Warning: Some photographs in this article may be upsetting to sensitive readers. They were NOT placed without long thought or concern, rather to remind everyone what gay male bashing victims look like and who we are trying to assist and protect.


  • In The Beginning
  • The Executive Director
  • Data collection/reporting. We have questions:
  • Language and definitions.
  • Data Forms.
  • Resourcing and Staffing.
  • Sexual Orientation, Gender and HIV.
  • A Tale of Three AVPs.
  • 40 years of NYC AVP, at a glance.
  • What we should have learned by now.
  • The Story of Jacob.
  • Pulse Night Club Revisited.
  • Conclusion. 
  • 2016 Funders


In The Beginning.

The Anti-Violence Project, established in 1980, is not an organization you enter lightly. You contact them by phone or in-person after what has most likely been the worst day of your life. It will be after you have been abused, hit, bruised, beaten, possibly hospitalized and definitely broken, on some level. This organization’s mission is to be there to help you through the storm of grief, regret, unrest, emotional turmoil and tears. From client services that include a hot-line, in person counseling for “survivors”,and even assistance navigating the cumbersome New York City legal system, AVP has spent almost 40 years convincing gay males that they are there for us. The problem is, this is not proven true, and their numbers don’t lie.

As gay males, and especially so for those of us of colour, we walk in many worlds but our masculinity and maleness should be of our own design. None of us were raised to be gay and we exist in a heteronormative culture. Because of this, the majority of us have a deep connection to our maleness, which is quickly shaken when we have been victims of abuse and physical attacks. Those victims of sexual attacks have an even harder mountain to clime. Questions about our ability to protect ourselves, and those we love come to mind first, then what about the high possibility of being victimized again, but worst of all is the feeling of how we will put ourselves back together as men. Gay males, no matter what people want to think, are not female, we are socialized just like our straight brothers, for the most part, and our society is not very forgiving to males who cannot defend themselves. Navigating the shame and stigma of being a male victim is only compromised by the fact it was caused by our nature of being gay. This is the time you will rise or fall as a man, as a gay man, as a person.

Organizations like AVP should be able to help us heal and recover from attacks and possibly grow stronger in the process. This means having competent staff members, who are members and participants of the gay male community to assist us. Most men, even the gay ones, are more willing to open up and share with someone that understands their experiences, without having to explain basic facts or nuances. Each of these organizations should have staff members to meet with and assist clients that are from the most vulnerable in our community, and this means us…gay males!

How do we know that gay males, especially those of colour are so vulnerable? AVP keeps telling us. Each year, for the past twenty (20) the National version, which is headed by the New York City chapter, produces two (2) reports: one on Intimate Parter Violence and the other on Hate and Violence Crimes. We took a very long look at the 2016 report on the latter and many concerns and questions arose. But we would like for you to judge for yourself if changes need to be made to make the organization more prepared to meet the needs of gay males today, tomorrow and in the future.

The Executive Director:

“Reports of homicides of queer, bi or gay (cisgender) men increased 400 percent in one year.”

On 26, January, 2018, Ms. Beverly Tillery published an article for the HuffPost about the work her agency is conducting. It focused on the murder rate for the GLBT community for 2017. In it, she states:

NCAVP is a national coalition of over 50 organizations that work toward systemic and social change on issues related to LGBTQ violence. We recorded 52 homicides of LGBTQ individuals in the U.S. in 2017 — an average of one killing a week. This is the highest number of single-incident hate-based homicides we’ve recorded in our two decades of tracking this information; it is an 86 percent increase over the 29 single-incident homicides NCAVP recorded in 2016.

This statement begins our many questions regarding the work and accuracy in reporting of the NCAVP, as headed by the New York Chapter and Ms. Tillery.

  • If there are a total of 50 participating organizations why does the original report from 2016, state: “NCAVP collected aggregate data on 1,036 incidents of hate violence against LGBTQ and HIV-affected people from 12 local NCAVP member organizations in 11 states. Of those 1,036 incidents, NCAVP collected incident level data on 553 incidents from 8 organizations in 8 states.”?
  • What is the difference between “incidents” and “incident level data”?
  • Why are the other 42 participating organizations not participating in this important research and why are we lead to believe that they are, based on the words of Ms. Tillery?
  • With ONLY 11 states reporting, and a total number of 1,036 incidences of violence, is this sample size large enough to be considered scientifically sound and accurate for a country of 325.7 million? The missing state of Texas alone should be a huge concern.
  • If the NCAVP collected aggregate data on 1,036 incidents, but only INCIDENT LEVEL DATA on 553, what happened to the other 483 incidents/people?
  • Not to nit-pick, but the 2016 report states that: Outside of those lives lost during the Pulse Nightclub shooting, NCAVP recorded 28 individual hate violence homicides of LGBTQ people, an increase of 17% from 24 in 2015. Ms. Tillery is either adding a new unknown murder victim or the 2016 NCAVP report is off by one substantial life.
  • Ms. Tillery speaks strongly about not counting the lives lost at Pulse, but the 2016 report clearly lists the total 49, and wrongfully counts each as LGBT.
  • Each and every life lost to anti-gay bias is “an individual tragedy”, says Ms. Tillery in her article. Even the life of one person was someone’s child and should not be forgotten by an agency who has chosen to collect this data. This, plus or minus one person, also changes the percentage gap between years 2016 and 2017.

In the same article Ms. Tillery makes a protracted statement which alarms us. First, to the untrained reader, it would seem as if she is attributing most “hook-up” crimes/murders committed against gay males from social media sites as, gay-on-gay crimes. But that can’t be…right?

  • Reports of homicides of queer, bi or gay cisgender men increased 400 percent in one year, rising from 4 in 2016 to 20 in 2017. Forty-five percent of these deaths were related to hook-up violence “a crime involving what the victim thinks is a casual sexual encounter” and most of these were related to hooking up online or through personal ads.

Here is the complete statement from the 2017 A Crisis of Hate Report:

  • In 2017, 45% of the homicides of queer, bi, or gay cisgender men were related to hook-up violence, and most of these were related to hooking up online or through personal ads. There appears to be a trend of targeting queer, bi, or gay cisgender men for violence, robbery and homicides, and other cisgender men are using these sites to identify and harm them. Furthermore, there are ways that stigma, shame, and societal pressure may be contributing factors in hook up homicides where both individuals are queer, bi, or gay men.

The above, in bold, is written without context, research or proof but states as fact that there are these factors which MAY contribute to gay males killing each other. This is irresponsible at best and shows a lack of understanding of gay male relationships, Intimate Partner Violence, and “hook-up” culture. There is no separation of statistics between those gay males targeted and killed by straights vs. those by other gay males. What is the percentage/ratio? Do we really have a crisis of killing our own through hook-up apps? Or, is it just possible that some criminals/murders are also “queer, bi or gay men”? And if this is a major issue within the gay male community, what work is AVP doing to stem the tide? Where is their work with these hook-up apps?

We need to make sure that the agencies we trust to provide us with accurate accounts of violence against our community are getting the numbers right, each and every time, for each and every person, because, to quote Ms. Tillery, once again,”these are more than just numbers. They are the lives of people in our communities, our friends, family and neighbors.”

Now that we have dealt with the very small concerns, let’s get down to serious business and discuss the 2016 report, on bias crimes, the most current year posted, and wonder how accurate and reliable this information is, for, about and to our community, as well as how well they provide services for the gay male population.

NOTE: Crimes against the entire GLBT spectrum are on the rise all over the world, even before the current occupant of the White House. Specifically sub-groups, like transgender women are at great risk for violence, including death. They are in need of special programming and counseling to address their concerns. This is not up for debate and we do not seek to challenge this concept in this article, but this does not mean that gay males are less vulnerable or not at risk. We are actually at the most risk of all in the GLBT community. Agencies like AVP need to be able to hold two, or more thoughts in their head at one time. Or admit they are only comfortable addressing the issues of communities they personally resemble gender wise. If gay males are not a priority, and they refuse to provide adequate staffing to address us on our level, where we are, we deserve to know this, and so do their funders. Not every gay male wants to or should have to always open his most personal feelings, abuses, sex life and experiences to a cis/transgender woman.  

Data collection/reporting. We have questions:

“The majority of survivors identified as gay (47%).”

The National Coalition of Anti-Violence Projects (NCAVP) prides itself on collecting data about hate crimes committed against our community for twenty (20) years. Unfortunately, this work is needed to be done by outside non-profit agencies because the United States Government, via the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI), does not have a law providing for mandatory reporting by police departments of bias attacks. It is all voluntary.

But, even with this said, and commending the work the NCAVP’s conduct, some issues and concerns need to be answered or at least addressed. First and foremost regards the reporting itself. There is no unified reporting document or system so that all 50, 12 or actual 8 reporting agencies are in agreement on terms, data collection or even consistent ability to report data at all, even though a very complete and detailed one is provided in the Index (1) of the annual report. There is also no explanation as to why the missing 42 member organizations provided no information at all. This becomes a glaring omission when you consider most of the reports are from the East Coast, but 35% of the GLBT population lives in the American South. Florida and Texas, two of the largest states, housing the second and third largest populations (almost 29 million and 21 million respectively) in the entire country are not represented at all.

  • Page 25: NCAVP collected aggregate data on 1,036 incidents of hate violence against LGBTQ and HIV-affected people from 12 local NCAVP member organizations in 11 states. Of those 1,036 incidents, NCAVP collected incident level data on 553 incidents from 8 organizations in 8 states.
  • Page 30: The majority of survivors identified as gay (47%). For gender identity, 44% of survivors identified as (cisgender) men.

From the above, we should now know that those most likely to be a victim of and report a crime based on their sexual orientation to an AVP organization will be a gay male. So, reflective staffing, programming and culturally competent efforts to reach our community should be a priority. But that is not the case with each of the individual agencies, especially the home office of New York.

Language and definitions.

The NCAVP and its members use the term “survivor” for those who have alleged incidents of bias due to sexual orientation or gender identity. The Oxford Dictionary defines a survivor as:

  • A person who survives, especially a person remaining alive after an event in which others have died.

For example: HIV/AIDS, a disease gay males are very familiar with.

  • A person who copes well with difficulties in their life.

The use of such a strong word would seem appropriate for some of the categories listed but it does seem to stretch the meaning in most others. Categorizing all reporters as “survivors” minimizes the very hard affects/effects of someone who was a victim of attempted murder, versus someone who experienced vandalism, verbal or even online or mobile harassment. Even when there are long lasting emotional effects from any/all types of bias based on immutable characteristics, we must admit that some experience are much more devastating than others. This mash-up also gives the reader the false impression that all bias crimes are physical attacks in nature.

  • Page 38: The 2016 findings highlight the importance of expanding the narrative of hate violence from singular acts of extreme physical violence to include the everyday and more insidious violence that occurs in workplaces, homes, and schools. NCAVP documents this violence in order to amplify the experiences of LGBTQ and HIV-affected survivors and victims, increase public awareness, dialogue, and research in order to create the conditions to end violence against LGBTQ and HIV-affected communities.

We understand the need to provide more information and reporting about the types of abuse many GLBT persons experience and concur with AVP, but maybe this isn’t the way. Further more, there are two striking issues with this style of reporting:

  • Introduction page 17: Additionally, much of the violence that LGBTQ survivors experience does not meet the level of violence that is required to be considered a hate crime.

In a report about data regarding hate crimes, NCAVP admits that much of the “violence” doesn’t meet the standard to be considered a hate crime. The larger question is, what is the definition/percentage of “much” in this case?

  • Page 32: Survivors were able to identify what they perceived the underlying bias of the violence they experienced to be.

Individuals are allowed to claim their “perceived” belief about what motivated the encounter. What if they are wrong. What if it was based on race alone, and not sexual orientation? What if it wasn’t an act of bias at all?

The Executive Summery from Page 12 gives us the entire breakdown of the “survivors” based on individual reporting

  • threats or intimidation (17%),
  • and physical violence (11%).
  • Attempted Murder 2%
  • Physical Violence 11%
  • Attempted Physical Violence 2%
  • Robbery 3%
  • Sexual Violence 3%
  • Bullying 4%
  • Discrimination 8%
  • Financial Violence 2%
  • Online or Mobile Harassment 13%
  • Isolation 1%
  • Medical 1%
  • Sexual Harassment 1%
  • Stalking 3%
  • Threat/Intimidation 17%
  • Verbal Harassment 20%
  • Vandalism 1%
  • Other Property Violence 1%
  • Police Violence 1%
  • Other 5% Violence Type

The NCAPV does take the time to define some basic terms within their report, but there are no definitions for rare or specialized usage of terms which are used by a few of the reporting member agencies. Not only would this help end confusion but it was a missed “teaching opportunity” for the NCAVP. For example:

  • Page 62: SafeSpace in 2016 defined 35% of its reported violence as discrimination.

This is too vague an answer. It could mean so many values. Why use it when there are other options already available?

  • Page 49: Kansas City uses the terms gender queer, gender fluid.

Not everyone knows what these terms mean and if a full 35%, which is a huge number in relationship to other reporting agencies, are using it, do they all agree on their meanings?

Data Forms.

“Not all NCAVP member organizations can collect data in the same way.”

  • Page 25: Most NCAVP member programs used NCAVP’s Uniform Incident Reporting Form to document the demographics of survivors and the details of the violence that occurred.

How many is “most” when you have such a small reporting pool? What form or format is used by the other, unknown number of member programs?

  • Page 27: not all NCAVP member organizations can collect data in the same way. Some organizations have less capacity and are unable to submit both aggregate and person-level data.

Is this the reason the NCAVP only uses data from 12 or 8 organizations, or is this the reason the other 42 member organizations’ data is missing?

  • Page 25: NCAVP collected aggregate data on 1,036 incidents of hate violence against LGBTQ and HIV-affected people from 12 local NCAVP member organizations in 11 states. Of those 1,036 incidents, NCAVP collected incident level data on 553 incidents from 8 organizations in 8 states.

But NCAVP lists local summaries for all 12 members organizations. Is data compiled from 12 or 8 organizations in total? Because both values are used within the report.

The report uses unclear language regarding the type of data collected. The terms “aggregated data” and “incident level data” are never defined or differentiated. In comparison, the FBI uses simple and easy to understand terms for the same period. “There were 6,063 single-bias incidents involving 7,509 victims.”

For two decades, these reports are used to aggregate the level of violence and bias attacks committed against the GLBT population, as a trend, across the entire United States population. Even the Federal Bureau of Investigations places a stop gap on their data’s ability to make such claims; and they get their information from the police! “Please note the UCR Program does not estimate offenses for the jurisdictions of agencies that do not submit reports.”

  • Executive Summary page 11:


Race/ethnicity: 867

Gender identity: 912

Sexual orientation: 836

Citizenship status: 699

When organizations are allowed to use their own methods of collecting data, which are not in sync with the other reporting members, there will be issues, including “BIAS”.

  • Page 27: Bias can also be introduced if individuals who completed the incident forms had different definitions and protocols for the same categories. These variations can exist between staff at the same program or staff at different organizations.

What form of bias is being referenced and why? Does NCAVP have a method to weed out this “bias” or at least a method of keeping those figures from being reported? Would this fact alone be enough for the NCAVP to create a uniformed reporting system and complete terms and definitions for the agencies AND readers of the final report?

We also have concerns that each agency submits its own, unverified findings to be collected and treated as fact. If there is a policy to ensure accuracy and validity of each and every report, it is not printed. It must be stated that there are members of the GLBT community that have reported hoax crimes, some even being prosecuted because of it.

  • Page 58: Center on Halsted in 2016 Our main source of collecting information on reportable incidents of violence for 2016 was through our phone line. Although we received more calls/reports of violence than listed here, we left out incidents where type of violence (hate or domestic) was unreported. We also utilized a reported three-minimum demographic category minimum to not dilute the data with types of violence yet with little else known. For example, if a caller reported domestic violence and only reported their age (1 demographic category), we did not include them in this report.

So, one agency has a totally complete set of rules and guidelines for reporting than the other 7 or 11, or 49?

  • Page 70: Since VAVP is relatively new to providing direct services, lack of community and statewide awareness are factors for the limited data pool, rather than an absence of hate motivated violence in the state of Virginia. While these numbers are too small to indicate an overall trend in Virginia, VAVP recognizes that anti-blackness and racism is inextricably linked to the experiences of violence for LGBTQ+ people of color.
  • Page 45: Diverse and Resilient MILWAUKEE, WISCONSIN, we are only receiving a few calls a month but we expect that to change once we are more widely known about in Wisconsin.

VAVP admits that its reporting pool is too small but their numbers are included to promote a national trend, when they even state it doesn’t even indicate an overall trend in Virginia. It is even worse considering Diverse and Resilient as they received “a few calls a month”. How many is a few and is it a large enough a data pool to be included in a national report?

  • Page 25: NCAVP collected both aggregate and incident level data from 12 local member organizations for this report. Organizations collected this information either directly from survivors or public sources. Survivors contacted LGBTQ and HIV affected anti-violence programs by contacting a program or hotline, filling out surveys, connecting through community outreach or organizing, or making a report online.

The above admits that anyone who calls one of the NCAVP hotlines, and makes a report, will be considered valid and true, without police or other corroboration. Is there any amount of over-site to these individual reports? Just because bias crimes are known to be under-reported doesn’t mean that everyone who does report is telling the truth.

Resourcing and Staffing.

Data inconsistency can also affect the data’s accuracy.”

Resourcing and staffing seem to be major issues with data collection for the NCAVP organizations. Smaller staff size could definitely reflect in the accuracy of data collection and reporting, thus calling into question the validity of the submitted data and the entire report.

  • Page 27: NCAVP is working to increase the capacity to report for all member programs throughout the United States and to increase funding and capacity-building support for these programs. NCAVP’s efforts to improve and increase data collection among member programs and affiliates remain an ongoing process. Despite these limitations, this report contains some of the most detailed and comprehensive data on LGBTQ and HIV-affected hate violence nationally
  • Page 26:Therefore, while the information contained in this report provides a detailed picture of the individual survivors who reported to NCAVP member programs, it cannot and should not be extrapolated to represent the overall LGBTQ and HIV-affected communities in the United States.
  • Page 26: NCAVP members’ capacity for data collection varied based upon the program’s resources, staffing, available technology, and other factors. These considerations resulted in some programs submitting partial information in some categories, which creates incomplete and dissimilar amounts of data for different variables within the 2016 data set. Moreover, because of the nature of crisis intervention and direct service work that is done as data is collected through NCAVP’s incident form, missing values are common. Missing values do not affect the accuracy of the data and data analysis as long as individuals are omitting information at random. This can, however, affect the accuracy of the data if certain survivors are uncomfortable with disclosing information on race, gender identity, or other characteristics because they belong to a specific subcategory of interest (i.e. if gender nonconforming individuals consistently left their gender identity blank) and therefore are not omitting information at random.

For any true merit to be ascribed to a report which documents incidents from varied agencies, there must be consistency within the questions and the compiled data. If not, the missing values will have a negative effect on the analysis. We know this, but so did NCAVP back in their 2010 report.

  • Page 162010 Violence Report:  NCAVP members’ capacity for data collection also varied based upon the programs’ financial resources, technology, and other factors. These factors resulted in some programs submitting partial information in some categories creating incomplete and dissimilar amounts of data for different variables within 2010’s data set. Data inconsistency can also affect the data’s accuracy. Individuals who completed the incident forms may have had different definitions and protocols for the same categories. These variations can exist between staff at the same program or staff at different organizations. Further, some of the categories utilized by NCAVP on the form used in 2010 do not provide comprehensive data on the diverse experiences that LGBTQH individuals face.

 Sexual Orientation, Gender and HIV.

“nine (9) genders, the ability to select more than one”

Basic information about sexual orientation and gender is convoluted and muddied. NCAVP gave survivors a choice of nine (9) genders, the ability to select more than one, and “self-identified”, which is never defined. They are not sure of exactly how many people have HIV.

  • Page 25: NCAVP allowed individuals to select more than one category when identifying their gender.
  • Page 31: self-identified for gender and sexual orientation.
  • Page 30: Of the 1,036 survivors, 12% of survivors reported being HIV-Positive. However, it’s important to note that 58% of survivors did not disclose information on HIV status and therefore the percentage of survivors who were HIV positive may have been higher.
  • Pages 46-47: Equality Michigan is a founding member of the NCAVP, and has worked for more than 21 years to end anti-LGBTQ and anti-HIV violence and discrimination. Equality Michigan saw a decline in survivors reporting from 2015 to 2016 (82 reports to 78 reports). 31% identified as gender non-conforming! from a new total of 98 reports.

Equality Michigan is a major outlier when it comes to gender and sexual orientation reporting, and thus needs an explanation. First off, significantly high or low numbers in data collection are routinely discarded by statical professional because they represent an abnormal level of research, some sort of error in reporting or collection. We are not saying this is the total case with Equality Michigan but the numbers regarding those self-identifying as gender non-conforming seem unusually and extremely high in comparison to other agency’s reporting but also with its own regarding sexual orientation, where “the majority of those who reported identified as gay (41% of those reporting), which matched the data from 2015 as well. Following gay, were those who identify as lesbian (32%), bisexual individuals (5%), and those who identify as heterosexual (3%).”

If we compare the reported percentage of 31 with the only other agencies (4 out of 12) that provide gender-non conforming as an option, or even gender queer/fluid, we notice a dramatic difference.

  • Page 49: Kansas city reports gender non-conforming at 1%, Gender queer at 1% and Gender fluid at 3%
  • Page 54: Fenway has gender non-conforming at 2%
  • Page 63: Safespace has gender non-conforming at 4%, Gender queer at 5%
  • Page 68: NYC AVP reports Gender Queer at 1%

A Tale of Three AVPs.

“we do note that male-identified persons, often neglected in victim-specific services, are contacting us”

  • Page 48: Overall KCAVP’s total number of individuals served skyrocketed from 48 individuals in 2015 to 148 in 2016, an increase of 208%. This increase was mostly likely caused by the opening of KCAVP’s Walk-In Advocacy Center, as well as the addition of an Outreach Coordinator Position.While KCAVP does not know exactly what caused this increase in TGNC individuals accessing services, we believe it is due to an increase in outreach as well as an increase in overall concern for one’s safety and wellbeing within the TGNC community.
  • Pages 52-53: In 2016, the Violence Recovery Program, at Fenway, documented 55 incidents of anti-LGBTQ bias/hate violence, an increase of six incidents more than the previous year. This slight increase in reported incidents is explained, in part, by increased staff stability and slight growth in capacity to serve LGBTQ survivors of violence in 2016. Other changes in reports of hate violence in 2016 include an increase in incidents targeting survivors who identify as men and survivors who identify as Latino/a. There are not known direct causes for the increase in incidents for these populations. However, there was a staffing shift for the program’s bilingual (Spanish-English) staff, resulting in more outreach and capacity to serve monolingual Spanish-speaking survivors of violence, and this may be associated with the increase in reports of incidents by Latino/a survivors.
  • Pages 58-60: Center on Halsted in 2016 continue to be a hub where male-identified persons, often gay, still seek us out for assistance in addressing violence. While we look to increase community awareness of our services offered to female-identified persons in the LGBTQ community, we do note that male-identified persons, often neglected in victim-specific services, are contacting us, at a rate of 64%. Furthermore, all callers who reported their sexual orientation identified as gay (10/11) or queer (1/11). Two did not report their sexual orientation.

The above three agencies are doing a great job of reaching out to the members of the community most in need and making changes to staff as they see necessary. From outreach, and adding Spanish speaking staff, to increasing staff stability, this shows that our first line of defense against hate violence is within these organizations’ staffing decisions. In addition to this, The Center on Halsted addresses our concerns quickly and shows the need for more outreach to gay males who are “often neglected in victim-specific services“. It should be noted that the Executive Director and much of the staff at Halsted represents their client demographic (male/gay), but still wish to connect with those who do not share their gender identity.

But, they also illustrate one of our other concerns about the accuracy in reporting. Each of these agencies uses a different term when describing their reports. From individuals, to incidents and persons, this is confusing but also troubling. In a single incident, more than one person could be victimized by several different methods. The recent attack on two gay males after the Miami Pride Parade is a perfect example.

40 years of NYC AVP, at a glance.

“50% of survivors identifying as gay”

The NCAVP is headed by the New York City chapter, which also is responsible for this, and every report, regarding violence in our community. The latest two (2) Executive Directors are lesbian white women, with the current head, Ms. Tillery, being an African-American lesbian. None of the three possess any degrees in Men Studies or Male Studies. This organization and its leadership are known to possess exceptional powers and influence in not just New York City, but the United States, and to some extent the world. One of the former Executive Directors went on to run successfully for three (3) terms in City Council, then Council Speaker, before a failed bid for Mayor of New York City. Obviously, this is a position of importance. Currently, as stated on their website, over 90% of their staff identifies as female, including management and their Board Chair. This includes the directors of client services, and the senior manager of clinical /advocacy programs as well as the director of legal services. All are people that create, shape and implement policy and programming that directly effects outreach and assistance for gay males.

  • Page 07: Even for this report, seven out of the 8 members of THE NCAVP GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE, are female.

The entire senior level management, minus the directors of communications and finance, as well as the manager of data analytics; none of whom see clients or make decisions regarding organization policy, or client programming, self-identify as female. They are also majority white. This is not reflective of their own stats and data regarding their client population, or the five (5) boroughs of New York City; the larges and one of the most diverse in the country. If NYC AVP staffing matched its reported client base, it would be at least 50% gay, 43% male and 74% people of colour. Not the 21% that self-identify as cisgender women.

Furthermore, a gay male client would possibly be only able to interact with one male for counseling services, and maybe another if he is unfortunate enough to need an attorney. But, these still may not be a male staff member and they are not management or program decision makers. Finally, this staff make-up is reflective in the lack of knowledge regarding gay male (of colour) life and violence (re: statements about male hook-up violence, sex parties and safety tips not indicative of real gay male life and challenges), as their leadership has no direct knowledge as participants in these communities. This is in stark contrast to the staff and leadership of other successful AVP programs such as The Center on Halstad, which boasts a Latino male executive director AND chief program officer. Halstad’s director of AVP is also male. We are not aware of the sexual orientation of the staff members at the New York City chapter.

This agency, like most non-profits, claims to take a special interest in hiring and promoting leadership from the communities they service, but this is obviously not the case here. Just like other non-profits in America, the staff and leadership is overwhelming white. Which is troubling considering the sheer pool of gay male (of colour) talent which must be present in the East Coast Gay Male Mecca, a city of over 8,5 million, not including New Jersey and Connecticut. As the leader of the National anti-violence projects, we are asking if it is time to stop being culturally sensitive and move to hire those who are qualified and culturally competent, participating members of the vulnerable communities they service?

  1. Page 69: NYC AVP has established itself as a crucial organization in New York City for direct services support, community organizing, and public advocacy for LGBTQ and HIV-affected survivors of police violence, including for the most vulnerable in our communities.
  2. Page 68: the 2016 NCAVP findings on hate violence illustrate the importance of centering the experiences and leadership of those who are most impacted by hate violence and discrimination, such as transgender and gender nonconforming people, LGBTQ people of color, LGBTQ youth and young adults, LGBTQ people with disabilities, and LGBTQ undocumented people. It is imperative that these unique and diverse experiences be considered and centered when creating policies, programs, and initiatives that work to end violence against LGBTQ and HIV-affected people.
  3. Page 69: 50% of survivors identifying as gay
  4. Page 68: 43% (cisgender) men
  5. Page 68: Overall, 29% survivors of hate violence identified as Transgender, Gender Non-Conforming, (TGNC), Intersex, or self-identified outside the gender binary, consistent with 2015 (28%).
  6. Page 68: 21% self-identified as cisgender women
  7. Page 68: Of the survivors who shared their race/ethnicity with NYC AVP the majority (74% identified as people of color a slight increase from 70% in 2015). Also consistent with last year, race/ethnicity the most reported was Latin@ at 30%, and a quarter of reports in 2016 identified as Black/African American/African Heritage, with 3% as Arab/Middle Eastern (up from 1% in 2015), and 9% as Multiracial (up from 4% in 2015).

Small, new non-profits and startups have a hard time with staffing and meeting the large concerns that still effect a company. But at almost 40 years of age, the NYC AVP, for year 2015 (the latest year of posted records) counted revenue of $3,380,962, of that $1,834,464 came from government grants. Meaning your money. Also, NYC AVP spent $513,599 on salaries and $2,332,266 on programming for their clients. The smaller AVP’s around the country can claim finance as a reason for not meeting particular staffing goals to match the demographics they serve, creating specific programming to meet the needs of those most effected by hate violence, effective outreach to those communities and campaigns to lower crimes against them, but this cannot be said for their home branch.

Because NYC AVP has yet to release data for how they spent money for years 2016 and 2017, we must rely on the posted year of 2015.

  • In fiscal year 2015, AVP received 2,618 calls on our 24-hour bilingual (English/Spanish) hotline, which is about one call every three hours, and provided vital direct Client Services to 1,294 individual clients experiencing all forms of violence.

How many of these calls and direct client services were from gay males and specifically gay males of colour?

  • In fiscal year 2015, our Legal Services Department provided full legal intake and consultation to 146 new clients, 85 of whom were accepted for representation.

How many of these intakes and consultations included gay males and specifically those of colour?

  • AVP served as a critical source of information for our communities, bringing much-needed attention to the issues of violence facing the LGBTQ and HIV-affected communities.

We have some questions about the type of programming and outreach NYC AVP is conducting to assist those most in need as well as decrease violence and increase a positive police interaction. Also policy is a major concern for our communities as laws need to be championed and implemented to protect us from the street to the court house.

  1. Because gay males, and those of colour, are the most at risk demographic and comprise 50% of NYC AVP reporting base, what were the forums used to connect with them directly?
  2. What specific programs are currently in effect to reach these communities?
  3. Stranger danger crimes have been on the rise for years, why has NYC AVP not created self-defense classes for gay males considering there are none in the entire Tri-State area that accepts us.
  4. Concerning outreach, which neighborhoods, gay male bars and clubs does NYC AVP frequent to get the word out about the dangers of crime and their subsequent services?
  5. Considering NYC AVP has a tips guide regarding sex clubs/bath houses, how many of these establishments do they reach and enter each year and how many are majority gay male of colour?
  6. Considering that NYC AVP believes there is a high percentage of gay-on-gay violence, including murder, which hook-up apps have they partnered with to stem this tide and educate our community about the dangers we are to ourselves?
  7. As to the above, where are the real world tips to assist our community?
  8. Policy wise, where is NYC AVP regarding the Governor’s attempts to outlaw the gay panic defense at trials? This is most troubling as their name doesn’t appear in any of the official documents but a former Executive Director works closely with this governor and supports his re-election bid.
  9. Considering that NYC AVP held a march, and fundraiser for themselves and the above mentioned former Executive Director in her failed bid for Mayor, after the brutal murder of Mr. Mark Carson, a gay Black man, what are they doing to stop people like his murderer from claiming a “bi-sexual defense” strategy?
  10. What is NYC AVP doing to actively reduce the number of hate crimes committed against gay males?
  11. What is NYC AVP doing to increase the numbers of those who have been victims of crimes to report them?
  12. Where are counseling and rehabilitating services for those gay men that are the batterers in gay relationships? Many times they were victims of abuse themselves and Intimate Partner Violence is more common than gay bashings.
  13. What is the state of lobbying efforts to create shelters for gay males who are over 25, or at least have the current domestic abuse shelters provide beds and services for gay males?
  • Page 68: Overall, 29% survivors of hate violence identified as Transgender, Gender Non-Conforming, (TGNC), Intersex, or self-identified outside the gender binary, consistent with 2015 (28%). This strong representation of TGNC survivors reporting to AVP reflects our ongoing commitment to working with TGNC communities, targeting direct services in a TGNC-specific way, and doing TGNC-specific organizing, including our Trans Forums, taking place in all five boroughs. In 2016 we also began developing curriculum for the first transgender support group at our main office. This group will begin in January 2017 and provide support for transgender women.

The above statement about programming for the TGNC community is wonderful to read. The dangers affecting those from this community are unusually high and the victims are not as likely to report crimes against them to the police, but this percentage is almost half of those who identify as male and there is still no specific targeted direct services, gay male specific organizing, forums or programming for them. Is this number not a “strong representation of survivors” as well?

Speaking about marginalized communities of colour, NYC AVP states: “it is imperative that these unique and diverse experiences be considered and centered when creating policies, programs, and initiatives that work”, but at some point literal action and change must take place. NYC AVP says these experiences must be “considered and centered” but not by hiring members from those communities that have lived life experience and community participation for positions of leadership and management. They also still rely on outdated, and sexist views that gay males are always going to feel safe around women and that those women will always be safe for us. Just because women feel safer around gay males than straight men doesn’t mean the feeling is always mutual. From family members to co-workers and those on the street, women can and do commit bias crimes against gay males and those of colour.(2010 NCAVP report, 23.8 percent of the offenders were non-transgender female.) This doesn’t includes the vein of racism which has recently been mined by the current president. As per the 2016 FBI offenders statistics, 46.3 percent of the offenders where white and 58.9 percent of victims were targeted because of the offenders’ race/ethnicity/ancestry bias.

From the founding of the American Empire, white women have had a special hand in the abuse and murder of black and brown male bodies. These actions still continue today and many gay males of colour do not feel safe with white women, especially when those mutual interactions do not end well for them, and they become further victims of police brutality. Christine Quinn, the former Executive Director of NYC AVP and failed mayoral candidate, was a staunch advocate of female street safety but also of, the now unconstitutional, STOP AND FRISK policy, which specifically targeted men of colour. Changing the hearts and minds after generations of abuse, so that gay males of colour find professionalism, if not empathy, from white women is a tall order. Outreach and staffing needs to reflect the personal and racial concerns of those most at risk, and it needs to happen now. VAVP recognizes that “anti-blackness and racism is inextricably linked to the experiences of violence for LGBTQ+ people of color”.

Representation is more than just a goal with for-profit corporations, it should be a standard for all companies. No one should know and understand this more than women and members of the GLBT community. This means more action than asking clients to fill out service surveys or give thoughts on programmings that will never be implemented. This is just a way to use clients where a competent community participating staff member would have been more effective. A gay male leader in management, and definitely one of colour could have added a great deal of value to the work performed. Maybe instead of being the leader of NCAVP, they need to be a follower and learn the lessons of success from other agencies.


What we should have learned by now.

“men too need a gendered approach”

Studies consistently show that there is a difference between female needs regarding providers and males, especially when it comes to general health, gynecological issues and domestic violence. Women have stressed that more women doctors and providers are a necessity to meet their medical concerns and provide better outcomes. Some six in 10 Dutch women under the age of 40 would prefer to see a female doctor for intimate issues such as cervical smears, according to research by women’s magazine Libelle and the Dutch patients’ federation. Over 25% of all women would rather have a female doctor altogether, but this rises to 40% for specifically female issues such as period pain, the research showed. Much of this is due to embarrassment about their bodies and one in eight women will delay a visit to a doctor if they are confronted with a male doctor, the survey said. Professor Toine Lagro told the magazine that such a high percentage cannot be ignored. ‘This means that women should be given the option of seeing a female doctor,’ Lagro said.

Polly Neate,  chief executive of housing charity Shelter, and was formerly chief executive of Women’s Aid, the national charity working to end violence against women and children in the UK states:  “many of the women we help would not leave their abusive relationship if the only option was going to a gender-neutral refuge. Domestic violence can be extremely traumatic, and as a result, many women will not feel completely safe in the presence of men when they have just left an abusive partner. Perpetrators can be extremely manipulative, and a gender-neutral refuge poses a risk as a perpetrator claiming to be a victim of domestic violence could potentially access the refuge his victim has fled to. This is of particular concern where there is only one local service.”

This sentiment about gendered services and providers is echoed by Glen Poole, The founder of the Stop Male Suicide project:

“In my experience, service providers born out of the women’s movement are not generally well placed to help men. One of the important roles that the women’s movement has played in helping female victims is that they have been loud and unapologetic advocates for women. With the best will in the world, it is unrealistic to expect the self-same campaigners to be strident advocates for men. They may also be prone to underplay the significance of female violence against men.”

“To ensure that everyone affected by domestic violence gets the help and support they need we need as many different minds on the job as possible. We need women and men; feminists and non-feminists; men’s advocates and women’s advocates; psychologists and sociologists. But attempts to approach tackling domestic violence from a non-feminist perspective (as many advocates for male victims do) are often fiercely resisted, and as the Centre for Social Justice’s Beyond Violence report noted, “the ‘patriarchy, power and control’ analysis remains more or less intact despite its incompatibility with emerging findings about domestic abuse”.

“My personal experience of helping male victims of domestic violence has shown me that men too need a gendered approach, and more importantly they need advocates who understand their unique needs and are happy to be on their side. One of the most reassuring developments in recent years has been the growth and emergence of charities such as the ManKind Initiative and Abused Men in Scotland, who have helped to push the needs of male victims up the public and political agenda.” {it is not your imagination, GMJ had to get most male centric information from programs in the EU because they don’t exist in the USA}

Due to many variables, most hate crimes go unreported. Those committed against gay males of colour are suspected to be even higher than most. As the Vera Institute of Justice states: Due to cultural norms of masculinity and victimization, many young men of color do not identify as “victims,” even when describing experiences of being harmed. Yes, young men of colour can also be gay. All gay males are male and thus subject to the mores and customs associated with our gender. N. Quentin Wolfe asks for the UK Telegraph: While as a society we rightly give lots of attention to protecting women against violence, from warnings about predatory cab drivers to reports on women’s refuges, from the understanding that it’s wrong to hit a woman to walking women home, very little seems to be being done to protect men, or to dissuade anyone from the idea that it’s also wrong to hit a man. Is male life cheaper?

Here is a long listing for women in need of support/services in the USA, by state, for domestic abuse and violence.

Here is the list for gay male only shelters for those who are not homeless youth (under age 25) in the United States: NONE

Due to extensive research, we know that marginalized communities react better and respond well to members of their own communities and life experiences. Why are gay males, especially those of colour, not afforded the same opportunities? At least one of the NCAVP members understands this importance in outreach, staffing and leadership.

  • Page 71: VAVP specifically works to center people of color leadership and staff, particularly because of an organizational value to trust that historically oppressed communities know best when it comes to supporting the needs of their own communities. Because of these practices, LGBTQ+ people of color may feel more comfortable coming to the organization for support, since those communities can see themselves reflected in leadership. Especially working in the US South, where there is limited system-level support for LGBTQ+ people of color communities, culturally specific programs, support, and resources are unique and sorely needed.

The Story of Jacob.

“because women-only shelters would not accept gay men”

When Jacob (a pseudonym) finally found a shelter that would take him in, he had already called dozens of others across the United States. All gave the same answer: no men.

Jacob’s husband had put him in the hospital 12 times over the course of six months. At the hospital, no one bothered to assess Jacob for domestic abuse, much less try to connect him with LGBTQ-affirming services for either his abusive relationship or substance abuse problem. Each time, he was discharged without question and sent home to his husband. Finally, he found a domestic violence shelter in Colorado that was able to offer him a ticket for the bus ride thousands of miles from his East Coast home.

For their 2015 report, surveying 1,976 instances of LGBTQ intimate partner abuse from 2015, NCAVP found that nearly half of survivors (44 percent) had been turned away from shelters. Of those, “71 percent reported that they were denied services due to their gender identity, because women-only shelters would not accept gay men”. “Gay, bisexual, and transgender men also reported that domestic violence shelters for men rarely even exist.”

Jacob was profiled in the 2015 report, so NCAVP knows the struggles that gay males have in receiving support and services, including beds in shelters, and after-care for domestic violence but has not consistently addressed these major concerns.

Pulse Night Club Revisited.

he didn’t even realize Pulse was a gay-oriented nightclub”

The NCAVP has utilized one particular act of violence as a bell weather for our entire community. After the attacks on September 11, 2001, the shooting at Pulse Night Club in Orlando was the second largest terrorist attack on American soil, and the deadliest mass shootings by a single shooter. But, was it a hate crime designed and directed toward the GLBT community? There is no denying the impact and the number of deaths. What we are striving for is accuracy and not fear. Neither we, nor NCAVP knows for sure the exact sexual orientation of all 49 victims or survivors. Even if, as it claimed in the report, the “majority of the victims were LGBTQ and Latinx”, how accurate are these accounts. Attributing the murders of almost 50 people to LGBTQ bias crimes, without sufficient proof and facts, shows a high level of hubris and disrespect for those individuals. We do know the bar had a five star rating and many straight women and allies attended the establishment regularly. Just as we should all take pause to not misgender individuals, the same respect should be given to sexual orientation identity.

We are not re-litigating the trial of Noor Salman or calling into questions any of the facts regarding her deceased husband. What we are providing are facts from her trial and the subsequent information that proves this was not a hate crime against the GLBT population, but one where we were causalities of another mass murderer. From Page 28 of the 2015 report:

  • NCAVP recorded 77 total hate violence related homicides of LGBTQ and HIV affected people in 2016, including the 49 lives taken during the shooting at Pulse Nightclub in Orlando, Florida in June of 2016. Though NCAVP cannot confirm the multiple identities of the lives taken at Pulse, it is reported that the majority of the victims were LGBTQ and Latinx.
  • What defines hate violence, in comparison to other forms of violence, is that hate violence explicitly targets people and groups based on their actual or perceived identities.
  • The Pulse shooting and ongoing homicides of LGBTQ people, particularly transgender women of color, made 2016 the deadliest year on record for the LGBTQ community.

Per the above, NCAVP admits they cannot confirm the multiple identities, and that the majority were LGBTQ and Latinx, NOT ALL, even though they irresponsibly counted ALL 49 in this report. Let us never forget Brenda Marquez McCool, who was in the club with her gay son and died protecting him.

As reported by Vox and numerous news organizations: “during the trial of the shooter’s wife, Noor Salman, whom the federal government charged with aiding and abetting and obstruction of justice. Federal prosecutors argued that Salman had helped her husband plan and orchestrate the attack. She was acquitted by a jury”

“There’s now conclusive evidence that the shooter wasn’t intending to target LGBTQ people at all. In fact, he allegedly had no idea Pulse was a gay club, and simply Googled “Orlando nightclubs” after finding that security at his original target, a major shopping and entertainment complex, was too high, as reported by ClickOrlando.com.The shooter didn’t target LGBTQ people — he didn’t even realize Pulse was a gay-oriented nightclub, asking a security guard at the club where all the women were just before he started shooting.”

The shooter’s motive was apparently revenge for United States bombing campaigns on ISIS targets in the Middle East. He had pledged allegiance to ISIS’s leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, and during the Pulse shooting posted to Facebook, “You kill innocent women and children by doing us airstrikes. … Now taste the Islamic state vengeance.” In his final post, he wrote, “In the next few days you will see attacks from the Islamic state in the usa.”

During the trial, prosecutors said Mateen, who was born in New York to Afghan immigrants, intended to attack Disney World’s shopping and entertainment complex by hiding a gun in a stroller but became spooked by police and instead chose the gay club as his target.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Sara Sweeney showed surveillance video of the Disney Springs complex that captured Mateen walking near the House of Blues club in the hours before the Pulse attack. In it, he looks behind him at police officers standing nearby before deciding to leave.

The Advocate disagrees with not only the outcome of the widow’s trial but also the fact that this was not an GLBT hate motivated crime, even though they can produce no solid evidence to the contrary. But famed gay male writer, and investigator, Glenn Greenwald reported for The Intercept the main facts presented at Salman’s trial, including information about her alleged confession and the media reports that the couple “scouted” Pulse before the mass shooting and knew it was a GLBT attended establishment.

This was the “confession” that prosecutors touted over and over, including when they demanded that Salman, despite being free for seven months, be held without bail after her arrest. In denying her bail request, Byron explicitly cited this part of the confession:

But when Fennern testified today, he admitted that the FBI had learned “within days” of Salman signing the statement that this claim was false. Using geolocation data from cellphone records and documentary evidence of the couple’s whereabouts, the FBI had already concluded — long before Salman was arrested — that it was impossible that she went to Pulse with Mateen on that date. Indeed, the evidence, as The Intercept documented previously, is very clear that the first time Mateen ever went to Pulse was to attack it, after simply searching Google for “nightclubs downtown Orlando.” The FBI agent also testified that Salman’s cellphone records show she was never near Pulse.

Upon hearing Fennern’s testimony that this crucial part of Salman’s statement could not have been true, and that the FBI knew this very early on, the judge began questioning him in front of the jury about the FBI’s discovery that this claim was false. After taking a break, but prior to the return of the jury, the judge more aggressively scolded the prosecutors: “I’ve heard many, many times the drive around Pulse nightclub had occurred.”

As for the “numerous” witnesses who claimed in the media to have seen Mateen at Pulse often, connected with him on gay male social media sites, and had sexual relations with him inside of a hotel 15-20 times, the FBI heavily investigated and found no evidence to support any of these claims or the individuals credible.

The Pulse massacre is now a sad part of GLBT history and a reminder that our safe spaces are not always safe, but the current War on Terror and home-grown mass killers continues to teach this lesson as well.


There is no denying that over the past forty (40) years NYC AVP and its member organizations have done some very positive work and helped many people. And the agency was started with the very best of intentions; to respond to the rash of gay male bashings that were occurring in New York City during that time period. But like many old institutions, NCAVP has obviously had troubles maintaining momentum, focus and changing with the times, as they rest on their reputation and past deeds. Likewise funders and even gay male clients have become comfortable with the limited services they have been paying for and receiving, respectively, even though many are being left behind. It is not enough to produce reports and raise awareness about crimes against the GLBT spectrum if you are not going to allow positive change and growth into your organization to create solutions to stem the tide of violence.

Just like when racist or homophobic advertising is produced by a large, well known and established corporation, for example Clearasil and H&M, many wondered why people of colour and gay males were not in some form of leadership to address the issue BEFORE the product was created and released. We have also seen the rise of arms for diversity and visibility on film and in television, because we all know that visibility in management does change the outcome of the final product and its ability to please consumers. Non-profits like NCAVP should not be held to a lesser standard, in fact, they should be held to a higher one because they have chosen to fight for those who have been abused, beaten and battered, This is larger than a film, this is an issue of people’s lives. The lives of our friends, loved ones, neighbors, and ourselves.

As Trump’s American values keep marching across the country, we will continue to see rises in bias attacks against all minority groups, including gay males. The work NCAVP does is important now, maybe more than ever. The notion that gay males are doing fine, just because a few white gay males are in the top 1%, says nothing about the rest of us. It is also wonderful that these organizations enjoy concentrating on gay youth under the age of 25, but this is no better a concept than the gay male theory that our lives lose meaning after we hit that age. In fact NCAVP is inadvertently supporting this belief. These are things that would be noticed by gay male leadership, and definitely one of colour.

We are asking NCAVP to do a few simple things:

  • Hire qualified leadership and counseling staff from the gay male community, including those of colour
  • Create programming and outreach initiatives that reflect the real lives and challenges of our community
  • Design and run some sort of self-defense training for gay males ONLY
  • Create a uniformed system of reporting bias crimes that are used by each and every participating organization so that the numbers reported are as accurate as possible
  • Increase policy initiatives that stop the gay panic defense and the new “but I am bi” defense
  • Stop giving good talk, and make the commitment to walk the walk

As we release this article in the month of April, which is STD awareness and healthcare month, we would suggest the NCAVP, for all clients of all genders, to work by their new hashtag #treatmeright.

  • Finally, here is the list of funders who read the 2016 report, know and understand all that we have written above and financially support each and every decision of the NYC AVP and NCAVP.

Fiscal Year 2016 Supporters July 1, 2015–June 30, 2016

  • Government Grants $2,074,150
  • Federal $609,966
  • State $811,768
  • City $704,974

$10K and above

  • Abacus Federal Savings Bank
  • The Helene Foundation
  • Anonymous (2)
  • The New York Women’s Foundation
  • Arcus Foundation
  • Stanley Ponte and John D. Metzner
  • Brian A. McCarthy Foundation, Inc
  • Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher and Flom LLP
  • Citi
  • Teri and James V. Covello
  • Stribling & Associates, Ltd.
  • Deutsche Bank Americas Foundation
  • Tikkun Olam Foundation, Inc.
  • H. van Ameringen Foundation


  • Kevin Alger
  • Robert K. Fitterman and Evan Schwartz
  • Broadway Cares / Equity Fights AIDS
  • Kaye Scholer LLP
  • Christofferson, Robb & Co.
  • Kenneth T. Monteiro and Leo J. Blackman


  • Bank of America
  • John Medina
  • Mark Black and Glen Leiner
  • Dean M. Michaels
  • Carleen Borsella and Jonathan Hoefler
  • Moody’s
  • Brian V. Breheny
  • Ragnar Dixon Naess and David Charles
  • Madelyn Calabrese and Craig Unterberg
  • The New York Bar Foundation
  • Christopher Street Financial
  • New York University Community Fund
  • Ryan Corvaia and Maulik Pancholy
  • James F. O’Sullivan and Krisczar J. Bungay
  • Thomas K. Duane
  • Michael Otten
  • EarthShare
  • Richard Palermo and Stephen Mazza
  • Joseph Evall and Richard Lynn
  • Clarence Patton
  • Brent H. Feigenbaum
  • Thomas Salatte and Christopher Bendixen
  • Thomas von Foerster
  • Susan J. Sampliner and Emily Grishman
  • David France
  • William Schwalbe and David Cheng
  • Todd Grasinger
  • Edward W. Snowdon
  • Jennifer Hatch and Susanne Smith
  • Sharon Stapel (FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR) and Sarah Mathison
  • Michael Hofman
  • Mark Stephanz
  • Timothy Hosking and Audrey Sokoloff
  • Stolichnaya Vodka
  • Lanaya Irvin
  • Matthew Sturiale, CSW
  • Debra Kleifield
  • Ian S. Tattenbaum and Lawrence M. Holtzin
  • Leslie Kogod and Laurie Goldberger
  • Chris Tuttle and Marcelino Gonzalez
  • Charles Kopelman
  • WABC
  • Kevin D. Krueger
  • Mariann Wang and Michael Gaouette
  • LA Coalition Against Domestic Violence
  • Eric H. Weinberger and Stephen W. Sagman
  • William Lanier
  • Bari S. Zahn Julius
  • Leiman-Carbia and Robert Powers
  • Kyle Thomas Smith
  • Stonewall Community Foundation
  • Dara Major and Roberta Dowd
  • Elizabeth Ann Stribling-Kivlan
  • Stephen Mango and Kenneth Rogers
  • Toskan Casale Foundation
  • McDermott Will & Emery Venable, LLP

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,