New York Times reveals extravagant spending at GLAAD, but the group calls the article ‘grossly misleading’

The New York Times reported Thursday on excessive spending by GLAAD, the LGBTQ+ nonprofit, and its president and CEO Sarah Kate Ellis, and the organization quickly pushed back — noting the investigation comes after GLAAD has called out the paper for its coverage of transgender healthcare.

Keep up with the latest in LGBTQ+ news and politics. Sign up for The Advocate's email newsletter.

The paper reported that Ellis’s income was higher than is typical for other nonprofit organizations of GLAAD’s size and that her expenses included potentially inappropriate spending on first-class flights, luxury hotel stays, and significant home office renovations. It also criticized Ellis for her spending while traveling to the popular tourist destination Provincetown in Massachusetts, where GLAAD says she was conducting official business. The article suggested these expenditures may have violated GLAAD’s internal policies and IRS regulations.

According to the Times, Ellis’s travel included more than 30 first-class flights in 18 months, a $13,000 trip to a conference inCalifornia, and a week-long stay in 2023 at the Tivoli Lodge in Davos, Switzerland, which cost nearly half a million dollars. Most of these expenses were reportedly covered by GLAAD, which operates with an annual budget of about $30 million. Another group covered the Davos trip, GLAAD told the paper.

GLAAD’s chief communications officer, Rich Ferraro, rejected the Times article detailing Ellis’s generous compensation and accusing her of engaging in a “pattern of lavish spending.” In response to questions by The Advocate, Ferraro called the article “grossly misleading.”

The Times also reported that Ellis’s compensation package could exceed $1 million annually, a claim GLAAD denies.

Ferraro disputed the article’s accuracy on that pay. “In practice, it is impossible for Ms. Ellis to receive $1 million in a year, and she has not received anything near that under this contract,” he told The Advocate. He emphasized that GLAAD’s board of directors has complete confidence in Ellis, who has successfully guided the organization through significant growth over the past decade.

According to the latest IRS Form 990 available for GLAAD from 2022, Ellis made $575,716 in salary plus $27,569 in additional compensation in 2021. A Form 990 is a document that tax-exempt organizations file annually with the Internal Revenue Service, providing detailed information on their finances, including executive compensation.

In response to The Advocate’s inquiry, Charlie Stadtlander, managing director of external communications at the Times, defended the article, writing in an email that it was “fair, accurate and based on objective information in GLAAD’s expense reports, employment contracts, tax filings and other documents.”

Stadtlander noted that GLAAD had not challenged any facts in the article.

He explained that The Times reporter reviewed Ellis’s employment agreement, which includes a starting base salary of $441,000 plus various bonuses. According to Stadtlander, the paper’s “math based on the terms of Ms. Ellis’s 2022 contract” showed potential earnings (including a $300,000 contract-indicated fundraising bonus) of $947,400 in 2022, $978,270 in 2023, $1,010,864 in 2024, $1,044,718 in 2025 and up to $1,305,454 in 2026 factoring in discretionary and farewell bonuses.

Stadtlander acknowledged that GLAAD indicated to The Times that Ellis’s fundraising bonus had not exceeded $50,000, which, according to the paper, calculated Ellis’s compensation (including discretionary bonuses and a farewell bonus her final year) at $697,400 in 2022, $728,270 in 2023, $760,684 in 2024, $794,718 in 2025 and $1,055,454 in 2026. The Advocate has not reviewed Ellis’s employment contract.

Ferraro defended Ellis’s expenditures. He told The Advocate that GLAAD’s board of directors approved a one-time home office renovation for business purposes in 2022. During the COVID-19 pandemic, when GLAAD’s New York City office was closed, Ellis had to use her attic, previously used for storage, as a home office and venue for virtual GLAAD events and TV appearances, he said, adding that improvements to the attic were necessary to create an appropriate on-camera setting for more than 80 media interviews in 2022. “The attic is not used as an entertainment or personal space for Ms. Ellis, her family, or guests,” Ferraro said.

Regarding Ellis’s travel to the LGBTQ+ hotspot Provincetown, Ferraro noted that GLAAD’s presence and events in P-Town predate Ellis’s tenure, pointing to a 2011 event in the enclave. In the summer of 2022, a fundraising event in Provincetown raised nearly $200,000 for GLAAD’s work, he added. According to Ferraro, Ellis’s business calendar included meetings with top-tier donors, appearances on panels, and discussions with community organizers and potential donors. Ferraro emphasized, “Ellis has been able to raise millions of dollars during a traditionally slow time of year for fundraising – August – because of the access and proximity to donors.”

Experts quoted in the Times article raised concerns about the appropriateness of such expenditures for a nonprofit organization. Michael West, an attorney who consults charities at the New York Council of Nonprofits, described the pattern of spending as “a potentially abusive use of charitable funds that would be surprising and insulting to a lot of their donors.” Ohio State University Fisher College of Business professor Brian Mittendorf told the Times that Ellis’s income looked “much more like a pay package of a for-profit executive and less like that of a person directing a charity.”

Ferraro underscored GLAAD’s commitment to financial integrity in response to the analyses on the group's spending. “Our financial statements are audited annually by an external firm, and for over a decade, these audits have consistently confirmed our sound financial management,” he said. Ferraro added that GLAAD holds perfect ratings from Charity Navigator and GuideStar and is recognized as a top-rated LGBTQ charity by CharityWatch.

Ellis addressed the scrutiny in a statement to The Advocate.

“I take my role as GLAAD’s financial steward incredibly seriously, and we’ll continue updating our procedures to keep pace with the organization’s rapid growth,” she said. “Our work has never been more urgent, because the LGBTQ community is under increasing attack.”

Board chair Liz Jenkins expressed unwavering support for Ellis. “GLAAD’s mission of accelerating acceptance for the LGBTQ community has never been more important,” Jenkins said. “The Board and I stand firmly behind Sarah Kate Ellis, with respect and appreciation for how she and her team are leading the movement at a time when our community is under attack.”

Jenkins added, “We have full confidence that they’re doing so with integrity, and that they share the Board’s commitment to irrefutably strong governance and business practices.”

Since taking the helm in 2014, Ellis has focused on raising GLAAD’s profile and expanding its mission, which included boosting fundraising efforts to stabilize the organization’s finances. She began making regular TV appearances and attending high-profile events.

The approach proved successful, the Times noted. By 2022, GLAAD’s revenue had increased fivefold to nearly $19 million, thanks to contributions from donors and new programs she helped establish. This year, she represented GLAAD onstage at the annual Emmy Awards, where the organization was honored with the Television Academy’s Governors Award.

The Times piece comes amid ongoing criticism of the paper’s coverage of transgender people.

In February 2023, more than 200 contributors to The Times signed an open letter criticizing the paper’s reporting on transgender topics. The letter accused The Times of biased reporting and called for significant reforms, urging the paper to engage more deeply with transgender voices and leadership.

While the legal experts consulted by The Times indicated that the scrutiny of Ellis’s compensation is part of standard nonprofit oversight, GLAAD sees it as part of a larger pattern of biased reporting.

“The Times has refused to implement the reforms suggested in the open letters, and GLAAD has continued its campaign to advocate for unbiased and accurate reporting about trans people in the Times,” Ferraro said. “This has included sending a billboard truck to park outside on the Times’ offices eight times, posting more than one dozen posts critical of the Times’ coverage across GLAAD social media accounts and website. On March 26, 2024, GLAAD and non-profit Media Matters for America published an analysis of Times coverage demonstrating that the newspaper does not include perspectives from trans people in a majority of its publications about transgender healthcare and anti-trans legislation.” He added, “Over the last 15+ months, The Times has not engaged on the campaign’s main ask: to sit down with transgender leaders.”

Stadtlander defended The Times’s broader coverage of transgender issues, writing that it has reported “fully and fairly on transgender topics ranging from challenges and prejudice faced by the community to the fight for expanding rights and freedoms to open debates about care.” He cited numerous instances of coverage of legal battles, prejudice, and rights expansion for the transgender community.

However, a May 2023 study by Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting presents a different perspective. The study compared front-page transgender-related news coverage in the Times and The Washington Post, finding significant differences. According to FAIR, The Times featured only nine front-page stories centering on transgender issues from April 2022 to March 2023, compared to 22 such stories in The Post. FAIR also noted that The Times often framed its coverage in a way that questioned the legitimacy and necessity of transgender rights and healthcare.

FAIR’s analysis pointed out that the Times’s headlines frequently focused on debates and conflicts rather than the experiences and challenges faced by transgender individuals. The group concluded that the Times’s approach to covering transgender issues has contributed to a biased narrative, which aligns with right-wing perspectives and undermines the struggles of the transgender community.

Four long-serving GLAAD employees — two vice presidents and two senior directors — wrote a letter, which The Advocate reviewed, to The Times reporter on July 31. They praised Ellis’s leadership and the positive changes at GLAAD under her tenure. They highlighted the organization’s increased resources, improved workplace culture, and significant external impact, attributing these successes to Ellis’s guidance.

“We believe the majority of the current staff understand and support her current compensation and bonus structure because we trust the Board’s oversight of her contract and know Sarah Kate to be a hard-working and dedicated leader,” the letter noted. They criticized the Times for not seeking their perspectives and suggested the story might be retaliatory due to GLAAD’s criticism of The Times’ transgender coverage. “It is deeply concerning that The New York Times would prioritize spreading misinformation about Sarah Kate and GLAAD from a small number of disgruntled former colleagues who were at the organization for brief periods of time. We are long-serving GLAAD staff and leaders of GLAAD’s programmatic work, and yet none of us have been approached for comment for this story, which is why we are writing this letter,” the authors wrote. “As seasoned media advocates, we know that a story that only platforms their biased perspectives will not result in a fair and balanced story.”

In her statement, Ellis warned, “Politicians, extremists, and even mainstream media outlets are undermining our efforts for equality and pushing dangerous narratives about our community.” She added, “We won’t stop fighting for acceptance and working as hard as we can, every day, to stand up for our community.”

Stadtlander rejected any notion of ulterior motives.

“The story only ‘fits’ into The Times’s pursuit of rigorous independent journalism. To insinuate otherwise is outrageous and betrays a lack of understanding of how journalism works,” he said.