Some of these ventures might have merit if the board were performing its basic functions effectively and growing the CFP brand by increasing the number of licensees. But it isn’t. Instead, it is running TV commercials filled with actors playing goofball disc jockeys. These TV commercials would fail to meet the basic standards put forth by other professional organizations such as the American Bar Association, according to one licensee who studied it closely.
But money seems to be no object in the Beltway these days -- and certainly not at the CFP Board. The board recently moved upstairs in its building, taking an 11-year lease with more space and a much better view of the White House, sources said.
That would be acceptable if the number of CFP license applicants were growing, but it isn’t growing very fast. Why does it need more space when the number of exam takers aren’t growing? The shortage of future advisors in an aging profession remains the industry’s most immediate challenge, and on a long-term basis it threatens the CFP Board’s economic viability.
The challenges of an aging population are hardly confined to the financial advisory profession so blaming a global demographic problem on the board would be ludicrous. Fully 25% of the physicians in America are over the age of 55. But with its robust $27 million budget some believe the CFP Board is the best positioned organization to tackle the problem in this business and, while some of its initiatives are designed to address the problem, it could do a lot more in the eyes of some certificants.
Finally, just about every new initiative under consideration at the CFP Board places it in conflict with every other organization. Many question whether that’s the best way to grow the profession.
Today, the CFP Board is chaired by the widely respected Ray Ferrara, and it has other board members with unimpeachable integrity such as Joe Votava. The problem is that for decades the SRO has filled its board with the profession’s best, and they have failed to curb its elephant-in-the-living-room tendency. One can only hope that this crew is different. After all, the lavish junkets began long before either Keller or most current board members were involved with the SRO.
Service on the CFP Board's numerous subsidiary boards typically involves hundreds, if not thousands of hours, all of it volunteered. Unlike volunteering and eventually attaining a lofty position at another association, CFP Board service typically doesn't give an advisor enhanced marketing visibility that can ultimately pay off in terms of increased revenue in their business.
Do board executives feel that generous perks are a just reward for volunteer efforts with little obvious reward? Who knows. Past directors say the perks are often subtle and it takes a while before they suddenly wake up and feel conflicted. The entire saga of the magnetic vortex that drives the most honorable, decent individuals to repeatedly wander astray and commit silly acts possesses all the dimensions of a Greek tragedy—or comedy. Jusk ask former volunteers.
The lawsuit filed by Jeff and Kim Camarda against the board will force it to open itself up to the public as never before. Some former board directors fear it will reveal that the emperor has no clothes. “If the CFP Board were held to the same standard as licensees, it would lose its license,” one ex-director says.
Keller’s salary is only a tiny part of the problem. By the standards of non-profits in the Beltway, others running vastly smaller non-profits make considerably more. For instance, Dallas Salisbury, CEO of the Employee Benefit Research Institute, pulled down more than $1.2 million in 2012 running a non-profit with $3.8 million in revenues.