Criticism
Recruitment practices
The company markets its programs to what it describes as "high achievers" and "an elite group of outstanding young people" which it identifies via recommendations and mass mailings. In 2009, more than 287,000 teachers nominated students to participate in an Envision EMI program. Students are nominated to attend the National Youth Leadership Forum by "teachers and alumni of previous conferences, and it culls names from mailing lists, for which the Congressional Youth Leadership Council paid $263,000 in 2006."
In the past, critics have accused the company of recruiting students by claiming that attendance is selective when the company actually markets its programs to tens of thousands of youth. In 2009, when Envision was still under the direction of Richard Rossi, the company's co-founder and the current President and Executive Director of the National Leadership Academies, the company attracted over 15,000 youth to events related to President Barack Obama's inauguration but was unable to fulfill the promises it made in its promotional materials. It settled a lawsuit, promising to pay out up to $17 million in vouchers to event attendees.
In 2008, some program materials stated that a minimum 3.5 grade point average (GPA) was required. Educators who nominate students are now told to use their own discretion. Teachers who nominate students to attend the company's programs say they consider a student's grades, behavior and participation in class, interactions with other students, and ability to learn. The nomination form does not ask for GPA. levels or educational achievement, simply asking only for the student's name, address, school year and sex.
Many high school students believe that attending one of Envisions' conferences is an honor and that their participation will positively affect their chances for college admission. CollegeConfidential.com, written by professional college admission counselors, reports that "Too many students are invited to take part to make this a truly selective organization, and so many college candidates do take part—especially those from the more well-heeled families—that college-admission officials usually just yawn when they spot an Envision program on an application."
Among college students, Susan Garrity Ardizzoni, Director of Undergraduate Admissions at Tufts University, reported that some students who receive invitations are not what she would consider "leadership material." Patrick O'Connor, the director of college counseling at the Roeper School for gifted students in Birmingham, Michigan, reported that he is "happy to nominate whoever wants to go."
2009 inaugural conference criticism and legal action
In January 2009, Envision EMI was criticized for its handling of their Presidential Youth Inaugural Conferences that offered 15,000 youths the opportunity to attend exclusive events in Washington, D.C. Participants received a letter congratulating them on being "accepted to be among the thousands of students" to "witness first-hand the Inauguration of the 44th President of the United States.
Read the full text
Some students who had attended prior Envision events were surprised by the number of participants. One alumni of prior Envision conferences said she did not expect to be among 5,000 university students and 10,000 middle school and high school students at the conference. Prior conferences she had attended had around 200 to 400 students. Envision did not tell participants the actual number of attendees until they arrived. A former employee of Envision, Angie Peltzer, returned as a faculty adviser during the Presidential Youth Inaugural Conferences and said she believed the company was unprepared to handle the number of students. "It's hard to do 15,000 people when you've only done 500 before," Peltzer said. Another student attendee said the invitation gave her the impression "that there would be less people and it would be more intimate." She was surprised by the numbers who attended.
The program web site stated that the conference included "exclusive and private inaugural events and activities... as well as public ceremonial events, such as the official swearing-in ceremony and the inaugural parade."
Parents began to file complaints with the company. As a result, the company pledged an independent review headed by Benjamin R. Civiletti, the Carter administration attorney general, and set aside US$1 million for restitution. The company acknowledged there were issues: "While the vast majority of scholars who attended our presidential inaugural programs had a positive experience, we acknowledge that some of them have stated that they did not and this is unacceptable to us.... We are urgently working to address each and every concern and to respond to the families' inquiries as quickly as possible."
Lawsuit filed
On May 13, 2009, the law firms Hausfeld LLP and DiMuroGinsberg PC filed a class action lawsuit, Radosti v. Envision EMI, LLC. The plaintiffs filed suit against Envision and CYLC citing breach of contract, negligent misrepresentation, and violations of state consumer protection laws. According to the lawsuit, delegates were told they would attend a "Black Tie Gala", when the actual dress code was "professional business attire (suits)". The suit alleges, that "instead of the promised official inaugural ball, the students were taken to a "glorified prom"." Richard Rossi, a co-founder of Envision, told The New York Times in April 2009 that the logistical challenges during the inauguration were overwhelming. "We were operating in almost a war zone, literally a presidential state of emergency", Mr. Rossi said. "There were a lot of things going on that were inconveniencing even V.I.P.'s."
Settlement announced
On June 10, 2010, the law firm announced a settlement that provided up to US$17 million in tuition vouchers to members of the class action suit. The vouchers provide anyone who attended any of the inaugural programs with two, fully transferable vouchers worth US$625 (totaling US$1,250). The voucher can be redeemed until 2018 in payment as tuition for any future Envision program. Class members may only transfer the vouchers to individuals who meet Envision's academic qualifications, including a demonstrated grade point average of 3.5 or higher.
The judge who approved the settlement noted that the cy pres fund established by the settlement agreement—if properly administered—will ensure that Envision substantially disgorges the profits from its alleged misconduct. The vouchers are worth approximately 50% of the tuition cost for the Presidential Inaugural conference. To provide a marketplace for the transferable vouchers, Envision agreed to maintain a web page describing how the vouchers can be transferred and redeemed. If Envision fails to distribute vouchers totaling at least US$8,000,000, it agreed to establish a Class Settlement Scholarship Fund that may be used to provide partial or total scholarships to "academically qualified applicants." The Fund may also distribute an additional 5% of scholarships to other youth organizations to give to their members so they may attend Envision programs. As of March 2015, the voucher web site page was no longer available.
Settlement criticism
In an amicus curiae brief filed with the United States Supreme Court, Theodore H. Frank of the public-interest law firm Center for Class Action Fairness stated that there is a likelihood that "class members will not be able to use their coupons to attend the conference of their choice, given that only 10% of seats at any given conference will be allowed to redeem coupons." He noted that the court approved the settlement over the objection of 22 state attorneys general. He also wrote that class members are forced to help Envision EMI stay in business and are compelled to deal with the same firm that failed to deliver the initial conference for which they paid more than $2,300 to attend.
Honorary Board of Congressional Advisors
In August of 2011, Representative Gary L. Ackerman (D-NY) led an effort to expose to members of Congress the Congressional Youth Leadership Council's transition to for-profit status and continued use of its "Honorary Board of Congressional Advisors" to advertise its product. The "Board," which held no meetings or had any formal duties, was used to establish purported credibility of the program. As a result of Ackerman's efforts to inform members of Congress of CYLC's tactics and conversion to for-profit status, dozens of Representatives withdrew their names and ultimately the "board" was disbanded.
