Danielle Wright is the Controller for a not-for-profit (NFP) organization called Jobs Are Us (hereafter referred to as JAU). NFP organizations do not have owners or stockholders like for-profit corporations; instead, NFP organizations raise capital by obtaining donations from donors and/or earning revenues from sales or services in excess of expenses and accumulate Net Assets which are the accumulated surpluses (similar to a for-profits retained earnings). The organization has a charitable mission of helping disabled people find employment with things like resume preparation, interview techniques, wardrobe, transportation and job skills improvement and employs over 110 people and serves over 300 clients. JAU is in financial trouble. Danielle Wright is the Chief Financial Officer and is responsible for the accounting and financial reporting for the organization. Because of the organizations poor financial performance, Danielle wonders how the organization can survive much longer. The payroll is due and Danielle has delayed paying several bills as there is insufficient cash to pay all the liabilities owed. Fundraising has failed to raise sufficient funds and JAUs largest donor, Bill Megabucks, has not paid his pledged quarterly contribution because he has not been provided with the last quarters financial statements as required by the donor agreement. Zach Boyles, the CEO of JAU, has directed Danielle to not send the last quarters financial statements to Bill Megabucks because the results of operations of the organization did not meet the minimum surplus threshold required by the donor agreement (surplus = revenues less expenses). Zach is afraid that the poor financial performance will nullify the donor agreement and cause Bill Megabucks to stop making contributions. Bill has contacted Danielle on numerous occasions in an effort to obtain the financial reports but Danielle keeps putting him off and making one excuse after another for why she has been unable to get the required financial statements to him. When Danielle came into work on Friday morning, Zach Boyles came into her office all excited and said Danielle we need to get Bill Megabucks last quarters financial statements ASAP but with one more adjustment so that he will make this quarters donation and allow us to meet next weeks payroll. He said, Yesterday when I was out golfing with my good friend, Chuck Williams, I was telling him about our difficulties and he had a great idea. Chuck told me we could temporarily write-off the liability that JAU owes to Chucks company CW Transport that is roughly $50,000. Danielle said, Let me get this straight. You are suggesting that I make an entry that debits Accounts Payable and credits Contribution Revenue for the write-off of the liability but that this entry will only be temporary to allow us to show a better financial performance by $50,000 for last quarter. Do I understand you correctly? Zach said, Yes that is it precisely! To which Danielle responded, But that would only be an appropriate entry if CW Transport was actually forgiving the debt permanently not just temporarily. Zach said, Danielle I dont think you understand the severity of our situation here, if we dont do what is necessary to keep the wolf from the door all of our good work here will be shut down. How about you give this some consideration over the weekend and the future of all of our jobs, and let me know on Monday whether you want to be a team player or not.

Ethical Decision Making Model - Seven Step Process:

1. Step 1: Identify the ethical issue(s). Make sure when you identify the one most important ethical dilemma that you also identify the one single person that is being faced with the dilemma and must make a decision on how to act.) 2.

Step 2: Determine the affected parties and identify their rights. Who is affected by the outcome of the dilemma and how each person or group is affected. Identify all stakeholders completely (including the person facing the ethical dilemma) and how each stakeholder (or stakeholder group) is affected in general and NOT how they are specifically affected by a particular course of action. This latter would be a consequence and should be discussed in Step 5.

. Step 3: Determine the most important rights. Prioritize the various parties rights according to your opinion of their importance.

4. Step 4: Develop alternative courses of action. These are the various options available to the person who must resolve the dilemma. In addition to the obvious binomial choices such as to do the unethical act (yes do not leave the unethical choice out of your paper) or to not do the unethical act, persons with ethical dilemmas may also remove themselves in some manner from the situation or pursue other options.)

5. Step 5: Determine the likely consequences of each proposed course of action. Proposed course of action are all the alternative options developed in Step 4. Make sure you label the consequences that go with each alternative noted in Step 4. Some alternatives may have multiple consequences.

6. Step 6: Assess the possible consequences, including an estimation of the greatest good for the greatest number. Determine whether the rights framework would cause any course of action to be eliminated.

7. Step 7: Decide on the appropriate course of action. Make sure you justify the decision that you made as if you were the person with the ethical dilemma.

ASSIGNMENT:

I need to write a paper, which I am prepared to do, going through each step and analyze the case about JAU. All I am looking for is some pointers on the case itself and some quick bullet points to run with while writing the paper. I feel pretty confident for the most part but another pair of eyes and opinion wouldn't hurt.