Report on the San Diego LGBT Community Center’s Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals Amidst Financial Scrutiny

Executive Summary

The San Diego LGBT Community Center (The Center) is facing scrutiny over its management of a substantial philanthropic gift of nearly $19 million. This situation presents significant implications for the organization’s alignment with several United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly those concerning poverty, health, inequality, decent work, sustainable communities, and institutional governance. Despite receiving a donation more than double its 2022 expenses, The Center has issued precautionary layoff notices to its entire staff, prompting questions from community stakeholders about financial transparency and strategic direction.

Institutional Governance and Financial Stewardship (SDG 16, SDG 8)

The Thimot-Rawnsley Donation

Three years ago, The Center received an $18.9 million donation from Maurice Thimot and M. Rust Rawnsley, designated to support LGBTQ+ seniors. The contribution was delivered in two installments: $10 million initially and $8.9 million in the fall of 2024. The stated purpose of this fund is to assist seniors currently in need while planning for the future expansion of programs and services, with a focus on safe and stable housing, directly supporting SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities).

Governance and Transparency Concerns

Recent events have raised concerns regarding The Center’s commitment to SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions), which emphasizes transparent and accountable institutions. Key issues include:

• Leadership Vacancy: The organization is currently operating without a Chief Financial Officer to manage its $32 million in assets, with two CFOs having reportedly left in the past year.
• Stakeholder Engagement: The senior advisory committee, a key body for community consultation, was disbanded in April and is undergoing restructuring. Former members report that requests for information regarding the donation’s use were met with resistance.
• Information Accessibility: Stakeholders, including longtime donors, have reported significant difficulty in obtaining basic governance documents such as bylaws and the specific terms of the restricted donation.
• Employment Uncertainty: Despite its significant assets, The Center issued a Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act notice, indicating potential mass layoffs. This action raises questions about financial stability and its commitment to SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth).

Impact on Social and Community-Focused SDGs

Senior Welfare and Reduced Inequalities (SDG 1, SDG 3, SDG 10)

The management of the donation directly impacts The Center’s ability to advance goals related to poverty, health, and inequality for a vulnerable population.

• Fund Allocation: The Center’s board has directed $350,000 annually for 10 years from the fund to pay for senior services. Interest from the donation is also intended to support the general fund.
• Service Expansion: Officials report that the gift has enabled a doubling of the number of seniors served, with the introduction of an adult housing program, daily congregate meals, and new social programs. This aligns with SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being).
• Community Perception: However, stakeholders like former advisory chair Elaine Lewis describe the spending as “drips and drabs,” arguing it will not have a lasting impact. Other clients note cutbacks in senior drop-in hours and lunch programs, indicating a potential disconnect between expanded services and core needs. This challenges the effectiveness of efforts toward SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities).

Sustainable Housing and Community Infrastructure (SDG 11)

A primary point of contention is the development of long-term, sustainable infrastructure for seniors, a key target of SDG 11.

• Community Vision: Community members have advocated for using the funds for capital projects, such as a dedicated senior center or permanent housing solutions.
• Institutional Constraints: The Center states that the “restricted nature of the bequest means we cannot use these funds for capital construction.”
• Future Planning: Officials have confirmed they are actively exploring “sustainable models that maximize impact while preserving the fund’s longevity,” with a plan that will prioritize senior housing and related services.

Analysis of Decent Work and Economic Stability (SDG 8)

Employment Uncertainty

In July 2025, The Center issued a WARN Act notice to its more than 100 employees, signaling that mass layoffs were a possibility within the next month. This action creates significant instability and undermines the principles of decent work and economic security for its staff.

Institutional Justification

The Center’s leadership insists the notice was a “precautionary measure” taken in case of the termination of federal grants. However, these grants account for less than one-third of the organization’s $15.5 million annual budget, approximately $4.4 million. CEO Cara Dessert stated that “as of today, there are no plans to lay off any staff members,” but the formal notice has created an environment of uncertainty that conflicts with the stability required to deliver on its mission and its responsibilities as an employer under SDG 8.

Conclusion and Recommendations for SDG Alignment

The San Diego LGBT Community Center is at a critical juncture where its operational practices appear misaligned with its potential to advance the Sustainable Development Goals. The substantial Thimot-Rawnsley donation provides a unique opportunity to make transformative progress on issues of poverty, inequality, health, and sustainable communities for LGBTQ+ seniors. However, concerns regarding transparency, governance, and financial strategy threaten to undermine this potential. To realign its mission with SDG principles, the following actions are recommended:

1. Enhance Institutional Transparency (SDG 16): Immediately publish the terms of the Thimot-Rawnsley donation and provide clear, accessible financial reporting to rebuild trust with the community and stakeholders.
2. Strengthen Stakeholder Partnerships (SDG 17): Reinstate and empower the senior advisory committee with a clear mandate and authority, ensuring that community voices are integral to the strategic planning process for the donation.
3. Develop a Comprehensive Strategic Plan (SDG 1, 10, 11): Create and publicize a detailed, long-term plan for the donation that outlines specific, measurable, and time-bound projects targeting senior housing, health services, and poverty reduction.
4. Ensure Organizational Stability (SDG 3, 8): Prioritize financial leadership by filling the CFO position and develop a sustainable financial model that ensures job security for staff, thereby guaranteeing the consistent delivery of vital health and well-being services to the community.

Relevant Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

SDG 1: No Poverty

• The article discusses the provision of services for “gay seniors less fortunate than themselves,” which directly relates to assisting a vulnerable and economically disadvantaged group. The goal of the donation is to provide “safe and stable housing,” a fundamental aspect of poverty alleviation.

SDG 2: Zero Hunger

• The Center’s services include a “congregate meal program” and considerations for “food resources” for seniors. This directly addresses the goal of ensuring access to food for vulnerable populations.

SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

• The article explicitly states that The Center “conducts HIV prevention and screenings and offers mental health resources and counseling.” It also provides “sexual health and other wellness programming,” which aligns with promoting health and well-being for all.

SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

• The central conflict in the article involves The Center warning its “100-plus employees that they could be laid off.” The filing of a “WARN Act notice” highlights a direct threat to stable and decent employment for the organization’s staff.

SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

• The core mission of the San Diego LGBT Community Center is to serve the LGBTQ+ community, a group that often faces inequality. The article’s specific focus on “LGBT seniors” and the need to expand “programs and services for LGBTQ+ older adults” directly addresses the goal of empowering and promoting the social and economic inclusion of all, irrespective of age or other status (like sexual orientation).

SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

• A primary purpose of the donation mentioned is to address the need for “safe and stable housing” for LGBTQ+ seniors. The article notes that The Center is actively planning for “senior housing and related services,” which connects to the goal of ensuring access to adequate, safe, and affordable housing for all.

SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

• The article is centered around a partnership between private donors (Maurice Thimot and M. Rust Rawnsley) and a civil society organization (The Center). It also mentions funding from “federal grants,” illustrating a multi-stakeholder approach to achieving social goals through financial resource mobilization.

Specific SDG Targets

SDG 1: No Poverty

1. Target 1.3: Implement nationally appropriate social protection systems and measures for all, including floors, and by 2030 achieve substantial coverage of the poor and the vulnerable. The Center’s programs, such as the “adult housing program” and “congregate meal program,” function as social protection services for the vulnerable LGBTQ+ senior community.
2. Target 1.4: By 2030, ensure that all men and women, in particular the poor and the vulnerable, have equal rights to economic resources, as well as access to basic services. The donation’s intent to provide “safe and stable housing” and other services for “less fortunate” gay seniors directly supports this target.

SDG 2: Zero Hunger

1. Target 2.1: By 2030, end hunger and ensure access by all people, in particular the poor and people in vulnerable situations… to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year round. The article mentions The Center offers a “congregate meal program daily” and is considering how to best use the donation for “food resources.”

SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

1. Target 3.3: By 2030, end the epidemics of AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria and neglected tropical diseases and combat hepatitis, water-borne diseases and other communicable diseases. The Center’s work in “HIV prevention and screenings” is a direct contribution to this target.
2. Target 3.4: By 2030, reduce by one third premature mortality from non-communicable diseases through prevention and treatment and promote mental health and well-being. The provision of “mental health resources and counseling” by The Center supports this target.

SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

1. Target 8.5: By 2030, achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all women and men… and equal pay for work of equal value. The potential “mass layoff” of “100-plus employees” described in the article represents a significant challenge to achieving this target for the staff of The Center.

SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

1. Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status. The Center’s entire mission, and specifically its focus on providing housing, food, health, and social programs for the “LGBTQ+ community” and “LGBT seniors,” is the embodiment of this target.

SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

1. Target 11.1: By 2030, ensure access for all to adequate, safe and affordable housing and basic services and upgrade slums. The article highlights that a key goal for the donated funds is to address the need for “safe and stable housing” and that The Center’s long-term plan “will prioritize senior housing.”

SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

1. Target 17.17: Encourage and promote effective public, public-private and civil society partnerships, building on the experience and resourcing strategies of partnerships. The article describes a civil society partnership funded by a major private donation (“an astonishing and unexpected gift of almost $19 million”) and supplemented by public funds (“federal grants”).

Implied Indicators for Measuring Progress

SDG 1, 10, & 11 (Poverty, Inequality, Housing)

• Number of seniors served: The article states The Center has succeeded in “doubling the number of seniors served,” which is a direct quantitative indicator of outreach and impact.
• Proportion of clients who are seniors: The fact that “more than 35% of all clients are seniors” serves as an indicator of the demographic being reached.
• Existence of housing and food programs: The mention of an “adult housing program” and a “congregate meal program daily” are qualitative indicators of the types of services being provided to meet basic needs.

SDG 3 (Good Health & Well-being)

• Availability of specific health services: The article implies progress can be measured by the continued provision of services like “HIV prevention and screenings” and “mental health resources and counseling.”

SDG 8 (Decent Work)

• Number of employees at risk of layoff: The “100-plus employees” who received a WARN Act notice is a clear indicator of job insecurity.
• WARN Act notice status: The filing of the notice is an indicator of potential mass layoffs, while a rescission of the notice would indicate progress toward job stability.

SDG 17 (Partnerships)

• Amount of mobilized financial resources: The article provides specific figures that act as indicators of resource mobilization, such as the “$19 million” donation and the “$4.4 million” in federal grants.
• Allocation of funds: The direction to use “$350,000 annually over 10 years” for senior services is an indicator of how partnership funds are being operationalized.

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Analysis

Source: sandiegouniontribune.com