Please help answering questions $1-6$ based on article provided. Thank you!

In November $2015,$ under increasing pressure from declining donations and persistent media scrutiny, Mortenson announced his retirement from CAl as both an employee and nonvoting member of the board. While donations had fallen from $$22\mathrm{.}8$ million in $2010$ to only $$2\mathrm{.}2$ million in $2014,$ Mortenson had continued to draw an annual salary, earning $$194,000$ in $2014.$ As part of the announcement, Mortenson stated that he had agreed to consult with CAI for its over$-$seas programs occasionally, which prompted Krakauer to comment: "I am concerned CAI apparently does not intend to sever all ties with Mortenson, which suggests that the board still doesn't comprehend the harm Mortenson has done."

In September $2016,$ a documentary directed by Mortenson's friend Jennifer Jordan and her husband, videographer Jeff

Rhoads, was released. Titled $3000$ Cups of Tea, the documentary directly refuted all of the allegations made by both

$60$ Minutes and Krakauer, claiming that the attacks on Mortenson were unprovoked and unwarranted. Any inaccuracies and misrepresentations that Mortenson himself had already acknowledged were dismissed as being "insignificant" and

as having done $"$no real harm."

The Central Asia Institute continues to operate, although with reported contributions of only $$3\mathrm{.}76$ million in fiscal year

ending September $2016($according to reports filed with Charity Navigator$),$ but the heady days of Mortenson's fame seem far behind them.

QUESTIONS

$1)$ Based on the evidence presented in this case

study, was Mortenson's work at the CAI an

example of deliberate fraud or mismanagement?

Defend your position.

$2)$ How does the conduct of the CAI board relate to

this case?

$3)$ From a business ethics perspective, which was

worse, the conduct of the CAI board or the conduct

of Mortenson himself? Why?

$4)$ Why would CAI want to keep Mortenson in a

"visionary" capacity?

$5)$ If Mortenson's claims have misled donors, should

the CAl return the money? Why or why not?

$6)$ What should be done to restore the reputation of

the CAI?