<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 10:45 AM, Robert Davidson <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:robert@dallasmakerspace.org" target="_blank">robert@dallasmakerspace.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div><div><span style="background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)">I hate to state the obvious but if this determination letter Go's though and is approved. It is a game changer, it will be the determination letter that all Makerspace's hackerspaces fablabs will be judged against.</span></div>
<br class="">And will set the tone for all who come after and before (eligibility audit).</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I don't think this is how the approval process works. It's not a court, with a judge and prior case law or anything like that.</div>
<div><br></div><div>My understanding is that you apply, your application is reviewed by one group to determine if you completed it correctly (all documentation present, applying for correct status), and if "pre-approved" - it moves on to the stage where you have a reviewer assigned to you. Then that reviewer will actually read your documents and either make the determination or ask for follow-up and more information.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Without seeing MakeHaven's application, it's unclear what may have shifted the opinion of the reviewer towards recommending a 501(c)4 vs. 501(c)3 designation.</div><div><br></div><div>Once you're at the stage where you have a reviewer, the process should be reaching completion. I'm not a non-profit expert or lawyer or anything like that, but my experience with Freeside's 501(c)3 application was simply to call the reviewer to introduce myself and ask if they needed anything further from me. That seemed to get the process moving again and got us our letter of determination faster.</div>
<div><br></div><div>The agency responsible for 501(c)3 application recently got a lot of flak over the whole "denying status to politically oriented non-profits" fiasco from early 2013, so of course applications are getting more scrutiny. These folks are used to people taking combative tones with them, threatening legal action, and on top of that, probably have a huge backlog of work to deal with. Thinking of it in combative terms of a "battle" or a "war" is, at best, going to slow down the process, if not outright anger your reviewer. Being patronizing is also a bad idea. You probably do know more than the application reviewer on a number of subjects. However, the reviewer has all the leverage and can hold your application hostage.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Try being super friendly and helpful, first. Be nice. Sometimes bureaucracy is aggravating and it seems like the people on the other end of the phone "don't get it." The process seems opaque and needlessly complex, but it's actually pretty straightforward given all the types of cases they have to deal with. Exercise a little patience and take an honest assessment of your communication skills. If the message isn't getting through, then try to find somebody in your community that is much better at communication to handle conversations with the reviewer. </div>
<div><br></div><div>By all means, seek some legal advice - it looks like your pro bono lawyer sees something in the application and that's why they recommend taking a look at what other organizations did. It helps to remember to write concisely - say only as much as you need to get your point across.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Thanks,</div><div>Alan</div><div>Director/Treasurer, Freeside Atlanta</div><div><br></div></div></div></div>