Avoiding "Sham Investigation" Claims In Nonprofit Misconduct Cases

Written exclusively for ChubbWorks for Not-for-Profit Zone

Tiana Joyner, former CEO of Habitat for Humanity of Durham, sued the nonprofit and alleged she was wrongfully terminated by the nonprofit's board after less than two years in the role.

Joyner's complaint contains allegations that tensions began after an August 2024 board retreat, where a fundraising consultant's presentation was criticized by then-board chair Carleena Deonanan as reflecting an attitude of "white supremacy."

Joyner, who is Black, alleges that Deonanan expected her to echo those views and to publicly agree with the chair's characterization of acceptable attitudes toward Black and white workers and volunteers.

It is alleged that when Joyner did not align with Deonanan's position, the board retaliated by launching what Joyner describes as a "sham investigation" into non-existent financial misconduct, which culminated in her dismissal.

The allegations surface as the long-standing nonprofit faces financial pressures, including fewer home builds and a decision to sell two homes on the open market to raise funds. Durham Habitat officials have confirmed the financial challenges, but have not publicly detailed their response to the lawsuit's claims.

Source: https://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/article312897088.html

Commentary

When a nonprofit's executive is accused of financial or ethical misconduct, the way a board investigates can either build trust or create the appearance of a "sham investigation" that fuels litigation, as alleged in the lawsuit cited above.

Donors, regulators, and staff all watch closely to see whether the process is independent, fair and proportional to the allegations.

The starting point is strong and neutral governance. Boards should pre-plan an investigation protocol that moves authority to an independent committee of disinterested directors, supported by outside counsel or investigators who do not have a stake in the outcome.

Allegations and evidence must be documented, the executive must be given a clear chance to respond, and the board should avoid pre-judging while the facts are still developing.

Communication with staff and key funders should be accurate and measured - enough to demonstrate seriousness, but not so detailed that it risks defamation or signals a predetermined outcome.

A credible investigation will not prevent every lawsuit, but it helps give the organization a defensible record that decisions were made in good faith, based on evidence, and with the mission and stakeholders in mind rather than internal politics.

Finally, your opinion is important to us. Please complete the opinion survey:

What's New

How Dark Web Malware Marketplaces Turn Low-Skill Criminals Into High-Impact Threats

The DOJ takes down a malware marketplace. We comment on dark web marketplaces that package malware, infrastructure, and support for novice criminals and outline how organizations can counter this expanding threat.

Threat Mapping: Connecting Daily Work To Cyber Risks

A survey reveals IT personnel are unable to effectively "threat map", which leaves them vulnerable. We comment on how linking routine tasks to specific cyber risks (threat mapping) empowers employees to recognize danger and help limit loss.

Stopping Ex-Employees From Logging In: A Practical Playbook For Employers

A survey reveals ex-employees are still using passwords. We comment on concrete measures such as MFA, access reviews, and verification testing, which can help prevent past employees from silently retaining or regaining access to company systems.

Latest Numbers

  • Unemployment Rate
    4.3% in Jan 2026
  • Payroll Employment
    +130,000(p) in Jan 2026
  • Average Hourly Earnings
    +$0.15(p) in Jan 2026
  • Employment Cost Index (ECI)
    +0.7% in 4th Qtr of 2025
  • Productivity
    +4.9% in 3rd Qtr of 2025

Source: Department of Labor