FBI Reviewing Food Charity After Chief’s Resignation
October 19, 2000 | Read Time: 2 minutes
By HARVY LIPMAN
The Federal Bureau of Investigation is investigating Food for the Poor, a charity that provides food and monetary aid to Latin American countries, following the resignation of the group’s president.
Ferdinand Mahfood resigned as president of the Deerfield Beach, Fla., group last month after an internal audit revealed that he had given about $275,000 of the group’s money to two employees.
Judy Orihuela, spokeswoman for the F.B.I.’s office in Miami, said the agency is involved because Food for the Poor receives federal aid. The charity’s informational tax return shows that it received about $37-million in government funds last year, out of nearly $182-million in total revenue.
Six weeks before Mr. Mahfood’s resignation, the board of the charity suspended him after he admitted the misuse of funds, according to Peter Goelz, a consultant to the charity. Mr. Mahfood has been replaced as president by his brother Robin, who is vice chairman of the organization’s board.
Mr. Mahfood admitted his misdeeds during an August meeting with the board, Mr. Goelz added. Mr. Mahfood suffers from manic depression, which Mr. Goelz said led to his actions. “For the past few years he has not been getting treatment he should have received,” Mr. Goelz said. “He is currently hospitalized.”
Mr. Mahfood and his family have paid back the funds, according to Mr. Goelz.
But controversy still surrounds the board’s response to Mr. Mahfood’s actions.
Several employees resigned or were fired after they refused to sign a confidentiality agreement prohibiting them from “making or publishing written or oral statements or remarks that are defamatory” toward the charity, according to the lawyer for one former employee.
Rod Taylor, the charity’s former development director, has sued Food for the Poor, saying he was dismissed after he spoke with the Broward County Sheriff’s office about Mr. Mahfood’s activities.
Mr. Goelz denied that the board acted inappropriately.
“Any reasonable review of the board’s activities will show that it acted in a responsive, aggressive way,” he said.