potential mismanagement and a total lack of accountability.
Mia: This financial instability and concentrated family control really set the stage for the internal showdown with their accountant. What exactly did Wendy Schwartz uncover, and how did UCM leadership react to her serious financial concerns?
Mars: The showdown with the accountant, Wendy Schwartz, revealed this fundamental argument over whether UCM's financial practices were even legal. She raised written concerns about potential violations of IRS tax-exempt and federal wage and hour laws.
Mia: Right, specifically she flagged David Boley's compensation as potentially improper. Maybe he was using an organization card or was paid as an unqualified subcontractor instead of being on proper payroll. She also warned that using donation funds for personal expenses could jeopardize their tax-exempt status. But instead of fixing things, the leadership, particularly David Boley, reacted with hostility, calling her burdensome. And just before she was terminated in January 2023, the organization's main bank account was locked, with leadership blaming her for it.
Mars: It's incredible. So, when the expert raises red flags about potential illegal activity and misuse of funds, the response isn't to fix it, but to attack the messenger and then lock the bank account? That's a textbook example of how a lack of accountability allows noncompliance to win.
Mia: And the accountant's warnings weren't just about procedural errors. They touched on potential violations of fundamental IRS laws that could strip UCM of its tax-exempt status—its very reason for existence.
Mars: That's the key. And the hostile reaction, blaming the accountant, and that locked bank account right before her dismissal—it paints a clear picture. The organization prioritized protecting its internal structure and leadership from scrutiny over addressing serious legal and financial concerns. This is where abstract governance failures become acutely personal and potentially devastating.
Mia: So we see how financial warnings led to the accountant's dismissal, a clear pattern of zero accountability. But the impact extends beyond paperwork. Let's shift focus to the human cost and the alleged personal disputes involving former employees and residents.
Mars: The human cost is illustrated by former employees Matthew Porter and Donna Frisbee. They managed a UCM property and were also residents there.
Mia: And Matthew claims he was fired on August 23rd, 2023, which was the day after Sister Jenny received a legal letter to garnish his wages for child support. His fiancée, Donna, quit in solidarity. The dispute then turned into a housing fight, with the couple alleging they were locked out of their UCM property, locks changed and everything. The allegations even state Ms. Boley escalated by calling law enforcement, accusing them of trespassing at a different address, though responding officers reportedly saw no legal grounds for the claims.
Mars: From wage garnishment triggering termination to being locked out of their homes and facing what they claim were false police reports—this sounds like a severe abuse of power. It's a complete betrayal of trust, especially from an organization that's supposed to help the vulnerable.
Mia: This personal dispute, with its allegations of retaliatory firing and false police reports, directly connects back to our earlier points about governance and accountability. The lack of independent oversight and basic policies seems to have allowed this centralized family power to manifest as real operational misconduct against individuals.
Mars: Absolutely. This is where abstract concepts like governance and compliance become intensely personal. That phrase the former employees used, betrayal in the temple of trust, really hits home. You see how the alleged harsh treatment of those inside the circle once they fell out of favor contrasts so sharply with the public mission of helping the vulnerable.
Mia: So, this lack of accountability at UCM appears to have a profound human cost, extending from financial and governance issues to alleged personal retaliation. It all just highlights a stark contrast between their public mission and the internal reality. To wrap this up, what are the biggest takeaways here?
Mars: I think it boils down to a few critical failures. First, the governance is broken—zero independent board members means no objective oversight. Second, the lack of basic conflict of interest or whistleblower policies created an environment where problems were inevitable. Third, the centralized family control created a single point of failure. Fourth, the organization was financially unstable, running deficits despite being propped up by donations. Then you have the serious allegations from the accountant about illegal practices, which were met with hostility. And finally, all of this culminates in severe human cost, with allegations of personal retaliation against employees, including being locked out of their homes and facing false police reports.
Mia: It's a powerful reminder that an organization's mission is only as strong as its integrity.