Nonprofit Name Game

Charities with similar names face distinct challenges

The e-mail messages, some 300 sent so far, carry scathing condemnations. “I hope your organization folds and never rises again!” reads one. “If you are supporting the horror that has struck our country I hope you burn in hell,” says another.

The recipient of those messages, the Holy Land Foundation, a Christian charity in Washington, did little to prompt such an outpouring — apart from having a name almost identical to one of the Muslim organizations charged by the federal government with having ties to Islamic terrorists.

Even before President Bush announced in December that the U.S. Treasury Department was freezing the assets of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, a Muslim group in Richardson, Tex., the Christian charity with the shorter name of the Holy Land Foundation had been bracing itself for a backlash from donors.

In June, after news stories reported that the Federal Bureau of Investigation was looking into the Muslim group for potential ties to the Islamic terrorist group Hamas, the Holy Land Foundation sent letters to its 14,000 supporters explaining that it had no connection to the similar-sounding Muslim organization. The Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development has denied the charges against it and has sued the federal government to restore its assets.

Established by Franciscan monks, the Holy Land Foundation used the letter to donors to emphasize its work providing college scholarships and other aid to Christians in Jerusalem and elsewhere in the area. In September, after the terrorist attacks, the charity sent a follow-up letter to many donors, again noting the distinction.

But despite the Christian group’s efforts — which were hampered when Mr. Bush referred to the suspected Texas charity only as the “Holy Land Foundation” in his December speech announcing the government’s actions — it has raised $400,000 less than the $1-million it typically receives annually.

Still, the Rev. Peter F. Vasko, president of the Holy Land Foundation, believes the problem could have been much worse. “It was some good foresight, because everything did hit the fan and we were able to regroup,” he says. “If we didn’t do that, it would’ve been much more disastrous.” The loss in income means the charity will reduce the number of scholarships it provides this year from 15 to 10.

The Holy Land Foundation is not alone in its troubles. At least four other charities in the United States and Canada have faced problems because their names sound like those of groups shut down by the government for allegedly supporting terrorists. The Holy Land Trust, in Altadena, Calif., and the Holy Land Christian Ecumenical Foundation, in Silver Spring, Md., have both been affected, as have the Global Relief Fund, in British Columbia, Canada, and Global Relief Resources, in Santa Fe, N.M., which have been mistaken for the Global Relief Foundation, in Bridgeview, Ill., which is on the government’s list of organizations suspected of terrorist ties.

Extreme Case

The latest confusion is an extreme case of a fund-raising challenge and public-relations nightmare that many charities have faced over the years because they were mistaken for similar-sounding organizations that had been accused of engaging in questionable, and sometimes illegal, activities.

The Make-a-Wish Foundation of America, in Phoenix, and its 80 local chapters — which help severely ill children fulfill dreams of meeting celebrities, traveling on big vacations, or other desires — says distinguishing itself from groups with like-sounding names requires constant vigilance.

“We spend a lot of time trying to re-educate, and that’s frustrating,” says Mark A. Reed, chief executive officer of Make-a-Wish Foundation of Iowa, in Urbandale, who says he has been dealing with sound-alike charities and their telemarketing tactics ever since he joined the group seven years ago. “What we really want to do is focus on granting wishes.”

As recently as last month, Mr. Reed found himself answering phone calls from angry Iowans who had mistaken the charity for the Children’s Wish Foundation International, in Atlanta, an organization that has been accused by a member of Congress and state authorities of using deceptive telemarketing tactics (The Chronicle, April 18).

Quick Responses

Strategies that charities can use to clear their names and maintain good ties with donors vary.

In addition to trying to anticipate a problem of mistaken identity and then acting quickly to warn donors about it, as the Holy Land Foundation did, fund-raising consultants recommend taking other public-relations steps as well to protect an organization’s income.

For example, the Holy Land Foundation made a point of immediately responding to all the critical e-mails it received, no matter how hateful their messages. About 80 percent of the senders apologized after learning their mistake, Father Vasko says.

Most charities in similar circumstances have also responded with e-mail messages and notices posted on their Web sites explaining the confusion.

It is not only donors and the public who have questions about identity mix-ups; groups that work with the charities can sometimes end up confused as well.

Salomon Smith Barney, a financial-services company, tried to freeze the assets of Global Relief Resources, says C. Robert Kline, founder of the group, which provides water-treatment equipment to international disaster-relief groups. And after September 11, calls from aid groups seeking water-sanitation equipment from the charity ceased.

Even Mr. Kline’s friends have been confused. “People called me and said, ‘Well, now, Bob, you know I don’t know about your politics, but we just can’t keep talking,’” he says.

Appealing to the Press

When cases of mistaken identity occur, some charities find appealing to news organizations helpful in clearing up confusion among the general public.

Mr. Reed of the Iowa Make-a-Wish chapter says that as soon as he hears that a similar-sounding organization is competing for donors — often he is tipped off by one of the charity’s volunteers, who has received a phone call from such a group — he issues a press release to local reporters. Working with news outlets is the quickest way to reach a large number of people, Mr. Reed says.

But even though a local television station or newspaper may do a story on Make-a-Wish’s situation, it doesn’t mean the public understands. “They may hear something about telemarketing and Make-a-Wish and not get the whole story and assume, ‘Oh, Make-a-Wish must telemarket,’” Mr. Reed says. “It’s a double-edged sword.”

For the Holy Land Foundation, enlisting the aid of news organizations has also yielded mixed results. The charity has contacted many major news outlets, asking them to use the full name of the Muslim charity in their stories. About 80 percent of the newspapers contacted have complied, Father Vasko says, but television stations, for the most part, have ignored the request.

Father Vasko has also tried to receive help in clarifying the situation from the White House and the Department of Justice. After Mr. Bush’s December speech, Father Vasko says he sent a letter to Attorney General John D. Ashcroft and White House Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card, asking them to draft letters explaining the difference between the two Holy Land Foundations. He hoped to be able to send copies of such a letter to supporters, but so far, he says, he has received no response.

S. Sanae Tokumura, a public-relations consultant in Honolulu who works with charities, says Father Vasko could take several other steps in the meantime.

“I would design a tag line that would immediately distinguish the organizations from each other,” Ms. Tokumura says. For example, the organization could begin referring to itself in press releases, fund-raising letters, and other material as the “Holy Land Foundation: A Christian charity working in the Middle East.”

Going to Court

Some charities have taken tougher approaches, pursuing legal action against sound-alike organizations.

In 1998, for example, the American Cancer Society sued a Los Angeles man for using the name National Cancer Society to fraudulently raise funds.

Bill Dalton, chief counsel at the American Cancer Society, in Atlanta, says about 100 to 200 nonprofit groups a year incorporate using names similar to the American Cancer Society, or try to copy the trademarked names of the organization’s major fund-raising events, such as Relay for Life. The American Cancer Society holds about 400 trademarks, he says.

Most of the trademark violations are made by well-intentioned people unaware of the law, and they are quickly resolved, says Mr. Dalton. “We just pick up the phone and say, ‘You know, you folks probably ought to realize you can’t do that,’ and they back right off.”

In cases not resolved with a phone call, Mr. Dalton sends a formal cease-and-desist letter, which may lead to more aggressive legal action. Because of its size, the American Cancer Society, with its budget of more than $600-million, is able to defend itself against such infringements. “We’re big enough to protect ourselves,” Mr. Dalton says.

For smaller charities, he says, suing a sound-alike charity for trademark infringement may not be good because of the costs.

It is unlikely that the Holy Land Foundation could pursue legal action against the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, because the Christian group did not trademark its name when it incorporated in 1994.

Even if the organization had trademarked its name, says Lisa A. Runquist, a Los Angeles lawyer who specializes in working with charities, it is unlikely it could win a case against the Muslim group.

The name Holy Land Foundation is “so generic that even if they got a trademark on it, it would’ve been very difficult to say that it was descriptive enough and not in the common use,” she says.

Ms. Runquist suggests that, in addition to trademarking their names, nonprofit groups should make sure they select a name that is unusual enough to protect.

Because of the complications and the expense, the Holy Land Foundation has ruled out legal action, says Father Vasko.

But the charity hasn’t ruled out what, on the surface, appears to be the easiest solution: legally changing its name.

Some members of the organization’s board of directors want to choose a new name, says Father Vasko. But if the Holy Land Foundation does change its name, it runs the risk of alienating its contributors and recipients of aid and ruining any positive name recognition that it has built up.

Father Vasko says he knows that a name change may confuse donors. But the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development continues to make headlines, he says, and will continue to do so when its case against the federal government for clamping down on its assets goes to trial.

“We’re going to decide whether it’s better to stick with the name and go through the storm,” he says, “or change.”