NELSONVILLE, Ohio — The Survivor Advocacy Outreach Program has moved to amend its lawsuit against former director Jen Seifert to include new defendants it claims were involved in the alleged fraudulent transactions at the center of its initial suit.
The move comes as part of the ongoing legal battle between SAOP and Seifert in the Athens County Court of Common Pleas. Seifert sued the nonprofit for defamation in June 2025. The nonprofit fired back in August 2025 with a counterclaim related to Seifert’s alleged misuse of nearly $1 million in organization funds.
SAOP’s initial countersuit against Seifert claims that before she was fired in July 2024, Seifert shirked the organization’s internal controls to make two major transactions without the nonprofit board’s approval. In one case, Seifert allegedly awarded $250,000 to Dream Bridge Collaborative for a profitable real estate transaction that SAOP alleges Seifert had personal connections with. In a second case, Seifert allegedly authorized a greater than $700,000 payment to the 3D-printing construction company Alquist for goods and services that SAOP says it never received.
In its motion to amend its counterclaim, SAOP asked the court to add Alquist, Dream Bridge Collaborative, Dream Bridge Collaborative statutory agent Ginger Gagne, and former SAOP Chief Financial Officer Denise O’Donnell to the lawsuit.
The court must decide if SAOP can amend its counterclaim to bring the new claims forward against additional parties.
The motion, with SAOP’s proposed amended counterclaim attached, accuses both Alquist and Dream Bridge Collaborative of unjust enrichment and conversion. Under Ohio law, unjust enrichment occurs when an entity knowingly keeps something of value under circumstances that are unfair or inequitable to the other party. Conversion occurs when one entity retains and uses funds that rightfully belong to another party.
The motion also accuses Alquist of fraud, alleging that the company knowingly submitted two false invoices to SAOP requesting payment for goods and services SAOP did not receive.
The proposed amended counterclaim would also bring two counts against O’Donnell for breach of fiduciary duty, one count related to each transaction at issue. It would also bring a count of fraudulent concealment against O’Donnell for her alleged role in concealing crucial details associated with the payment to Dream Bridge Collaborative.
SAOP argues that it should be allowed to bring its new claims forward as part of an amended counterclaim because they pertain to the same core issues as its initial counterclaim. SAOP argues that it brought the new claims early in legal proceedings and as soon as it could have done so, based on further investigation it has conducted since filing its initial counterclaim.
“Trying these claims together is efficient and essential to ensuring that SAOP can obtain complete relief in a single, coordinated proceeding,” SAOP argues in its motion.
3D-printer transaction
In its proposed amended counterclaim, SAOP argues that the Colorado-based Alquist wrongfully transferred over $700,000 from SAOP, and refused to issue a refund despite never providing SAOP with associated goods and services.
The proposed amended counterclaim details a Feb. 17, 2024, invoice from Alquist in which SAOP says the company enumerated the cost of various goods and services that the nonprofit never actually received. The invoice requested payment for licensing fees, material creation, supply chain development, curriculum for a training program, printer systems, and personnel costs.
Alquist knew the invoice was false, SAOP claims.
The SAOP board never knew of nor authorized payment of the invoice, the proposed amended counterclaim says. However, O’Donnell and Seifert proceeded with the payment.
The proposed amended counterclaim seeks to hold both Alquist and O’Donnell responsible for the payment, in addition to Seifert.
SAOP claims that Alquist’s fraudulent activity did not end after Seifert was fired and O’Donnell resigned from SAOP in summer 2024. Alquist issued a second, fraudulent invoice to SAOP on Aug. 14, 2024, just two days after O’Donnell resigned, the proposed amendment claims.
The company pressured then acting-director Madison Trace to pay the fraudulent invoice, although SAOP never paid that second invoice.
By adding Alquist to its counterclaim, SAOP hopes to recover the more than $700,000 wrongfully transferred to and retained by Alquist, as well as attorney fees “and punitive damages based on Alquist’s fraudulent and intentional behavior,” according to the proposed amended counterclaim.
The proposed amended counterclaim also seeks punitive damages from O’Donnell for “numerous breaches of her fiduciary duties and intentional conduct” associated with the payment.
Seifert previously asked the court to toss out the claim against her related to the payment to Alquist, pointing to the SAOP board’s approval of certain specific purchases from Alquist. However, SAOP argued that the approval of those specific purchases did not authorize the more than $700,000 transaction.
Athens County Court of Common Pleas Judge George McCarthy allowed SAOP’s claims about the transaction with Alquist to move forward in a Nov. 26, 2025 decision.
Lavender Ranch transaction
The proposed amended complaint includes new allegations against Dream Bridge Collaborative and its statutory agent, Ginger Gagne.
SAOP claims “DBC operates as the alter ego of Gagne and Gagne’s control and operation of DBC is so complete that DBC has no separate mind, will, or existence of its own.”
The initial lawsuit included allegations that Seifert approved a $250,000 grant agreement with Dream Bridge Collaborative for a down payment on a Meigs County property for a nonprofit endeavor, Lavender Ranch.
The funding was awarded as a subgrant from federal and state grant funding to SAOP through the Appalachian Community Grant Program. SAOP claims that its board was not informed of the subgrant and that the Appalachian Community Grant Program “does not allow for lump sum awards and specifically requires a reimbursement model for distribution of funds.”
The proposed amended complaint seeks to hold O’Donnell responsible for concealing details associated with the subgrant, alleging that O’Donnell helped to conceal its existence from the SAOP staff and board, and that she benefitted financially and professionally from the transfer. The initial complaint alleged that Seifert benefited financially and professionally from the transfer. Those allegations remain in the proposed amended complaint.
After O’Donnell and Seifert departed from SAOP, the nonprofit asked for information on the subgrant from Gagne and Dream Bridge Collaborative.
Lavender Ranch transaction
The proposed amended complaint includes new allegations against Dream Bridge Collaborative and its statutory agent, Ginger Gagne.
SAOP claims “DBC operates as the alter ego of Gagne and Gagne’s control and operation of DBC is so complete that DBC has no separate mind, will, or existence of its own.”
The initial lawsuit included allegations that Seifert approved a $250,000 grant agreement with Dream Bridge Collaborative for a down payment on a Meigs County property for a nonprofit endeavor, Lavender Ranch.
The funding was awarded as a subgrant from federal and state grant funding to SAOP through the Appalachian Community Grant Program. SAOP claims that its board was not informed of the subgrant and that the Appalachian Community Grant Program “does not allow for lump sum awards and specifically requires a reimbursement model for distribution of funds.”
The proposed amended complaint seeks to hold O’Donnell responsible for concealing details associated with the subgrant, alleging that O’Donnell helped to conceal its existence from the SAOP staff and board, and that she benefitted financially and professionally from the transfer. The initial complaint alleged that Seifert benefited financially and professionally from the transfer. Those allegations remain in the proposed amended complaint.
After O’Donnell and Seifert departed from SAOP, the nonprofit asked for information on the subgrant from Gagne and Dream Bridge Collaborative.
SAOP says it “received some, not all, of the requested information and the limited information” suggested that only $16,000 of the $250,000 award was used for eligible purposes.
Additionally, on Feb. 28, 2025, Gagne notified SAOP that Lavender Ranch was selling the property to Meigs Property Group, an unnamed group of investors that SAOP claims has ties to Seifert.
However, in her conversations with SAOP, “Gagne asserted that a non-disclosure agreement prevented her from identifying the buyers,” SAOP claims.
Dream Bridge Collaborative and Gagne have refused to return the funding awarded by SAOP, the proposed amended counterclaim states.
The proposed amended counterclaim seeks to hold Dream Bridge Collaborative and Gagne responsible for causing the transfer to occur and for holding onto the funds despite SAOP’s claims that the funds were used for ineligible purposes and that Gagne and Dream Bridge Collaborative failed to disclose Seifert’s financial and professional interests in the transfer.
SAOP claims that O’Donnell should also be held responsible for alleged breaches of fiduciary responsibility associated with the sub-grant award as well as her alleged concealment of “a number of material facts regarding the DBC transaction.” Each fact O’Donnelll concealed constitutes “a separate and independent instance of fraudulent concealment,” the proposed amended counterclaim says.
The proposed amended counterclaims says:
The material facts concealed by O’Donnell include but are not limited to: (1) the existence and amount of the grant itself; (2) the existence of DBC; (3) the distribution of money to DBC and/or Gagne; (4) the purpose for which DBC intended to use the $250,000.00; (5) payment of a lump sum of grant money; (6) the identity of the ultimate purchaser of the Meigs County property; (7) any pecuniary or professional relationship between Seifert andGagne and/or DBC and/or Lavender Ranch and/or Meigs Property Group; and (8) the connection between DBC, Lavender Ranch, Gagne, Meigs Property Group, and Seifert.
The property at issue formerly was the site of Fur Peace Ranch.
According to Meigs County Auditor records, Meigs Property Group purchased the property from Jorma and Vanessa Kaukonen on May 30, 2025. The same day, Meigs Property Group sold it to Lavender Ranch. The site is now home to Rocksprings Wellness, which offers “counseling, employment, and connection for individuals navigating poverty, trauma, and systemic barriers,” according to its website.
SAOP seeks attorney fees, damages resulting from the loss of the $250,000 subaward, and punitive damages from O’Donnell, Dream Bridge Collaborative, and Gagne, in addition to Seifert.
