Survivor group SNAP implodes amidst mass defection of long-time leaders
The Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP), one of the earliest organizations to fight for victims of abuse, appears poised to implode after the resignation of more than 27 long-time leaders and advocates. The news follows months of internal turmoil over integrity, accountability, transparency, fiduciary matters, board member conduct, and more.
Like many organizations in the survivor community, SNAP has had its share of internal debate and conflict in recent years. That is not surprising, as working with victims of abuse often implicates deep-seated traumas, unresolved issues, and other challenges.
But this time, the situation appears to be a true existential crisis.
History
So how did we get here? Here’s our very brief take on recent events:
Problems began to bubble to the surface in early 2017, when two prominent leaders within SNAP resigned amidst allegations that the organization was taking kickbacks from law firms that were suing the Catholic Church over sexual abuse.
The resignations led to a series of changes, including the hiring of a new executive director, Zach Hiner. Although not an abuse victim himself, Hiner appeared to be a positive move and adeptly steered SNAP through a major lawsuit while improving the organization’s finances.
Hiner resigned in 2023, after he and his wife announced the birth of their first child. At that time, SNAP announced that long-time executive committee member Mike McDonnell would take over.
It was about that time that Anglican Watch began noticing issues. Indeed, several longtime leaders abruptly resigned, and we began receiving numerous complaints from survivors who said they’d repeatedly tried to contact SNAP, only to be ignored. Indeed, in one case, it took us more than six months to get follow-up for a survivor we were helping — despite having made a major donation the previous year.
Recently, SNAP hired a new executive director, Angela Walker. While she’s new enough that we don’t really have an opinion about her, Walker’s early online meetings were simultaneously cogent and thoughtful, while simultaneously painfully disorganized. (In one instance, we did something we never do, which is to drop offline. Sorry, but those are 15 minutes of our lives we’ll never get back.)
Things really began hitting the fan when long-time SNAP staff member Melanie Sakoda, who has been serving as the SNAP Survivor Support Director for the organization, was abruptly fired in August 2025 by Walker and the SNAP board of directors.
The news was devastating to many, and survivors often recount that the first person they ever met who truly cared about them was Sakoda. Indeed, our own experiences with her were hugely positive, and one of the reasons we’d begun providing financial support to SNAP.
Subsequently, long-time SNAP members alleged that Sakoda under the mistaken belief that she’d provided free attendance at the organization’s annual meeting. Of course, that begs the question: Why didn’t some great light of the Western world ask Sakoda about this prior to firing her?
Still worse, allegations later emerged that a senior member of SNAP lied to a judge in connection with Sakoda’s unemployment benefits application.
Recently, after multiple efforts to address concerns, David Lorenz, the former SNAP Maryland leader, resigned via the following emailed letter:
To the SNAP BOD
I have been with SNAP for over 20 years and have always had full confidence in the integrity of the BOD of SNAP. While I may not have agreed with everything that they were doing, I always believed they had the survivor’s best interest at heart. With the current BOD, I do not believe that they mirror either of these attributes. In fact, they have shown themselves to be dishonest and lacking of moral authority.
There are numerous examples that I could cite over the last 2 years but let me use a recent even that should illustrate my concerns. Melanie Sakoda appealed the ruling for receiving unemployment benefits after being fired from SNAP. At her dismissal, neither Angela nor Shaun would offer any specific reason for her being fired but warned her not to request unemployment. She did appeal and she won unemployment benefits. I attended the hearing in support of Melanie though I could not stay the entire time. During this hearing, I specifically heard Dan McNevin state that Melanie refused to work on the 2024 conference (this is probably wrong since I did see her work on it very hard) but then he added that the conference was the biggest fundraising event that SNAP has. Dan said this to a federal judge and I have a recording of it. For the past year and a half, Dan has been telling everyone that SNAP has NEVER made money on the conference. I have several emails from him to that effect. This truly calls Dan’s integrity into question and causes me to ponder why he is the treasurer of SNAP. He has either been lying for the last 2 years or lied to the federal judge.
I also read Angela’s submission to the federal judge. It was submitted the very day of the hearing and this did not allow for much time to review and adequately rebut. However, I have read some of it since that time. Angela is accusing Melanie of favoritism for allowing a friend, Sally Zakhari, to enter the conference for free. Let’s ignore the fact that I had paid for Sally’s admission and that neither Dan nor Angela even bothered to ask Melanie about this before firing her. They simply saw that Sally had not paid and then leapt to the inaccurate assumption that she must had been let in for free. In the submittal, Angela implies that Sally should not have been treated as a leader and should never have been allowed into the leaders meeting because she had not been properly ratified. This is a clear case of rewriting history. The whole idea of leader ratification only came about after the conference had closed. Sally had been recognized at the beginning of that very conference as a leader and was given a green lanyard. She had also been listed on the SNAP website as a leader along with her contact information. She was, in fact, invited to the leaders’ meeting. While Angela’s statement about Sally not being ratified was technically correct, it was written in such a way as to lead the reader to the conclusion that Sally’s status of being unratified (whatever that might mean as this concept defies definition) had occurred before the conference, which is simply not true.
For this reason, and dozens of others that are listed on rememberthesurvivors.org, I believe that SNAP leadership can no longer be trusted by me or by survivors in general. I regretfully but rightfully resign from SNAP. Please remove any reference to me from the SNAP website as I can no longer be associated with what I perceive as a corrupt organization. I request that my image, likeness, writings and spoken word no longer be used to promote SNAP or any of its activities.
Sadly, but defiantly,
David Lorenz – Former SNAP Maryland Director
Soon after, the following joint resignation came out, signed by 27 current and former long-time members/supporters:
We, leaders and supporters in SNAP, are submitting our collective resignation from SNAP (Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests), effective immediately. We expect that our image, likeness, writings and spoken word will no longer be used to promote SNAP or any of its activities.
We acknowledge SNAP’s historic role in survivor advocacy and affirm that accountability, transparency, and survivor-centered leadership are essential to that mission.
Our resignation follows repeated good-faith efforts to raise concerns regarding board conduct, governance practices, and the Board’s fulfillment of its fiduciary and oversight responsibilities. These concerns—including issues of transparency, accountability, and response to protected internal reporting—have not been meaningfully addressed through appropriate or independent review.
In light of these unresolved governance failures, we can no longer continue our affiliation without compromising our ethical obligations or implying consent to practices inconsistent with SNAP’s stated values.
This action is not a withdrawal from survivor advocacy. It is an act of integrity and solidarity with survivors who deserve leadership that is ethical, transparent, accountable, and free from retaliation.
We urge SNAP’s Board of Directors to commission an independent and transparent review of board conduct, governance structures, and organizational culture. Absent meaningful reform, continued erosion of trust and credibility is likely – indeed it is already occurring.
We remain committed to survivor-centered advocacy and will continue this work beyond SNAP.
— Jointly signed by former SNAP members and advocates
David Lorenz Cal Pfeiffer Tim Schlenz Myra Russell
Sally Zakhari Susan Vance Becky Ianni Melanie Sakoda
David Brown Frank Mckenna Terry Steubenville Paige Eppenstein Anderson
Frank Schindler Judy Lorenz Karen Lowart Jeb Barrett
Maryjo Briggs Karen Zehr Mark Fuller Nancy Fratianni
Marigrace Labella Janet Klinger John Chevedden Teresa Lancaster
Orlando Gonzalez Tim Lennon Mary McKenna
What next?
Anglican Watch is deeply concerned about this situation, and we do not see SNAP as viable given that so many stakeholders have lost trust in the organization. Nor can we support SNAP as things now stand.
To be clear: Yes, there are times when non-profits have to tell key stakeholders that, for the good of the organization, it’s time to move on. But when so many good people, so deeply invested in the organization and its mission, suddenly pull up stakes, it’s a safe bet that the problem is not with those who are leaving the organization. And while SNAP so far is taking the see-ya-wouldn’t-wanna-be-ya approach, the group that left basically was SNAP. Without the group, there simply isn’t any substance to the group.
At this point, we’ve been in contact with those who have left, and we are offering to provide a platform to any former SNAP leaders who want to share their experiences. And we are committed to supporting survivors from all faith communities in any way possible.
So, it’s too early to know how all of this will shake out. But don’t be surprised if we have further updates on this disturbing situation. And we are prepared to go to bat for the underdogs in this matter.