JDC rocked by internal strife over CEO search process - Special Report

Stan Rabin, former president of the board, told The Jerusalem Post that he was concerned about the effect the problems with the search process will have on the organization.

“JDC is a fabulous organization with a tremendous history and we need to be able to reach out to the best available candidates,” he said. “JDC’s standing in the Jewish world can be worsened if the board is not unified and not everyone is engaged and involved as an example.”

The JDC was established in 1914 with a mission to assist Jews in distress around the world and rescue those in physical danger. In 2018, it had an operating budget of almost $330 million, the majority of which was spent on caring for Holocaust survivors in the former Soviet Union and Europe, and social services for the vulnerable in Israel.

Trouble has brewed at the organization over the past year, however, after an election for president of the board of directors was contested for the first time in the organization’s history in 2019.

---

Stay updated with the latest news!

Subscribe to The Jerusalem Post Newsletter

Subscribe Now

---

The election was particularly divisive, and generated factionalism within the board between proponents of Sisisky and his challenger, who was defeated.

In April 2019, a search committee of 13 members was convened by then-president Stan Rabin to find a replacement for CEO David Schizer, who was standing down, and a management consulting firm, Russell Reynolds Associates, was hired to assist with the search.

After several months of work by the search committee and Russell Reynolds Associates, a list of 25 potential candidates was compiled, from which the search committee conducted in-person interviews with the leading candidates.

With the search process well underway, Sisisky was elected as president of the board in December 2019 and took up his post in January 2020, by which time the list of candidates had been whittled down to four finalists.

In-person interviews for those finalists were set up for March 4, but the first major intervention in the search process then took place in February.

In an email to the 13 members of the search committee, Sisisky stated that after having had “the opportunity to go deeper into the issues facing JDC,” he was appointing six new members to the panel.

Then on March 16, Sisisky suddenly announced he was suspending the search process entirely, citing uncertainty due to the COVID-19 pandemic as his reason, and adding that travel restrictions made it impossible to adequately interview the candidates.

This decision ran contrary to the advice of Russel Reynolds Associates, who recommended continuing with the search process, members of the original search committee have said.

Just three months later, Sisisky then told the JDC board of directors in an email that he was restarting the search process, but was appointing an entirely new search committee, comprising only seven members.

Sisisky in his email said that the “unforeseen conditions” caused by COVID-19, which had forced the suspension of the search, had now changed, allowing the resumption of the process.

He added that the entire world, including Jewish philanthropy, had changed due to the global health crisis, ostensibly using this as his reason for appointing a new search committee and dispensing with the original one.

This series of developments generated strong opposition from several board members as well as the overwhelming majority of the original committee.

Speaking to the Post, Rabin, under whose tenure the original search committee was set up and who was a member of that committee, said he opposed the decision to form a new committee.

“The search committee was formed while I was still president, and we had made a lot of progress. The pandemic had hit, but I was very pleased by the progress of the original search committee, and we had two co-chairs who did an excellent job,” said Rabin, who currently serves as chairman of the board. “I did not see any reason to change the original search committee.”

Following the decision to freeze the search process in March, 10 members of the search committee, including the two co-chairs, wrote a memo, seen by the Post, on March 24 to the JDC executive committee protesting the interference in the search process.

The memo insisted that the committee had been “acting with great respect, unity, and dedication to find the best person to lead JDC,” and that it had been “collaborative, transparent and, above all, respectful of the search process as approved by the Executive Committee and full board.”

The 10 committee members panned the addition of six new members in February, saying they had no familiarity with the candidates or any knowledge of the framework of the process and how to evaluate the candidates.

The members also vehemently objected to the dismantlement of their committee, saying it was done without consultation with the committee co-chairs, and noting that Sisisky told Russell Reynolds Associates to no longer speak to the co-chairs without his presence.

“The lack of transparency and unilateral decisions that have been made in the past month are counterproductive and a waste of resources – both financial and human capital,” wrote the former committee members to the JDC executive committee. “These continued unilateral actions taken without discussion with the co-chairs and Search Committee, go to the heart of our concern for the integrity of the process moving forward.”

They said that the CEO search process had “suffered from repeated, unprecedented intrusions,” and critically asserted that Sisisky believed the search process to be unnecessary given his belief that there was a suitable in-house candidate: Eisenman.

In their memo, the committee members wrote that in April 2019, before the search committee even convened for its first meeting, Sisisky “indicated to at least one member of the committee that he had a preference for a particular ‘in-house candidate,’” and that he “did not believe a robust search committee process was necessary.”

The members further asserted that a member of the search committee heard the in-house candidate say he/she had been “promised the job” of CEO.

JDC board members told the Post that the in-house candidate referred to was Eisenman.

And a former senior official in the JDC told the Post that they had personally heard Sisisky espouse support for Eisenman to be appointed as the next CEO.

Eisenman, in her early 40s, is the executive director of Entwine, a JDC initiative to encourage young Jewish professionals and leaders to engage in work the JDC does with Jewish communities around the world and offers trips for such people to far-flung Jewish communities.

It is not, however, a core JDC program.

Entwine has a staff of 22 employees and had a budget of $5.7m. for the 2018/2019 financial year.

Several sources, including current and former JDC board members, told the Post that they did not believe Eisenman was suited for the job since she has little managerial experience other than her work with Entwine.

One former senior member of the organization said “she did not have the right experience or the standing in the Jewish community in its greater context,” and noted that she has never run a major organization.

“Other candidates we had did have major executive experience dealing with fundraising, management, and all sorts of components that a good CEO needs,” said the source.

The head of a Jewish organization contacted by the Post, who has worked with Eisenman in the past, praised Eisenman, and said she would be a worthy CEO for JDC.

“Few people, if any, have succeeded in making a legacy Jewish organization relevant to the next generation,” said the source. “Sarah Eisenman has not only succeeded in doing so – she has made the mission of JDC, humanitarian aid and service, a staple of the Jewish experience for tens of thousands of young Jews.”

But concerns have also been raised about the close ties of several members of the new search committee to Entwine and Eisenman.

Search committee member Jane Weitzman sponsors the Entwine Weitzman fellowship program and is on the Entwine board committee, while Irv Smokler is also a search committee member and an Entwine board committee member.

Lynn Shusterman is another search committee member. The Charles and Lynn Schusterman Foundation is a major Entwine funder, giving one Entwine program $470,000 in 2016 and another Entwine program $302,000 in 2018.

Jay Chernikoff, another search committee member, started on the JDC board of directors through the Entwine Global Leaders Initiative.

And Jeffrey Soloman, another search committee member, sits on the board of the Jim Joseph Foundation, which is also a funder of Entwine.

In July, following a board meeting held by video conference, several board members also expressed concern with the new job description for the CEO formulated by the new search committee, which they felt was being tailored to a specific candidate.

The job description states specifically that the CEO should be “Someone who understands the next generation of donors and is capable of leading moves that will speak to them, and the ability to recruit other donors.”

Additionally, the job description notes that the JDC “should be aware of the voices of the time, and present diverse leadership in the following areas; gender, with an emphasis on women, racial diversity, Jews of color, which are especially crucial at this time, and Jewish pluralism.”

During the July 20 board meeting, chair of the new search committee Annie Sandler stated specifically that “funders in the Jewish public are looking at issues of diversity, equity and inclusion,” and asserted that there is “increased sensitivity to racial justice in the Jewish community and outside. To gender equality, safe work environment and advancing women’s leadership and a commitment to religious pluralism and inclusion,” which she said the JDC needed to adopt.

Sandler also said during the meeting that the best candidates for the CEO job may be disinclined to leave current positions since, she said, the “reputation of JDC in the marketplace and on the street has been severely damaged,” and stating that this and instability at the organization “limit the desire of the special candidates and the best pros may not be attracted to taking this risk to their careers.”

When asked, however, if the search process should be delayed due to the lack of trust in JDC, Sandler said no, adding, “There are amazing Jewish leaders out there.”

One board member told the Post that he is aware that two of the finalists identified by the original search committee have not been contacted either by the search firm or the new search committee since the search restarted.

Several board members have already resigned in recent months due to concerns with the search process, and more are considering doing so.

In response to questions by the Post, the JDC declined to say why Sisisky appointed a new search committee instead of reactivating the original.

JDC also declined to say if the finalists identified by the original search committee had been contacted and were being considered for the position, or if Eisenman is being considered for the position.

The organization also did not respond to the claims by senior JDC officials that Sisisky had expressed support for Eisenman.

The organization did say in response that “JDC does not comment publicly on internal specifics of its ongoing CEO search process. The search is conducted in accordance with decisions by JDC’s current leadership and in full compliance with JDC by-laws and governance.

“The Search Committee is considering qualified candidates from all parts of the Jewish world, without discrimination or bias against affiliation, nationality, gender or age, as required by US law.

“The committee is determined to select the best candidate to lead JDC towards future opportunities and challenges, a CEO who will ensure the integrity and ongoing deployment of the mission of this critically important organization.”