Vanguard Foundation Update: With Leader Pleading Guilty, "Truth and Reconciliation"?

The Vanguard Public Foundation was a high-profile, influential, progressive institution in San Francisco: the original "rich kids" foundation making grants to radical grassroots organizations and involving community members in grantmaking. As we chronicled in earlier Blue Avocado articles, Vanguard's ambitions coupled with absence of CEO oversight led to making the Foundation and many of its donors easy targets for a get-rich-quick scheme. Rick Cohen provides this update:

In all likelihood, within the next couple of months the former president and CEO of the Vanguard Public Foundation -- Hari Dillon -- will be sentenced for his self-admitted role in a small-scale version of a Bernie Madoff-like scam.

And around the same time, Mouli Cohen -- the persuasive businessman behind the scam -- will be sentenced as well. Just two weeks ago, he was convicted in U.S. District Court on 15 counts of wire fraud and 11 counts of money laundering (plus three counts of tax evasion). More than $30 million of foundation and donor money have disappeared.

As of now: Cohen is in jail and Dillon is facing jail; the Vanguard Foundation has closed its doors; there's talk of a grantee lawsuit (for awarded but unpaid grants); some activists are calling for a "tribunal" or a "truth and reconciliation process;" and progressive nonprofits are finding it harder than ever to raise funds in the wake of the Vanguard implosion.

The decline begins

Samuel "Mouli" Cohen was the hotshot Internet businessman who convinced several major donors to the Vanguard Public Foundation, including actor Danny Glover, to invest more than $30 million with him purportedly to purchase stock in Cohen's firm -- Ecast -- which would then be acquired by Microsoft. The result would pay a return of some 1,000 percent ($3.50 shares of Ecast stock would be paid off in Microsoft stock at $23 per share), giving them both a fantastic return and the ability to make even bigger donations to Vanguard. All told, more than 55 investors had given Cohen money for the chimerical Ecast deal.

When a deal is too good to be true, it usually is exactly that. Although Cohen had been with Ecast (which provides bars and nightclubs with digital music and interactive advertising), he was long gone from the firm by the time he started pitching to Vanguard donors and leaders; there was no pending acquisition by Microsoft, and Cohen was pocketing the money to finance an extravagant lifestyle. Like Bernie Madoff in New York, Tom Petters in Minneapolis, R. Allen Stanford in Texas and most recently Garfield Taylor in Washington, D.C., Cohen was just another Ponzi scheme artist whose scams captured charities as well as individual investors

Somehow, Dillon and some of the foundation's longtime donors fell for Cohen's scheme. Their participation essentially bankrupted the well-known Vanguard Public Foundation, an organization founded in 1972 known to make grants to progressive, grassroots organizations mostly in the San Francisco Bay Area. Therein lies the tragedy, a story of hubris and ignorance mixing to undo a history of philanthropic good work and causing damage beyond the specific downfall of Vanguard.

Based on interviews with former board members, staff, grantees, and donors (many of whom asked not to be named), and by review of court documents, the story emerges:

In the late 1990s, Vanguard's leaders watched the boom enrich other foundations. It seemed as if not only the progressive causes, but Vanguard itself and Vanguard's donors would all benefit by making a killing in the market. A few years earlier, a sign reading the "Dillon Group" had appeared next to the "Vanguard Public Foundation" sign on the foundation's offices front door. What it was, who it was, who worked for it, and what part of the Vanguard Public Foundation offices and personnel were working for the Dillon Group was not clear . . . except that Hari Dillon (president of Vanguard) was the CEO of the Dillon Group, which was a private partnership vehicle for investors. The first Dillon Group preceded any dealings with Israeli technology entrepreneur (and self-styled philanthropist) Mouli Cohen, but eventually there were at least three Dillon Group partnerships and one Glover partnership used as vehicles to funnel investments from Vanguard Public Foundation donors to a deal with Mouli.

Reluctance to question

As the attorneys asked the investors/donors who testified during the trial: why didn't you call anyone about Cohen? Why didn't you consult investment advisors? Why didn't you look to see that Cohen had been sued by his own former firm and by an Oregon investor who had fallen for the same scheme? Why didn't you do basic due diligence on a deal that was taking millions on the promise of a fantastic, too-good-to-be-true deal?

Partly, they fell for Mouli Cohen's show, his self-produced documents about his international philanthropy. They fell for the trappings of this successful hotshot investor: his four-story house in Belvedere, his house full of original Picassos and Matisses (that turned out to be fakes), the butler and the maids.

The investors also fell for the deal, it must be said, partly because of Hari Dillon. Dillon was the leader and face of the foundation, Danny Glover's pal, the radical activist who had stood up against criticisms of his foundation work, even causing critics on the board to leave the organization in frustration. In many instances, Cohen's pitches were conveyed and assured by Dillon acting as the intermediary to the scammed investors. Many critics say that donors and Vanguard board members were afraid to challenge Dillon for fear of being seen as undermining a progressive leader of color, and some board members -- who were also grantees -- have said they didn't want to jeopardize their grants by questioning the foundation's leadership.

Guilty pleas

Dillon and the board weren't motivated only by the usual desire for personal wealth. They wanted to see Vanguard run its own initiatives and make bigger grants, requiring a good deal more money. Hari Dillon spent two days on the witness stand at Cohen's trial, having signed a "cooperation plea"of guilty to a couple of counts of wire fraud and money laundering. On cross-examination,Cohen's attorneys tried to paint him as a con man himself rather than the dupe he claimed to be.

But Dillon's plea involves his own share of the booty. Apparently, the plea agreement -- revealed in court, but still not accessible in the court's public records -- acknowledges that Dillon diverted or misappropriated some $2.5 million for his own purposes, including the purchase of a condominium in San Francisco and the payment of personal debts. Sources say that Dillon had anticipated that the Cohen/Ecast/Microsoft deal would generate such huge returns that he would be able to repay what he had taken, but the fact is that he has pled guilty to taking money for himself.

Where did Mouli's money go? It's gone, that's for sure. We're told that he spent some $6 million between 2003 and 2009 renting private jets, taking expensive trips to Israel, the south of France, and elsewhere, and purchasing a mammoth $1.4 million diamond ring (presumably for his wife, Stacy, who attended the trial faithfully) and fancy cars such as an Aston Martin, a Jaguar, and a Rolls Royce -- but it doesn't all add up to $30 million. Several sources suggest money stashed away or given to family members.

Maybe there will be investor lawsuits against Cohen as there have been against Dillon and the Dillon Groups to recover some of the money. Good luck.

Collateral damage

The damage of the Vanguard Public Foundation implosion is not limited to Dillon, the donors, and the foundation itself. The damage goes to fundraising for progressive organizations. Efforts to create or revive a "new Vanguard" that would bring money from progressive donors to making small grants to progressive groups "run off the kitchen table" have been difficult to sustain. For instance, social activists concerned about Vanguard's fall, the closing of the Agape Foundation, and the San Francisco Foundation's dismantling of its social justice program have created the Bay Area Community Advised Fund (BACAF). Structured to prevent the management governance problems of Vanguard, BACAF suffers from the fallout of the Vanguard disaster. "Every time I talk to a donor from that era," one activist said, "the question is what happened [at Vanguard]."

But structuring new funds that self-consciously present themselves as managed and governed differently from Vanguard isn't enough. "We're really hampered by Vanguard, hampered by issues of trust... it's impacting us in our ability to build anything here," one activist said, adding that "people are furious, they aren't buying the [Dillon-as-] victim story."

A tribunal for Vanguard?

As a result, there are moves to "clear the air," to examine the story of Vanguard publicly enough to allow donors and groups to hash out the issues. Several people mentioned the idea of a Vanguard "tribunal" (one called it a "truth and reconciliation" process, telling terminology given Dillon's well-known history of support for the African National Congress in South Africa). "The community needs to heal from his dishonest behavior, and this cannot happen if he continues to spout lies about what he (Dillon) did with the money," a former donor to the foundation said.

There is also word of a grantee lawsuit in the works -- the 501(c)(3) Vanguard Public Foundation still exists, though there were court documents questioning whether anyone was authorized to officially represent the entity -- though what assets plaintiffs might seek are questionable. It may be that some "pass-through" grants from donors to specific nonprofit recipients may never have reached their targets despite being announced as having been made by Vanguard.

According to the Justice Department's press release, Mouli Cohen faces a maximum penalty on each wire fraud count of "20 years in prison, a fine of the greater of $250,000 or double the gross gain from the offense, restitution to victims, and three years of supervised release" and, on each count of money laundering, "10 years in prison, a fine of the greater of $250,000 or double the amount of criminally derived money, and three years of supervised release." Presumably, Dillon is eligible for the same penalties, though his cooperation with the federal prosecutors and his guilty plea (compared to Cohen's tooth and nail fight against the charges) -- plus the fact that the scheme was clearly cooked up by Cohen, who had run it before -- may end up being taken in his favor by the courts.

Nonetheless, both Cohen and Dillon having to disgorge themselves of whatever assets they received in this scam, won't be enough for the Bay Area philanthropic community or the region's politically progressive community that feels, according to one observer, "burned...[due do the] bad business, bad politics, [and] bad personal behavior" attributed to Dillon, the board, and others. "We're burdened by [the Vanguard Public Foundation's] history big time," one activist added.

Did the Cohen-Dillon scandal do damage to philanthropy beyond the demise of one now all-but-defunct foundation? An expert in the public charity field put it professionally: "There are a lot of pretty disillusioned donors out there, the violation of fiduciary duties always hurts the field." One former donor was somewhat less polite about the impact on her: "No matter your personal relationships with folks involved, it's more important to ask the tough questions and be willing to take some heat," she said. "I'm advocating radical philanthropy at this point ... F**k the gatekeepers; it's critical to fund the new movement that has arisen without waiting for bureaucracies to sprout."

See also in Blue Avocado:

Rick Cohen is National Correpondent for the Nonprofit Quarterly. His background includes serving as executive director of the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy as well as stints with local government and the Enterprise Foundation. Previous articles by Rick in Blue Avocado include investigations of Teach for America, L3C corporations, tax-exemption "killers," and affinity groups of foundations and program officers.

Comments (14)

  • Hello folks,

    The real truth is slowly emerging about the fiasco at Vanguard Public Foundation, once a stellar social justice foundation. Thanks to Rick Cohen and Jan Masaoka who have diligently followed the trial that found both Mouli Cohen and Hari Dillon guilty of embezzling funds. I encourage you to follow further articles that Rick is planning to write about in Blue Avocado that will ensure that this never happens again - at least not on our watch as supporters and caretakers of the social justice movement and our communities.

    In the meantime, a number of us are helping grantees to collect the grants that were awarded them and not honored. We are asking former Vanguard donor board and community board members to step up and host a "truth and reconciliation" session. We will be inviting and encouraging current board members of Vanguard, former staff, interns, volunteers, and advisers, vendors and tenants as well - to join us at a healing and closure session early next year, after the holidays. The demise of Vanguard has had a wider ripple effect beyond the Foundation. Many donors continue to question what truly happened inside Vanguard during Hari's tenure. The lack of information and silence by the principals at Vanguard has affected their giving to grassroots social justice organizations in the Bay Area. It has also affected other progressive public foundations' quest for general support. And those grassroots organizations who do not have access to major donors are now left out of this circle of generosity.

    There are many of us who were associated with Vanguard 15-20 years ago who continue to support the many movements in the Bay Area and beyond. We are committed to helping continue the flow of funds to grassroots groups who are struggling during these difficult times. We hope you will do the same and continue your support. Every little bit helps. Encourage donors, small and large, to continue to give directly to the many deserving social justice groups in the Bay Area. And if you need advice, there are a number of us who are now associated with other foundations who are willing to help you -- as volunteers. We are happy to do some due diligence. We are familiar with the status of many social justice organizations. Better yet, contact the groups directly and get to know the dedicated activists and their constituencies.

    If you know of grantees who are owed money by Vanguard, please have them email their grant award letter to me: info at We've been contacted by more than twenty-five grassroots organizations who are owed grants. And if you know donors who held donor advised funds at Vanguard - whose grants were not paid out - please have them send their list of grantees or encourage them to contact me The community so needs these funds and they were public funds that should have been shepherded by the Board, beyond Hari Dillon.

    There is light, always. Happy Holidays to you and yours. And thanks for your support of the work of many activists and the communities that they serve. Let's keep in touch. Love, integrity, and humility prevails! beth rosales
    "A commitment to love and justice demands the transformation of social structures as
    well as of hearts." - Mary E. Hunt

    Dec 06, 2011
  • Anonymous

    I urge an investigation into the manner this case was prosecuted. Much suspicion is aroused regarding the original Judge presiding over this case, referring specifically to Susan Illston. Why did she mysteriously withdraw herself from proceedings in the middle of the case ? Is it possible that she was connected in some personal way to the Vanguard Foundation or it's founders / board. This case involving 'Vanguard', a social justice and equality non profit organization, founded and headquartered in the most liberal city in America (San Francisco) was handed over to Judge Illston who happened to be nominated as a Federal Judge by Bill Clinton ( Left wing, liberal democrat ). I honestly believe that this Judge was personally connected in some way to Vanguard or it's board. How is that she denied Mouli Cohen bail on 3 separate occasions ? Denied multiple leniency requests by his attorneys and seemed to lack any impartiality towards the defendant before he was convicted and presumably not guilty. Why did she withdraw without reason ?? It could not have been intimidation.... Did she maybe feel that she couldn't judge fairly due to certain external factors or relationships that existed that may impinge on the ruling ? Mouli Cohen could not have defended himself properly while in jail for over a year and bank accounts frozen on Judge's or court orders. I believe the new Judge ( Bryer ) is a fair and honest Judge who seemingly smelled something was going awry. He therefore granted Mr. Cohen bail, and showed a fair face and heard and granted requests from both defendant and prosecution. If Blue Avocado has the resources or interest into looking into this I believe they should. What led to Mr. Cohen's arrest ? Vanguard's board and donors consists of some very powerful and wealthy people with political connections and influences that resonate deeply within the San Francisco community. Did they have any influence on the Judge or investigation ? I'm quite interested and seemingly believe there is more to meet the eye in this story.

    Dec 07, 2011
  • You're asking some interesting questions, Anonymous above. Why don't you sign your name to them?

    Dec 07, 2011
  • Anonymous

    Yeah, Anonymous.

    Dec 07, 2011
  • Anonymous

    That's an interesting idea.... but is my name relevant ? Even more so... Why don't you reveal yours before asking for mine. And who signs their real names to blog / comment posts ?? It's not relevant

    Dec 11, 2011
  • Anonymous

    My question is if Mouli is ex Moussad, I think so. I have known him for 10 years, and believe me, he has been trying the same scam since 2000 even before he was ousted from Ecast. One thing I have learned is that you can't trust a word he is saying, he is even lying when he doesn't need too. He can be very fun to be around, I give him that, but I'm glad that he will be off the streets forever, since he is a danger to the society. It is a petty that he wasn't caught before this tragedy.

    Jan 15, 2012
  • Every year as I grow older, I am more clear about why this clatch of West/East Coast progressive foundation folks were so snooty toward those of us working in the heartlands of the country in the 70s,80s and 90s. It has taken me years to overcome my naivete and understand that much of the giving done back then had a more prescribed political agenda than just political and social justice. Of course now I wonder how I was so stupid. But I and others were young and idealistic and saw clearly what we heard were the needs of ordinary people organizing for justice in the backwaters of the country while at the same time raising the political consciousness of the systemic and structural reasons for the injustice. But that wasn't good enough. We didn't even know that there were still Marxist/Leninists/Maoists in the damn country, much less rich ones who were using their money to build a Marxist/Lenist/Maoist/pick your favorite faction movement (talk about hubris and delusion!). Now, I smile sadly about our angst over why we weren't somehow good enough or smart enough or sophisticated enough to warrant the really cool "progressive" money that other, seemingly less effective organizations were raising. I do not mean to sound like some commie hating revisionist liberal here. I am just expressing how many of us experienced the left funding world during the good old days of anti war and military, pro environment, pro civil rights for all, anti nuke organizing at the grass roots which seemed to flourish post 60s. I abandoned foundation fundraising for my work years ago because I just could not figure it out and the energy it took to prove one's bono fide as a progressive was exhausting and took away too much from the real work. The honorable and effective organizing happening in communities now still depends on Progressive money but the lack of accountability and the black hole quality of how the foundations operate put off many good community groups. This whole incident makes me profoundly sad and angry and I suspect I would speak for many an old organizer. Marla Painter, Albuquerque, NM

    Dec 10, 2011
  • Marla, thank you for this comment. It's so true that often foundations (on the left and right) are driven by an agenda that is unsaid . . . so nonprofits can't figure out what they're doing wrong in the grant application process. Thank you for reminding all of us about this in a very heartfelt way. Jan

    Dec 14, 2011
  • Anonymous

    Has the judge given his sentence yet??

    Feb 02, 2012
  • Anonymous

    Moved sentencing hearing from Feb 1 to April 27... A close family member was a victim investor in this case.

    Mar 06, 2012
  • Anonymous

    I am a single woman, a senior/retired nurse. had my personal investment in the Dillon Group/Vanguard Foundation (my entire life savings, $300,000!) stolen by Dillon/Cohen. Words cannot express how much I would like to see both of them behind bars for the rest of their lives.

    Mar 07, 2012
  • Anonymous

    Yesterday was Cohen's sentencing date. Was he sentenced?

    Apr 28, 2012
  • Anonymous

    It really angers me that the terms "leftist" or Marxist or Maoist are always associated with progressive names and causes, especially by those who are on the "right" The real corrumption and hurbris these days is on the so-called "right" not the left. It's interesting that Cohen and perhaps Dillon (I don't know) were part of what I call the right wing Jewish Israeli Mafia. People like me on the "left" are not allowed to criticize Israel---AT ALL--because that would makes us all anti-Semitic. It's sad because Jewish "liberals' have been so important to the progressive movement in this country. Vanguard used to be run by ethical progressives, and spending money on a benefit related to something Harry Belafonte or Danny Glover was involved in is not "crony progressivism", especially when you look at the low level amounts involved and the generosity and integrity of those two individuals. And finally, all the major foundations, Pew, Mellon, MacArthus ALL have their own programs now. They don't trust the non profits anymore, and unfortunately this example of Vanguard hurts the good non-profits as they live hand to mouth on the big liberal foundations' largesse.

    May 04, 2012
  • The author writes "Somehow, Dillon and some of the foundation's longtime donors fell for Cohen's scheme." Why on earth does he believe that Dillon was tricked by Cohen? From everything I have read about this case, Dillon was a big time manipulator, who used charm and color-guilt-tripping to extract money for his own use from Vanguard donors. My guess is that he, not Cohen, was the drive wheel in this scam.

    Jun 10, 2016

Leave a comment

Fill this field in if you want to post a name a user login

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <small> <sup> <sub> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <img> <br> <br/> <p> <div> <span> <b> <i> <pre> <img> <u><strike>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
6 + 1 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.

subscribe (free)