By BERNIE BELLAN (This story was originally posted on January 14) I’ve been writing about the Simkin Centre’s aacumulated deficit situation ($779,000 according to its most recent financial report) for some time.

On January 14 I published an article on this website, in which I tried to find out why a personal care home that has an endowment fund valued at over $11 million is running such a huge deficit.

Following is that article, followed by a lengthy email exchange I had with Don Aronovitch, who is a longtime director of the Saul and Claribel Simkin Centre Foundation. My purpose in writing the original article, along with the update, is I’m attempting to ascertain why the Simkin Centre simply doesn’t use more of the charitable donations it receives each year to address its financial situation rather than investing then under the management of the Jewish Foundation:

Here is the article first posted on January 14: A while back I published an article about the deficit situation at the Simkin Centre. (You can read it at “Simkin Centre deficit situation.“) I was prompted to write that particular article after reading a piece written by Free Press Faith writer John Longhurst in the August 5 issue of the Free Press about the dire situation personal care homes in Winnipeg are in when it comes to trying to provide their residents with decent food.
Yet, Longhurst made one very serious mistake in his article when he wrote that the “provincial government, through the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority, has not increased the amount of funding it provides for care-home residents in Manitoba since 2009.”
In fact, the WRHA has given annual increases to personal care homes, but its allocations are not broken down by categories, such as food or salaries. As a spokesperson for the WRHA explained to me in an email: “PCHs receive per diem global operating funding based on the number of licensed beds they operate. This funding model is designed to support the full range of operating costs associated with resident care, including staffing, food services, utilities, building operations, and other day-to-day expenses.”

Now, one can make a perfectly valid argument that the level of funding from the WRHA has not kept up with inflation, especially inflation in food costs, but the Simkin Centre is in an even more precarious position because of the skyrocketing cost of kosher food.
“In recent years,” according to an article on the internet, “the cost of kosher food has increased significantly, often outpacing general food inflation due to unique supply chain pressures and specialized production requirements.”
Yet, when I asked Laurie Cerqueti how much maintaining a kosher facility has cost the Simkin Centre, as I noted in my previous article about the deficit situation at Simkin, she responded: “approximately $300,000 of our deficit was due to food services. I do not have a specific number as far as how much of the deficit is a result of kosher food…So really this is not a kosher food issue as much is it is an inflation and funding issue.”

One reader, however, after having read my article about the deficit situation at Simkin, had this to say: “In John Longhurst’s article on Aug 5, 2025 in the Free Press, Laurie (Cerqueti) was quoted as saying that the annual kosher meal costs at Simkin were $6070 per resident. At Bethania nursing home in 2023, the non-kosher meal costs in 2023 were quoted as $4056 per resident per year. Even allowing for a 15% increase for inflation over 2 years, the non-kosher food costs there would be $4664.40 or 24% lower than Simkin’s annual current kosher food costs. If Simkin served non-kosher food to 150 of its 200 residents and kosher food to half of its Jewish residents who wish to keep kosher, by my calculation it would save approximately $200,000/year. If all of Simkin’s Jewish residents wished to keep kosher, the annual savings would be slightly less at $141,000.”

But – let’s be honest: Even though many Jewish nursing homes in the US have adopted exactly that model of food service – where kosher food is available to those residents who would want it, otherwise the food served would be nonkosher, it appears that keeping Simkin kosher – even though 45% of its residents aren’t even Jewish – is a “sacred cow” (pun intended.)

So, if Simkin must remain kosher – even though maintaining it as a kosher facility is only adding to its accumulated deficit situation – which currently stands at $779,426 as of March 31, 2025,I wondered whether there were some other ways Simkin could address its deficit while still remaining kosher.
In response to my asking her how Simkin proposes to deal with its deficit situation, Laurie Cerqueti wrote: “There are other homes in worse financial position than us. There are 2 homes I am aware of that are in the process of handing over the keys to the WRHA as they are no longer financially sustainable.”

I wondered though, whether the Simkin Centre Foundation, which is managed by the Jewish Foundation of Manitoba might not be able to help the Simkin Centre reduce its deficit. According to the Jewish Foundation’s 2024 annual report, The Saul and Claribel Simkin Centre Foundation, which is managed by the Jewish Foundation, had a total value of $11,017,635.
The Jewish Foundation did distribute $565,078 to the Simkin Centre in 2024, but even so, I wondered whether it might be able to distribute more.

According to John Diamond, CEO of the Jewish Foundation, however, the bylaws of the Foundation dictate that no more than 5% of the value of a particular fund be distributed in any one year.

There is one distinguishing characteristic about the Saul and Claribel Simkin Centre Foundation, in that a portion of their fund is “encroachable.” The encroachable capital is not owned by JFM. It is held in trust by JFM but is beneficially owned by Simkin, similar to a “bank deposit”. While held by the JFM, these funds are included in the calculation of Simkin’s annual distribution.



I asked John Diamond whether any consideration had been given to increasing the distribution that the Jewish Foundation could make to the Simkin Centre above the 5% limit that would normally apply to a particular fund under the Foundation’s management.

Here is what John wrote in response: “The Simkin does have an encroachable fund. That means that at their request, they can encroach on the capital of that fund only (with restrictions). This encroachment is not an increased distribution; rather, it represents a return of capital that also negatively affects the endowment’s future distributions.

”It is strongly recommended that encroachable funds not be used for operating expenses. If you encroach and spend the capital, the organization will receive fewer distribution dollars in the next year and every year as the capital base erodes. Therefore, the intent of encroachable funds is for capital projects, not recurring expenses.”
 
I asked Laurie Cerqueti whether there might be some consideration given to asking for an “encroachment” into the capital within the Saul and Claribel Simkin Centre Foundation?
She responded: “We are not in a position where we are needing to dip into the encroachable part of our endowment fund. Both of our Boards (the Simkin Centre board and the Saul and Claribel Simkin Centre Foundation board) are aware of our financial situation and we are all working together to move forward in a sustainable way.”

At the same time though, I wondered where donations to the Simkin Centre end up? Do they all end up in the Simkin Centre Foundation, for instance, I asked Laurie Cerqueti on December 15.
Her response back then was: “All donations go through our Foundation.”
I was somewhat surprised to read that answer, so I asked a follow-up question for clarification: “Do all donations made to the Simkin Centre end up in the Simkin Centre Foundation at the Jewish Foundation?”
The response this time was: “No they do not.”
So, I asked: “So, how do you decide which donations end up at the Foundation? Is there a formula?”
Laurie’s response was: “We have a mechanism in place for this and it is an internal matter.”
Finally, I asked how then, the Simkin Centre was financing its accumulated deficit? Was it through a “line of credit with a bank?” I wondered.
To date, I have yet to receive a response to that question. I admit that I am puzzled that a personal care home which has a sizeable foundation supporting it would not want to dip into the capital of that foundation when it is facing a financial predicament. Yes, I can see wanting the value of the foundation to grow – but that’s for the future. I don’t know whether I’d call a $779,425 deficit a crisis; that’s for others to determine, but it seems pretty serious to me.

One area that I didn’t even touch upon in this article, though – and it’s something I’ve written about time and time again, is the quality of the food at the Simkin Centre.
To end this, I’ll refer to a quote Laurie Cerqueti gave to John Longhurst when he wrote his article about the problems personal care homes in Winnipeg are facing: “When it comes to her food budget, ‘we can’t keep making the same number of bricks with less straw.’ “

(Updated January 24): Since posting my original story January 14 I have been engaging in an email correspondence with Don Aronovitch, who is a longtime director of the Saul and Claribel Simkin Centre Foundation.

On Jan. 19 I received this email from Don:

Hi Bernie,

Your burning question seems to be “Do all donations to the Simkin Centre end up going to the SC Foundation.”

In our attempts to explain the subtle workings of the Simkin Centre PCH, the Simkin Centre Foundation & the role of the Jewish Foundation of Manitoba, we somehow have failed to answer your question.  I trust that the following will do the job.

All donations to the Simkin Centre (PCH & Foundation) go to the SC Foundation as a ‘custodian’ for the PCH.

Then, at the direction of the PCH, the monies, in part or in whole, are transferred to the PCH either immediately or subsequently. Further, again at the PCH’s direction, a portion may be transferred to the Foundation’s Encroachable Building Reserve Fund at the JFM.

Regards,

Don Aronovitch

I responded to Don:

But how are the monies that are transferred to the PCH treated on the financial statement? 

Is everything simply rolled in as part of “Contributions from the Saul and Claribel Simkin Centre Foundation?”

On Jan. 22 Don responded:

Bernie,

I said previously and I repeat that the Simkin Centre has many sharp minds and therefore, it is eminently able to effect asset management strategies appropriate to the Simkin Centre’s ‘Big Picture’ which they understand fully. Having said that, please note that: 

Other than the Simkin Stroll which brings in about $100k and goes directly into the Home’s operations to support the program being promoted, the annual contributions to the Simkin Centre are relatively nominal. 

The suggestion that there may be a sub rosa plan to ‘starve‘ the PCH by stashing money in the Building Reserve Fund at the JFM is absurd, totally absurd!!

Don

I responded to Don:

Don,

According to the Simkin Centre Foundation’s filing with the CRA  it received $205,797 in charitable donations in 2025 plus another $387,000 from other registered charities.

Would you describe those contributions as “relatively nominal?”

But – there is no way of knowing what portion of those donations was given back to the Simkin Centre for immediate use and what portion was invested by the Jewish Foundation.

Can you tell me why not? (Laurie says that is an “internal matter.” Why?)

By the way, I never wrote there was any plan to stash “money in the Building Reserve Fund at the JFM.”

I was simply asking what is the point of building up an endowment for future use when the Simkin Centre’s needs are immediate, viz., its accumulated deficit of $779,000.

Also, have you or any other members of the board had meals for a full week at the Simkin Centre? I have spoken to many residents during my time volunteering there who told me they find the quality of the food to be very poor.

Why I’m so persistent on this point Don is that Laurie Cerqueti has been making the case – quite often – that the amount of funding the Simkin Centre receives from the WRHA is far from adequate.

But, if it’s actually the case that the Simkin Centre receives a substantial amount in charitable donations each year, but chooses to invest a good chunk of those donations rather than spend them, then it’s hardly a valid criticism to make of the WRHA that it’s funding is inadequate.

Why is it so gosh darn difficult to come up with the amount Simkin has been receiving in charitable donations? 

Could it be that it’s because a lot of people would be dismayed to learn the reason is that money is being invested rather than being spent?

-Bernie

Don responded:

Bernie,

I add the following to this, my last contribution to the thread below. 

First, let’s stick with individual donors as those were the references you started with. Starting with the 2025 figure of $206,000 total, deduct $105,000 (from the Simkin Stroll) and also deduct the healthy 5 figure donation (from a longtime Simkin supporter). We then have approximately $60,000 from 20/30 individuals and YES, it is what I would call “relatively nominal”.

As an fyi, I am in Palm Springs and in the past several days, I have asked 4 individuals what would be their spending expectations of a charity to which they donated $25,000.  The responses were almost identical and they can be summarized as “We only support organizations where we value their mission and trust their management. In trusting their management, we believe that they know best if our money should be used for current operations, for future operations or for both.“

Don

Does it make sense to say, as Don does, that when considering the amount of charitable dollars the Simkin Centre receives, one ought to deduct the proceeds from the Simkin Stroll and a “healthy 5 figure donation?” I don’t see the logic in that.

And, I’m still wondering: How much of the more than $500,000 in charitable donations the Simkin Centre received in 2025 came back to the Simkin Centre to fund its immediate needs and how much was invested?