
ESTATE PLANNING FOR ANIMAL PEOPLE
Making Bequests to Animal Charities, and Setting up Trusts
to Benefit Animals
Josephine Usag loved animals all her life. At age 84, having no surviving members of her immediate family, she left equal shares of an estate of $173,000 to four different animal protection groups: the Medina County Animal Shelter and the Medina County SPCA (both in Ohio), and two national organizations--People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and the National Wildlife Federation.
Each received $29,678, and each was
properly grateful. The Medina County Animal Shelter and the Medina
County SPCA were particularly grateful, because local animal shelters
are perennially under-funded, heavily dependent upon volunteer help,
and in urgent need of all sorts of things that only money can provide.
They usually are bypassed by people drafting wills--and
people making routine donations--because they aren't as
big and visible as the national advocacy groups whose appeals continually
stuff your mailbox.
But whatever Ms. Usag intended her money
to do, chances are at least one share of it canceled out the work
done with one of the others. PETA and the National Wildlife Federation
have strongly opposing philosophies of animal protection. Since both
are primarily advocacy groups, they frequently wind up lobbying and
petitioning on opposite sides of issues. Most fundamentally, PETA
is opposed to hunting; the National Wildlife Federation originated
as an umbrella group for 48 state hunting clubs and is still the leading
organized voice of the "hunter/conservationist" philosophy in the
United States (the World Wildlife Fund is the global leader). The
two organizations agree on some essentials, for instance the need
for endangered species protection, but strenuously disagree on how
to go about providing it. PETA argues that endangered species habitat
should be left undisturbed; the National Wildlife Federation argues
that allowing hunting in wildlife protection areas is the most appropriate
means of managing and financing habitat protection.
Willing money to advocacy groups with
conflicting agendas is only one of the many ways you can waste your
estate if you don't carefully research your prospective beneficiaries,
and then make sure your will insures that the money goes where it
is supposed to go. In one famous Illinois case, an heiress intended
to leave her entire multi-million-dollar estate to a trust fund that
was supposed to dispense the money to various animal protection groups
in support of specific projects. Unfortunately, the attorney who drafted
her will was inexperienced and included "boilerplate" language in
it, copied from the state charities act, which ended up directing
that the funds could go to any charity that engaged in any sort of
activity to benefit animals, education, or human health. The will
was challenged in court by some of the intended beneficiaries, but
the challenges failed because the heiress was no longer around to
testify as to precisely what she meant. In the absence of clear testimony
to the contrary, the language of her will stood, even though she had
never demonstrated any personal interest in any of the other philanthropic
projects her estate now supports.
As the above example illustrates, if
your intention is to set up a foundation or trust to benefit animals,
it is crucially important that you hire an attorney who specializes
in trusts and estates.
There are other problems with creating
trusts. For example, can you designate trustees with the assurance
that they will survive your own death? Someone you don't know (perhaps
the courts) may end up appointing trustees. You may be able to define
criteria for the kind of trustees you want, but the likelihood that
they will hold the interest of animals first and foremost is probably
50/50. At most you may be able to ensure that trustees have no personal
conflict of interest with their fiduciary responsibilities.
Many charities have set up plans called
"charitable gift annuities," "life income funds," "unitrusts," or
"pooled income funds," where in exchange for your contribution of
cash, stock, or other property, you are promised a lifetime of fixed
payments. Upon your death (or the death of your spouse or other named
beneficiary), the contribution you have made belongs entirely to the
charity. These plans are generally considered safe investments, but
they are irrevocable. Once you put your money into one of these plans,
you will not be able to get it out if your opinion of the charity
changes in the years to come.
We know of people who have put money
into joint charitable trusts, also called "donor advised funds" or
"community trusts." Contributions to these are also irrevocable, and
there is no guarantee that their money will be spent as they wish.
In fact, we've seen one such charitable trust refuse the explicit
instructions of the donor.
Choosing an executor for your estate
is fraught with risk unless you are a hundred percent certain that
person shares your commitment to animals--or, at the very
least, is not personally interested in the gift and is without any
actual or potential conflict of interest.
Even allowing your chosen executor to
choose an animal charity to receive your estate is potentially problematic.
All that a self-interested executor need do to hijack such an estate
is to incorporate a new animal group and pay him- or herself the money
as salary to direct it. This has happened more than once. There are
no substantive legal controls on misuse of funds by charities.
Many people in the field of animal protection
now will be dead or retired in 20 years. Groups that seem full of
vitality now may have fallen into decline. The most urgent problems
faced by animals will have changed--at least we must hope
so.
Because situations will change, be careful
not to be overly specific in directing how a charity may spend your
money. Many donors who have contacted us for advice wish to have their
estates used for spaying or neutering dogs and cats. However, by the
time they are likely to pass on, safe and effective immunocontraceptives
and/or chemosterilants will probably be used for homeless and unadoptable
populations of cats and dogs instead of surgical sterilizations. These
techniques should be fully developed and on the market by 2010. When
they are available, dog and cat population control will be revolutionized.
With any luck at all, within 15 years there won't be dog and cat overpopulation
as we know it now. If dogs and cats are your special interest, we
recommend that you prepare a will bequeathing your estate, or whatever
portion of it you wish, to the animal protection charity you designate,
not for spaying and neutering but "to be used for the purpose of eliminating
dog and cat overpopulation and homelessness."
More common than legal errors are problems
that result from unfamiliarity with the beneficiaries. We were once
asked to help locate an animal rescue group that was supposed to receive
a Vancouver woman's estate. It turned out that the "animal rescue
group" was in fact a single individual, who was incorporated as a
nonprofit organization and did charitable work, but who had made no
provision for the continuance of the organization after her own death--and
she died nearly a decade before the woman who left her the money.
The woman who left the money also failed to indicate in her will a
second choice, in case the first beneficiary was no longer around.
When you name a charity as a beneficiary in your will, notify the
charity, so that they may keep you and your executor informed in case
their charitable status changes, or in case they relocate or rename
the charity. Also be sure to notify a charity if you have named it
as beneficiary to a life insurance policy.
Be sure to use the official, legal name
of the charity in your will. There was a case involving a California
man who left a multi-million-dollar estate to "The SPCA." Which SPCA,
where? More than 1,500 organizations in the U.S. include the words
"society for the prevention of cruelty to animals" in their titles,
and more than 4,000 perform the generally recognized functions of
SPCAs. A probate judge eventually divided the estate in equal shares
among all the SPCAs who applied for some of it.
Most common of all are cases of leaving
money to organizations that spend more on fundraising and related
publicity than on actual animal protection. ANIMAL PEOPLE compiles
annual reports on the income, assets, expenditures, and top salaries
paid by the 150-odd most prominent national, international, and regional
groups involved in animal and habitat protection. Our information
comes from the organizations' own IRS Form 990 filings and balance
sheets. Since fiscal year 1989, we have discovered that year in and
year out, approximately one organization in four is spending more
money on fundraising and administration than the 35% recommended ceiling
set by the Wise Giving Alliance, a body formed by merger of the National
Charities Information Bureau with the Philanthropic Advisory Service
of the Council of Better Business Bureaus.
If you want to be absolutely certain
that your money is used properly, you will have to distribute it yourself,
to organizations in which you have total confidence. Unless death
is imminent, naming a charity to receive a bequest many years hence
is a crap shoot insofar as insuring administrative integrity and honesty
is concerned.
If the bulk of your assets cannot be
distributed until after your death, take steps to prepare an ironclad
will declaring that the money will go to animal charities named in
a codicil to your Last Will and Testament. Your attorney (or you)
can easily prepare a new codicil to your will with exact instructions
about the charities you are naming every year, with minimal effort
and expense. This way you can review and change your charity choice
as often as you feel the need. If a group disbands or loses its purpose,
choose another. Purge any group that has become dysfunctional or corrupted,
and in its place add a deserving new group you have learned about.
In planning the distribution of their
estates, some donors shy away from the smaller, poorer, unestablished
animal charities in favor of the ones that are securely institutionalized.
But while it is true that small groups may disband once their leader
dies, it is also true that large, wealthy, and well established charities
may lose their purpose once their founders die. Think about the possibility
that you might end up bequeathing your estate to a charity that will
simply use it to increase the value of its stock portfolio.
(You may help continue the work of ANIMAL
PEOPLE by bequeathing a gift of money, securities, or other
property to "Animal People, Inc., a 501(c)(3) charitable organization
located in Clinton, Washington.")
Providing for Companion Animals
in your Will
What becomes of your companion animals
if something happens to you?
Providing long-term care for animals
left behind is one of the most neglected areas of estate planning,
perhaps because most people mistakenly think finding new homes for
their wonderful dogs, cats, birds, horses, or other animals will be
easy. The animals one leaves behind may indeed be wonderful, but animal
shelters are unfortunately full of wonderful animals. Currently, 4.4
million dogs and cats are killed in shelters each year because there
are not enough adoptive homes for them all--and the older
the dog or cat is, the less likelihood there is that the animal will
be adopted. Because most pounds and shelters are desperately short
of space, many kill the majority of animals over three years old upon
arrival.
If you want your companion animals to
go on living a happy, healthy life after your departure, make sure
the animals are remembered in your will. The history of attempts to
look after animals properly through wills and bequests indicates that
you will definitely need the help of an experienced estate lawyer.
Other beneficiaries frequently challenge bequests made on behalf of
animals - usually winning. Because animals do not have legal standing,
courts have repeatedly overturned wills that leave money or property
directly to them. Likewise, courts have overturned hundreds of wills
that leave money or property to other people on condition that they
look after certain animals. Such "gifts on condition" do not have
the same binding strength as specific contractual agreements, under
which both parties agree to what is to be done, in exchange for what
considerations.
There are three legal avenues you may
take to provide for your animals.
First, you may establish a trust fund
for that purpose. The conditions of the trust must explain what is
to be done with the remainder of the fund after the demise of the
animals. Avoid "over-funding," which some courts have cited as a reason
to overturn trust funds. A trust fund that can pay out the cost of
boarding an animal at a good kennel for the maximum expected life
of the animal will probably be considered appropriate; a larger fund
may run into trouble.
If setting up your own trust fund is
impractical, you may enter into a direct contractual relationship
with someone to take care of your animals, effective upon your death
or incapacitation, designating your estate executor as agent for your
end of the contract.
You can also leave a bequest to an existing
charitable organization such as a humane society, which agrees to
look after your animals - but make sure you have the agreement finalized,
in writing, before putting it into your will.
Of course it is possible that your surviving
friends and family are prepared to take in your companion animals,
if necessary. But be aware that the cost of maintaining each animal
can be considerable: $500 to $3,000 a year for dogs and cats, depending
on the age, health, and needs of the animal. Ask before making assumptions,
and be sure the arrangements you make in your will are appropriate.
Too often we hear about cases like one in California, where a woman
who died without assets left 35 dogs to dear friends, all of whom
were on fixed incomes. Nine of the dogs did find new homes, but 24
were killed by animal control due to lack of adoption opportunities.
Companion Animals in Nursing
Homes
Nothing about entering a nursing home
is likely to be easy. The expense, the loss of privacy, and the loss
of familiar surroundings are well-recognized blows to the patient's
sense of self. But an even harder blow to many is having to give up
cherished animal companions. In most states, nursing homes don't even
have the option to allow residents to keep dogs and cats. The only
exceptions are made for seeing-eye dogs and hearing dogs. Various
attempts have been made by state legislatures to allow ambulatory
patients to have animals if they're able to look after them, but so
far all such efforts have failed in committee.
The problem, explains Samantha Mullen
of the Humane Society of the U.S., is that the presence of dogs and
cats could greatly complicate keeping nursing homes clean. Further,
once dogs and cats are admitted, administrators anticipate great difficulty
in persuading people to part with the animals when their health deteriorates
to the point where they can no longer care for the animals themselves.
It is easier to simply keep animals out altogether.
Animals are allowed in nursing homes
in a few states, but only under tight restriction. Most nursing homes
that accept animals will permit only small caged birds or a small
tank of tropical fish. A few will accept neutered cats. Ambulatory
patients do often keep animals, but strictly on the sly. The ANIMAL
PEOPLE staff once helped a nursing home janitor to capture and
arrange for neutering all the cats on the premises. We thought there
might be 20 when we started. There were 32, plus an assortment of
opossums and raccoons who had also become used to daily handouts.
And we didn't even try to count the birds who feasted on crumbs placed
along window ledges.
The Animal Welfare League of Greater
Baltimore in the early 1990s formed a subsidiary corporation called
Pets and People Care Systems, to manage a series of facilities designed
specifically to accommodate ambulatory patients and up to three animals
apiece. The program is funded through a bequest from the late Tom
Heghinian, who reluctantly gave up his dogs Muttski and Halley when
he was hospitalized with terminal cancer. The first Pets and People
Care home, the Heghinian Center, occupies a large brownstone house
in Baltimore. The initial three human residents were chosen from a
list of 20 applicants, which subsequently grew to hundreds of names.
The humans share the facility with a full-time manager/caretaker.
Humane organizations in several other
states have researched the possibility of setting up similar programs,
and many have programs that involve taking dogs and cats to nursing
homes as visitors, but the opportunity to keep an animal as a nursing
home resident is still extremely rare.
ANIMAL
PEOPLE
is the only independent newspaper covering animal protection worldwide.
We produce 10 regular editions per year, emphasizing original investigative
reporting on topics of humane concern, researched and written by professional
staff whose backgrounds average more than 25 years apiece of experience
in both news work and animal protection. In
addition to providing news reportage, we offer a lively forum for
discussion and debate about ideas and tactics, via letters, guest
columns, and point/counterpoint face-offs. Early-age neutering, neuter/return
feral cat control, high-volume adoption, care-for-life of exotic and
dangerous animals, and conversion of shelters to no-kill policies
all began on a limited local scale here and there before ANIMAL
PEOPLE debuted in 1992, but each exploded in popularity and prominence
soon after we devoted significant page space to discussion of successful
projects and debate over their pros and cons. More recently, we are
seeing a surge of interest in outreach to poor, rural, and foreign
animal protection projects, also following considerable attention
to such outreach from ANIMAL PEOPLE. Subscriptions
to ANIMAL PEOPLE are sold for $24.00 each, but are sent free
to more than 9,500 animal charities and agencies throughout the world.
ANIMAL PEOPLE
also provides accountability monitoring, to assure donors that animal
protection organizations are delivering the services they promise
to provide when they solicit funds. This is accomplished via "The
Watchdog," a regular investigative feature of ANIMAL PEOPLE,
supplemented by two annual special reports. "Who Gets The Money?"
is included each year in the November or December editions. It includes
the most prominent animal protection organizations' budgets, assets,
program-versus-overhead balance both as declared by the various charities
to the IRS and as recalculated using the National Charities Information
Bureau accounting standard, and top salaries paid. There are also
extensive explanatory footnotes. The ANIMAL PEOPLE Watchdog Report
on Animal Protection Charities, a stand-alone publication sold
separately for $20, provides further information pertaining to the
100+ organizations we are most often asked about. It summarizes their
major programs along with any program-related controversies, administrative
issues, and/or policy-related issues involving them.