Skip to content

Get Judicial Watch Updates!


Judicial Watch • PJW v IRS 01559 unredacted documents- pg 1-3

PJW v IRS 01559 unredacted documents- pg 1-3

PJW v IRS 01559 unredacted documents- pg 1-3

Page 1: PJW v IRS 01559 unredacted documents- pg 1-3


Number of Pages:3

Date Created:May 2, 2018

Date Uploaded to the Library:May 02, 2018

Tags:Hilary, mitch, favorable, Janine, disclosures, Highlighted, IRS unredacted, 2018, 01559, Justin, matthew, Holly, Sharon, grant, Joseph, IRS

File Scanned for Malware

Donate now to keep these documents public!

See Generated Text   ∨

Autogenerated text from PDF

Abner Donna
Wednesday, June 06, 2012 5:53
Paz Holly
RE: advocacy cases next steps RESPONSE NEEDED Holly,
Just few slight differences from notes our conversation last week. See below:
From: Paz Holly
Sent: Tuesday, June OS, 2012 2:24
To: Lerner Lois Thomas Cindy Abner Donna Light Sharon
Subject: advocacy cases next steps RESPONSE NEEDED
Importance: High
Below draft email setting forth next steps the various buckets advocacy cases. Please review and let
know have missed anything stated anything incorrectly. looks you, please let know that well.
Once hear from all you, will send this email everyone the team. Thanks!
Set forth below summary the bucketing results. This email outlines the next steps taken with regard each
bucket. c/3s bucketed: approval limited development general development likely denial
199 c/4s bucketed: approval limited development general development likely denial
Faye and Jodi will make calls all applicants who were sent development letters but have not yet responded
before favorable determination letters are sent using the script already provided. Faye and Jodi will send the favorable determinations using the letter already provided.
Faye and Jodi will make calls make calls all applicants who were sent development letters but have not yet
responded before favorable determination letters are sent. The phone script already provided will modified
accordingly Faye and Jodi. Faye and Jodi will send the favorable determinations. Addendum the letter will added our standard favorable letter. The second addendum the letter referencing the section the pub
re: political activity not necessary.
Donor Information
C4s that provided names their donors response additional information request from the IRS will sent
letter (to sent separate email) indicating that the request was made error and have destroyed that
information. This applies applicants that provided the information response development request
specifically requesting list all donors, development request detail all sources revenue any other additional
development request the IRS. does not apply c4s that provided this information their application. cases
meeting this criteria, this letter must sent before the favorable determination sent.
Quality Review light the small number disagreed cases, Quality will now shift from 100% mandatory review reviewing one every cases bucket Holly understood that the shift sample review was for the approvals bucket
#1. For the c3s were begin reviewing the bucket approvals. Like with the c4s the initial reviews are
favorable meaning agreement most then will shift sample review that point. attempt will made
assign the review Daniel Mike since they are most familiar with these cases but neither will review cases
bucketed. Because the priority given the assignment all Cincinnati reviewers including Daniel and Mike are
reviewing the cases. All bucket case reviews are expected completed this week. Disagreed cases will
discussed QA, the individuals who completed the bucketing worksheets and/or reconciliation sheet, and Sharon
reach mutual decision re: the appropriate action the case. mutual decision cannot reached, the case will
elevated for decision.
Jodi, Faye, Grant, Janine, and Carly will draft the development letters consisting the questions listed the bucketers the bucketing worksheets. Each letter reviewed Hilary, Matthew Andy before sent based the
following partnering:
Andy Faye (all cases)
Matthew Carly and Grant
Hilary Jodi and Janine
Hilary and Matthew should consult with Andy they have any questions. applicant was previously sent development letter but has not yet responded, the individual assigned write the
development letter will first call the applicant direct them disregard the prior development letter and that new
letter will coming (modifying phone script provided for bucket cases). The new development letter should also
contain such statement (language can pulled from first addendum favorable letter).
The assigned Determinations specialist should email the assigned reviewer the development letter. reviewing the
letter, the reviewer will look the application TEDS and the organizations website (if applicable).
Quality will review the the cases once response has been received and the Determinations specialist has reached
decision the case just like regular mandatory review case. Initially, all bucket cases will sent Quality, but
this will reduced sampling based the results the review. will send message the team when are
ready shift sampling review.
Same bucket except the individual assigned the case will have draft the questions. Bucket cases should done
before bucket cases.
Cindy will send the oldest cases. She will indicate whether the case will assigned Mitch Joseph.
Judy will work with Mitch, and Justin will work with Joseph. Judy and Justin will draft development letter. Tom Miller
will review the development letter. Mitch and Joseph will send the development letter and coordinate with Judy/Justin reviewing the response.
Mitch will handle all c3s bucket will determine whether these organizations could qualify under and, so,
contact the applicant inform them that not believe they qualify under but may under and instruct them submit 1024 they are interested pursuing status.
Bucketing Going Forward:
Mitch and Joseph will each review and bucket all new receipts that meet the definition advocacy case the BOLO.
Sharon will involved any reconciliation discussions needed Mitch and Joseph place cases different buckets.
Tracking Going Forward:
Ron Bell will responsible for tracking the advocacy cases going forward. will use the spreadsheet created
Sharon. Everyone should notify Ron when case sent their manager for closing.