{"id":3738,"date":"2006-04-20T11:50:37","date_gmt":"2006-04-20T15:50:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/charityandsecurity.org\/?p=3738"},"modified":"2019-10-17T13:14:40","modified_gmt":"2019-10-17T17:14:40","slug":"treasury_risk_matrix_","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/charityandsecurity.org\/sanctions\/treasury_risk_matrix_\/","title":{"rendered":"Treasury Posts Risk Matrix for Charities"},"content":{"rendered":"

In March 2007, without public announcement or comment, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) published a\u00a0Risk Matrix for the Charitable Secto<\/a>r on its website. The Introduction of the publication says the matrix is meant to help charities comply with U.S. sanctions programs that prohibit transactions with designated terrorists or certain countries.<\/p>\n

In 2006, Treasury said it was working on a draft of the matrix, and in June 2006, a group of nonprofits wrote Treasury asking for a public comment period. Treasury did not respond. Despite the unannounced posting, representatives of the nonprofit sector are likely to comment on the matrix and suggest improvements.The Introduction to the matrix says the publication is needed because of “reports by international organizations and in the media have revealed the vulnerability of the charitable sector to abuse by terrorists.” In the past, Treasury has urged charities and grantmakers to take a risk-based approach to avoiding violations of sanctions laws through its\u00a0Voluntary Anti-Terrorist Financing Guidelines<\/a>. The Introduction to the matrix also says it will be “particularly useful to charities that conduct overseas charitable activity due to the increased risks associated with international activities.”<\/p>\n

The Introduction notes that the matrix is not a comprehensive list, and in a footnote, says it is not mandatory. Instead, another footnote recognizes that “charities and their grantees differ from one another in size, products, and services, sources of funding, the geographic locations that they serve, and numerous other variables.” However, the burden is on charities to determine the best approach, since Treasury has no safe harbors or specific measures that protect against sanctions, which include asset seizure. Instead, the footnote says Treasury “addresses every violation in context, taking into account the nature of a charity’s business, the history of the group’s enforcement record with OFAC, the sanctions harm that may have resulted from the transaction, and the charity’s compliance procedures.”<\/p>\n

The matrix lists 11 factors according to whether they constitute a low, medium or high risk of diversion of funds to terrorists. The factors are:<\/p>\n