Benefits Data Trust (BDT) Staff Demand Answers After Failed Acquisition Process
September 6, 2024
We, the staff of Benefits Data Trust (BDT), wanted to respond to some of the points raised in the July 30 letter from BDT founder Warren Kantor, updating staff that attempts to find an organization to acquire BDT and continue its mission have failed.
This was the first communication from the Executive Team or Board regarding the acquisition process since Thursday, July 18. On that day, staff were told they would have the opportunity to provide criteria for evaluating proposals, which would be finalized and voted on the next day. When direct questions were asked about the timeline, acting CEO Wendy Starner offered vague responses, stating the timeline depended on how many proposals passed the initial screening.
Despite multiple follow-up efforts via Slack and email on July 24 and 26, no updates were provided until the letter was sent on July 30. Nearly two weeks passed without any communication, leaving staff—whose jobs were at stake—in the dark.
The letter attributes the failure to find a suitable acquisition partner to the 60-day timeline imposed by the Executive Team and Board. While staff received a legally required 60-day notice of closure, it is baffling that leadership did not recognize the need to secure additional funding much earlier. The apparent lack of proactive outreach to potential funders or partners prior to the 60-day notice is deeply troubling and raises questions about the seriousness of the effort made since the decision to close. The letter twice blames the self-imposed timeline for the failed acquisition:
In the past few weeks, BDT met with many possible partners and funders to discuss any possible means of continuing BDT's mission. As of yesterday, it became clear that we had exhausted all avenues and would not be able to find a sustainable way forward for the organization in the time remaining.”
The financial distress of the organization just simply could not be relieved in a timely manner, which forced our closure.”
It is disingenuous, however, to mention large, respected funders such as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Ballmer Group, The Rockefeller Foundation, Robin Hood Foundation, Gitlab, and The Pew Charitable Trusts, without acknowledging that, according to our contacts and prior reporting, no outreach was made to them to secure additional funding before the closure decision.
If funders were never asked to step in, why are they being implicated in BDT’s closure?
We urge our partners and funders to join us in holding the Executive Team and Board accountable for this omission.
Were these funds ever requested?
Would they have been provided?
Was BDT's closure truly inevitable?
Most concerning is information we’ve received from trusted sources indicating that an offer—which could have preserved many jobs and mitigated the impact on BDT’s beneficiaries—was rejected because it required the exclusion of the current Executive Team and Board from the new organization.
This requirement was also included in the staff-generated and approved criteria for evaluating proposals:
The mission should be continued under new leadership without the involvement of current executives and board members.
If a well-funded, thoughtful proposal was dismissed to protect the current leadership, it is a grave injustice. If proposals that shielded the Executive Team and Board were even considered, it goes against the very criteria staff voted to adopt.
We call on funders, reporters, partners, and the Pennsylvania Attorney General to demand transparency in the proposal process so the Executive Team and Board can be held to the same high standards we, as dedicated BDT employees, upheld.
Even if BDT could not continue as it was, staff have legitimate, unanswered questions about the acquisition process, why we were barred from participating, and why the leaders responsible for BDT’s closure were trusted to find a new home for its mission. This process could have been transparent and open, yet the Executive Team chose to obscure critical information, providing updates that skirted the urgent questions raised by staff and partners, and eroding trust at every turn. It is crucial to emphasize that staff were entirely excluded from this process. No one sought our expertise, feedback, or ideas to help facilitate the acquisition.
In response to pressure from funders, staff were given a mere three days—from July 17 to July 19—to propose “staff-sourced mission-driven criteria” for evaluating proposals. These criteria, which we believe were approved by a full staff vote, were never communicated back to us. There was no acknowledgment or acceptance of these criteria by the Executive Team or Board, and no explanation of how proposals were evaluated against them.
The Executive Team and Board alone made the decisions, with no accountability or transparency to staff, partners, funders, or the clients who now face greater challenges in accessing benefits.
We urge funders, journalists, partners, and the Pennsylvania Attorney General to demand clarity about the proposal evaluation process and the proposals received. Only then can the Executive Team and Board be held to the same rigorous standards that we, as BDT employees, held ourselves to every day.
Concerned BDT Staff