James B.

Sanderlin Neighborhood Family Center

June 18, 2018

RE: Appeal Procedure – Donna Welch

We write to report on our meeting with Donna Welch on Friday, June 15 and to notify the Board of
Trustees (BOT) that Ms. Welch is exercising her right, pursuant to the JBSNFC Personnel Handbook, to
appeal the adverse decision by the BOT to terminate her employment. It is our strongest
recommendation that the BOT carefully consider the facts set forth in this report and, furthermore,
schedule a meeting with Ms. Welch as soon as possible so that she can argue her appeal to the full BOT.

1. THE MEETING WITH MS. WELCH

As directed by the JBSNFC Board of Trustees (BOT), Celeste Thomas and I met with Donna Welch for the
purpose of notifying her of the BOT’s decision to terminate her. We explained the BOT’s reasons for the
action and provided her with two options: resign voluntarily or be terminated involuntarily and for
cause. We presented two letters to her—one for her to sign if she chose to resign voluntarily, and the
other signed by me and notifying her of her “for cause” termination in the event she refused to resign.
These are the same options and letters that were presented to the other two employees who the BOT
voted to terminate.

As with the other two employees we terminated, during our conversation with Mrs. Welch, we gave her
an opportunity to respond to the reasons for the BOT’s action, which she did. This is the same
procedure that we followed with the other two employees who have been terminated. Unlike the other
two employees, Ms. Welch presented what we felt was a compelling argument for reconsideration. As
is often the case, presenting something in writing is significantly different than meeting face-to-face
with the person.

Ms. Welch stated that she intended to fight this decision and asked what the process was to appeal the
decision. Ms. Welch is the only one of the three employees who the BOT voted to terminate who
exercised her right to appeal.

Since I was not well-versed on the policy or its procedures, I asked her to provide the board with a letter
presenting her appeal. I also told her I would review the policy to confirm the proper procedure and let
her know how we would proceed. On review, I determined that the Appeal process set forth in our
policies allows her 3 business days to submit a written statement of the grounds for her appeal. Thus, I
have notified her via e-mail that her letter is due on or before Wednesday, June 20, at 6:00 PM. I have
also provided her with a copy via e-mail of the Sanderlin Personnel Policy, Chapter 11, regarding the
appeal process as well as the November 17, 2017 purported revision to the accrued vacation policy that
was not reviewed or approved by the BOT, that led to the BOT’s decision to terminate. Additionally, I
provided Ms. Welch with a list of the current members of the BOT to direct her appeal letter.

1
James B. Sanderlin Neighborhood Family Center
June 18, 2018

2. FACTS PERTAINING TO THE APPEAL

In considering Ms. Welch’s appeal, the BOT should be aware of the following facts which were gathered
from conversations with Lounell Britt, Delphinia Davis, Donna Welch, and Laddavanh (Laddie)
Phommaleuth, CPA of JWB during the past two weeks:

o In March, Ms. Welch was advised by Laddie, who was assigned to assist Ms. Welch with
the Faith Based budget management that the payouts for accrued vacation were not
authorized by JWB. Ms. Welch asked Laddie what she needed to do to correct it and
was directed to go to the Sanderlin Center COO, Delphinia Davis, to get clarification.
This conversation is corroborated by Laddie. Ms. Welch relied on that advice, believing
she was doing what she needed to do. Subsequently she was advised by Dr. Davis that
she (Dr. Davis) would look into it.
 In our opinion, Ms. Welch had a reasonable expectation that the directions she
received were valid.
o Subsequently, Ms. Welch followed up with Dr. Davis and was further advised that there
had been a policy change so that staff would not forfeit accrued hours. Again, Ms.
Welch asked what she needed to do to “fix it” and was told it was “taken care of,” which
is consistent with Dr. Davis’ statement that she was aware of the policy change but did
not know it required board approval. In our judgment, therefore, Ms. Welch’s version of
events is supported by Dr. Davis’ statements to us. It is reasonable that Ms. Welch also
could have expected that the Center’s COO would be knowledgeable and a reliable
source and that the issue had been settled. When Dr. Davis described how the
purported policy change was made, she indicated that Ms. Welch was not involved in
making the change.
 We find Ms. Welch’s report of these events to be credible. Ms. Welch’s claim to
have had no involvement in or knowledge of the policy change is corroborated
by Laddie and Dr. Davis.
o Ms. Britt made clear to the BOT on numerous occasions—including an explicit statement
at the last regular BOT meeting before Ms. Britt’s termination--that (1) Ms. Welch was
“not her employee,” (2) Ms. Britt did not have responsibility for overseeing the FBO
program, and (3) Ms. Welch was independent of JBSNFC. Thus, Ms. Welch could
reasonably be expected to not view Ms. Britt as her “supervisor,” and therefore had no
reason to report her concerns about the payout to Ms. Britt or to seek Ms. Britt’s
guidance on these matters at all.
 In our opinion, if Ms. Britt had been more actively involved in the oversight of
the FBO program and the supervision of Ms. Welch, this situation would have
had a different outcome. The fact that Ms. Britt did not do so was by no fault of
Ms. Welch.
o Ms. Welch expressed dismay at being “blindsided” by the BOT’s decision to terminate
her as she had not been given opportunity to be heard on this issue. Of the three

2
James B. Sanderlin Neighborhood Family Center
June 18, 2018

employees involved in this incident, Ms. Welch is the only one to indicate a desire to
make her case to the BOT.
o Ms. Welch has operated the FBO program with integrity and dedication for 11 years,
first as an independent program housed at Everyone’s Youth United and after EYU
closed, being housed at the Sanderlin Center, and currently as a program of the JBSNFC.
During that time, the program has had tremendous success and has indisputedly made a
positive impact on the youth in our community. Ms. Welch has significantly contributed
to building a program that enjoys the support of more than 10 churches and their
pastors.
o Although we are making every effort to support FBO during this transition, we believe it
is inevitable that the functioning of this program will be significantly disrupted if Ms.
Welch is terminated. This outcome would not be consistent with the Sanderlin Center’s
mission.
o Marcie Biddleman of JWB has made it clear that she will support the BOT no matter
what the ultimate decision is with regards to Ms. Welch. In fact, Ms. Biddleman has
made it clear that she will not seek to influence the BOT’s decision one way or the other.
In our judgment, however, Ms. Biddleman would welcome a reconsideration of Ms.
Welch’s situation and would view Ms. Welch’s continued employment and leadership of
the FBO program as a positive outcome for all concerned.
 In our opinion reinstatement with conditions of Ms. Welch is in the best interest
of the mission of the Sanderlin Center.

3. RECOMMENDATION:

Ms. Welch has a right to appeal the termination decision pursuant to the Personnel Policy, and has
notified us of her intention to exercise that right. Our Personnel Policy directs the employee to refer her
appeal in writing to the Executive Director. Ms. Welch has up to 3 business days to submit her appeal
letter, which is Wednesday, June 20 by 6:00 pm. Normally, according to the Policy, the ED would
provide Ms. Welch with an answer within 3 working days, (Monday, June 25), and then Ms. Welch could
appeal to the BOT. Because there is no ED, and the entire Board is essentially serving in that role, we
believe the only rational way to handle the appeal would be for the full BOT to hear it immediately. By
affording Ms. Welch an opportunity to come before the entire BOT, we could best comply with the
intent—if not the letter—of the Personnel Policy’s appeals process in these unusual circumstances.

In considering Ms. Welch’s appeal, we believe it may be helpful for the Board to consider that one or
more of these alternate actions may be appropriate:
1. As a condition for continued employment, Ms. Welch could be required to return the
unauthorized vacation payout she received that had initiated the BOT’s initial action;
2. Ms. Welch could be reinstated with a 6 to 12 month probationary period during which time, as a
condition for continued employment, she will be required to demonstrate that she can work
collaboratively with the Board, management and JWB to the benefit of the FBO program, and
adhere to all relevant JBSNFC policies and procedures;

3
James B. Sanderlin Neighborhood Family Center
June 18, 2018

3. As a condition for continued employment, Ms. Welch could be required to participate in

mandatory management training at the direction of the Board or its newly hired ED in order to
establish a clearer chain of command and oversight of the FBO program, since FBO is a program
of the Sanderlin Center and thus the Sanderlin Center has a fiduciary responsibility for FBO; and
4. A letter of reprimand can be placed in her Personnel record.

In hearing Ms. Welch’s appeal, we ask that the BOT give special consideration to our concern—and it is a
concern that JWB shares—that the FBO program not be disrupted more than is absolutely necessary, so
as to minimize adverse impacts on the FBO staff, community partners, JWB and--most importantly--the
children served by the program. If in its judgment, the BOT were to reverse its decision to terminate
Ms. Welch, we believe that Ms. Welch, the new ED, the BOT and the community can rebuild a mutually
beneficial partnership that best serves the interests of the community.

Respectfully,

__________________________ Dianna King, Board Member

_________________________Celeste Thomas, Board Secretary