A disturbing picture has emerged, revealing a significant disparity between stated charitable goals and actual financial practices. A prominent activist, central to the disruption of a church service in Minnesota, personally amassed over a million dollars while leading an organization purportedly dedicated to fighting poverty.
Nekima Levy Armstrong, identified as a key organizer of the protest at Cities Church in St. Paul, was among those arrested. The demonstration, framed by activists as a moral stand against immigration enforcement, appeared to many as a deliberate act of intimidation against a local congregation.
Armstrong, who describes herself as a “scholar-activist” and civil rights attorney, publicly alleged ties between a church pastor and US Immigration and Customs Enforcement. This accusation fueled the protest, part of a larger campaign challenging federal immigration policies and scrutinizing related practices within the state.
However, a closer examination of financial records paints a starkly different reality. For at least six years, Armstrong served as executive director of the Wayfinder Foundation, and during that time, her personal compensation totaled over $1.1 million – a figure that raises serious questions about priorities.
This included a salary of $936,395, alongside $201,313 in benefits and other compensation. Remarkably, the foundation distributed approximately $700,052 in grants over the same period, meaning more funds were directed to Armstrong’s personal enrichment than to the communities the organization claimed to serve.
The imbalance became particularly pronounced in recent years. In 2024, the foundation awarded a mere $158,811 in grants while Armstrong received a salary of $215,726, plus an additional $40,548 in benefits. The pattern continued in 2023 and 2022, with similar discrepancies between grants awarded and Armstrong’s compensation.
Over six years, the Wayfinder Foundation reported over $5.2 million in revenue, originating not from individual donors but from substantial contributions from major foundations within the progressive funding network. These included the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation and, significantly, the Walton Family Foundation, which donated approximately $2.34 million.
Archived website content reveals the foundation’s stated goal: to fund activists who would “challenge the status quo” and “disrupt” existing systems. Armstrong herself described their approach as investing in “little revolutions” aimed at shifting power dynamics and creating systemic change.
However, the reality appears to be a different kind of revolution – one fueled by tax-exempt dollars and characterized by radical-left political agitation. Armstrong has publicly supported controversial figures, including Joanne Chesimard, a convicted cop-killer, praising her as “brave, wise, powerful, and revolutionary.”
This situation highlights a troubling trend: while working families face economic hardship, activists are being handsomely compensated to pursue an ideology that actively challenges core societal values and institutions. The disruption at the church was not an isolated incident, but a consequence of a system that incentivizes extremism.
When charitable organizations become instruments of ideological warfare, faith communities and taxpayers are placed in the crosshairs. This case underscores a growing demand for accountability and a reevaluation of how charitable status is granted and utilized.
The original intent of charitable status was not to finance radical activism or enrich those who actively oppose established norms and the rule of law. This situation demands scrutiny and a renewed commitment to ensuring that charitable resources are used for genuine public benefit.
