Twin City Mission Legal Risks: Critical Gaps in Donor Privacy Policy Exposed | Erayaha

When Donor Privacy Policies Miss the Mark: Twin City Mission’s Legal Exposure

Imagine a scenario where a nonprofit faces a $100,000 lawsuit or a regulatory fine simply due to ambiguous donor privacy terms. Our analysis of Twin City Mission’s donor privacy policy reveals several critical legal and logical gaps that could result in significant financial and reputational harm. In the current regulatory climate—where GDPR, CCPA, and state-level privacy laws are aggressively enforced—such oversights can translate into substantial penalties and donor trust erosion.

1. Ambiguity in Data Retention and Deletion Rights Twin City Mission’s policy does not specify how long donor data is retained, nor does it provide donors with clear rights to request deletion of their information. This omission is a direct compliance risk under GDPR Article 17 (Right to Erasure) and CCPA’s deletion requirements. Non-compliance can result in fines up to €20 million or 4% of annual global turnover under GDPR, and $7,500 per violation under CCPA.

Legal Analysis

high Risk

Removed

Added

We have developed this privacy policy to ensure our donors that donor information will not be shared with any third party, and that donor information will be retained only as long as necessary for the purposes outlined herein. Donors have the right to request deletion of their information at any time in accordance with applicable privacy laws.

Legal Explanation

The original clause omits critical data retention and deletion rights required under GDPR and CCPA. The revision clarifies retention limits and grants donors explicit erasure rights, reducing regulatory risk.

2. Lack of Explicit Security Safeguards for Sensitive Data The policy states that credit card numbers are used only for processing but does not mention any security measures (e.g., PCI DSS compliance, encryption). This exposes the organization to potential data breach liabilities and regulatory scrutiny. A single data breach could cost upwards of $150 per record exposed, not including reputational damage and class action risks.

Legal Analysis

critical Risk

Removed

Added

Credit card numbers are used only for donation or payment processing, are transmitted using secure, PCI DSS-compliant methods, and are not retained for other purposes. We implement industry-standard encryption and security safeguards to protect all donor payment information.

Legal Explanation

The original clause lacks any mention of security measures, exposing the organization to data breach liability. The revision ensures compliance with payment security standards and reduces breach risk.

3. Insufficient Notice of Donor Rights and Choices While donors are told they can be removed from mailing lists, the policy does not inform them of broader rights such as access, correction, or objection to processing—requirements under both GDPR and CCPA. This lack of transparency can trigger regulatory investigations and erode donor confidence.

Legal Analysis

medium Risk

Removed

Added

We also provide you with the opportunity to remove your name from our mailing list, ifand inform you desireof your rights to do soaccess, correct, or object to the processing of your personal information as required by applicable privacy laws.

Legal Explanation

The original clause only addresses mailing list removal, not broader donor rights. The revision adds notice of access, correction, and objection rights, aligning with GDPR and CCPA.

4. Incomplete Disclosure of Third-Party Processing Although the policy claims no sharing with third parties, it does not address the use of third-party service providers (e.g., payment processors, email platforms) who may access donor data. Failure to disclose such relationships is a common source of regulatory action and contractual disputes, with settlements often exceeding $50,000.

Legal Analysis

high Risk

Removed

Added

Use of donor information will be limited to the internal purposes of Twin City Mission and only to further the activities and purposes of Twin City Mission, except where third-party service providers (such as payment processors or email platforms) are engaged under strict confidentiality and data protection agreements.

Legal Explanation

The original clause does not disclose the potential involvement of third-party processors, a requirement under privacy laws. The revision clarifies this, reducing the risk of undisclosed data sharing.

Conclusion: Proactive Legal Protection is Essential Our examination shows that Twin City Mission’s donor privacy framework contains several preventable legal risks. Addressing these issues not only reduces exposure to regulatory fines and litigation but also strengthens donor trust—a critical asset for any nonprofit.

**This analysis is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For actual legal guidance, consult with a licensed attorney. This assessment is based on publicly available information and professional legal analysis. See erayaha.ai’s terms of service for liability limitations.**

**Are your organization’s privacy policies keeping pace with evolving regulations? What would a data breach or regulatory investigation cost your nonprofit? How can proactive contract review protect your mission and reputation?**