Posted on 06/09/2010 7:46:49 AM PDT by blam
The 20 Worst Charities In America
6-1 2020
By Greg Bocquet
A favorite saying in business is that you have to spend money to make money. Charitable organizations, on the other hand, have to spend money to give money, and it turns out that some are woefully inefficient at channeling donations to the people they're supposed to help.
The non-profit Charity Navigator Web site tracks such expenses via charities’ disclosure statements to the IRS to provide donors with an assessment of how well charities run themselves. Looking only at the supply side for the more than 5,500 charities that it tracks, the organization does not evaluate the impact on the recipients of funds, since that impact is often a subjective appraisal of “effectiveness.”
But it is safe to say that all donors give money not to pay for office supplies and inflated salaries for executives, but rather to the programs that charities undertake to further their goals. It is with this philosophy that we highlight the 20 charities in the U.S. with the highest administrative costs, to show which groups take the most of each donated dollar for themselves, in some cases leaving less than half for the intended recipients of aid.
Whether it be rent on prime office space, generous pay and benefits for the board of directors, or the high fixed costs of running a summer camp, overhead like this reduces the impact of a charity no matter how that money is being spent. Donor beware…
20. Tucson Audubon Society
Administrative expenses: 42.8%
Well-known for its many programs focused on the protection of biodiversity and the environment, the Audubon society, based in Washington, D.C., has chapters across the country, run independently of the main office. Its affiliate in Tuscon, Arizona, which fosters interest in and conservation of the bird
[snip]
(Excerpt) Read more at mainstreet.com ...
Why aren’t the two major political parties on that list?
;-)
I remeber years ago when I worked for Western Union, my supervisor tried to get me to donate some of my paycheck to The United Way. I told her no, that I give to my church and I am happy enough with that. A lot of these big charities have a lot of bureaucratic expenses. Fogettabouddit!
Plus if they take united way money they are not supposed to have any additional fund raisers. Most do anyway.
Er.
Actually, I would put the entire United Way as number 1. Just because so many of them are annoying jerks and liars.
# 1. ----------- The Department of Revenue
(... or is that theft?)
I worked for a law firm that boasted 100% employee participation in the United Way campaign....which wasn’t right because I never donated to it. UW is a corrupt organization, a conglomerate of charities. If I want to give to a specific charity, I’ll do so directly. I don’t need UW to filter my donation for me.
My brother, now retired, worked for the electric company. He said that while technically, donations to the United Way were voluntary, it was common for those who did not donate to be passed over for promotions. Illegal, but I don’t think anyone who was denied a promotion on this basis was ever able to prove that this was the reason.
I would put the United Way #1 on any list of “worst charities” due to the way they infiltrate companies and encourage managers to strong-arm their employees.
I was once the lone holdout from a department’s 100% UW participation goal. When a company VP plunks down and starts talking about how important it is for everyone to help out, you figure the $1/week protection money is cheap job insurance.
Their corporate fund drives encourage low-level managers to engage in arm-twisting and knee-capping for donations, so that they look good for the higher-ups. Ditto for the higher-ups so that they look good in the newspaper because they have "100% participation".
Meanwhile, I look at the exorbitant salaries that the UW directors pull down. Also, I'm sure that their commercials that run continuously (esp. during football season) aren't free, either.
I've never seen a commercial for any of the charities that I donate to.
I refuse to be coerced into donating to anything. Of course, at the time I worked for that firm I mentioned, jobs were plentiful and I could have gone elsewhere.
My experience was that participation in the United way had no bearing on promotions unless you were a Senior Manager. Face it, you aren’t going to pass over a guy simply because he didn’t give to the UW. But in the upper ranks, it is viewed as “insubordination”.
I never gave.
Federal Government
Administrative Expenses: 128.00%
I can’t believe that trailer hasn’t fallen into the river yet.
Are administrative expenses always a bad thing? If I give a dollar to a charity and they pay it to a fundraiser who gets two dollars from someone else, that would seem to be a good thing. My charity dollars are being multiplied.
Also, one would expect certain kinds of charities would have high administrative expenses. For example, Make-A-Wish foundation has high administrative expenses, but every recipient of their charity gets something a little different. If a charity is giving every child with a terminal illness the same teddy bear, it would be easy to keep administrative expenses low. But if this child wants to go to Disney World and that child wants to go to the Super Bowl, it seems like it would require a larger staff to make sure everything was done properly.
Ya. When I was at BofA we had a departamental “credit meeting” which turned out to be a hard sell UW meeting complete with this total jerk of a spokesman. I was so very pissed.
I did appreciate the corporate officer trade they have. They took our VP for a year: a woman who everyone hated. It was nice to have her gone for a while
bump
Why would you need a large staff to send a child to Disney World? Pick-up a phone and call a travel agent. Done.
My donations usually go to Salvation Army and Disabled American Veterans.
20. Tucson Audubon Society - Administrative expenses: 42.8%
19. New Hampshire Audubon - Administrative expenses: 42.8%
18. Gospel to the Unreached Millions (GUM) - Administrative expenses: 43.1%
17. American Psychiatric Foundation - Administrative expenses: 43.7%
16. Marshall Heights Community Development Organization (MHCDO) - Administrative expenses: 44.1%
15. Please Touch Museum - Administrative expenses: 44.9%
14. American Friends of the Open University of Israel (AFOUI) - Administrative expenses: 45.2%
13. Peter G. Peterson Institute for International Economics - Administrative expenses: 45.4%
12. Stan Hywet Hall & Gardens - Administrative expenses: 45.8%
11. Victorious Christian Living International - Administrative expenses: 46.0%
10. Center for Individual Rights - Administrative expenses: 46.1%
9. Changed Lives - Administrative expenses: 47.4%
8. Vision New England - Administrative expenses: 48.7%
7. Charleston Area Medical Center Foundation (CAMCF) - Administrative expenses: 48.8%
6. National Museum of Racing and Hall of Fame - Administrative expenses: 55.1%
5. Cherokee National Historical Society - Administrative expenses: 58.2%
4. Union Rescue Mission, Little Rock - Administrative expenses: 62.1%
3. National Council of Negro Women (NCNW) - Administrative expenses: 64%
2. Boys Choir of Harlem - Administrative expenses: 66.3%
1. American Tract Society - Administrative expenses: 68.0%
—
Where do MADD and United Way measure up these days?
The Human Fund - Money For People
Too many of those on the list are “Christian” organizations. This is disturbing, time to clean out the closet.
Coincidence, I'm sure.
"We really hate to see Mrs. VP go for a year. Trial though it is, we'll just have to manage. The UW is a favored corporate charity, and deserves our best."
I was never so lucky; just needed to deal with the local arm-twisters. I've worked at companies that were pretty obnoxious about it. Where I am now, thankfully, is not. Although, the HR lady still looked politely surprised when I declined to participate and told her that I already had my own charities that I supported....I think she couldn't reconcile the fact that I might - all by myself, with no help at all - be able to come up with a worthy cause to contribute money to. :-)
American corporations lean socialist and the public is unaware. They think because those at the top loot the wealth of the companies, they are "capitalists".
The politburo does well. The rest do not. 2 systems. George Orwell said that under Communism, "all animals are equal, some are more equal than others".
There is NO reason to mandate that employees give to liberal United Way. Even if you target your contribution, you are still feeding the beast.
There is NO reason to indoctrinate employees on politically correct re-education seminars on the environment, homosexuality, et al. Employees can work cooperatively without being "retaught" that sin is not sin or that MAN is killing the planet and must bow before Lord Algore.
CAIR and Red Cross/Red Crescent do ugly works yet they are still called “charities”.
True, but multiply that by ten thousand children going to ten thousand different destinations. Also, there would be issues of hotel reservations, speical accomidations if the child is disabled, and what if the child wanted to march at the head of the Disney parade? It's just going to take a lot more time than sending out ten thousand teddy bears.
But, then again, I'm at a small company. Less Bureaucracy. Less management, and accordingly, less meddling. I have no problem with walking into the Owner's, or the CEO's office, and saying what's on my mind. I'd better not be there to discuss the weather, but if there's something up, they encourage - no, they *expect* - employee input.
The bigger, Fortune 500, places I've worked aren't as open. The C-level execs are generally all nice guys, though. But - then again - they can afford to be as they pay people to be mean for them. It's always the lower-level wanna-bes that I had troubles with.
Excellent.
I only gave to the United Way through my job when I was assured that my selected charity would get the money. I got a letter from that group, on their letterhead, thanking me for the donation, in the amount I intended. That’s the ONLY way I’d ever give to UW.
At my employer, a day off was used as a bribe if a team had 100% participation in donating to the United Way (minimum $10). I declined, and was the only one on my team to do so. My coworkers put in $5 each to donate in my name so we all got a day off.
That was 2 1/2 years ago, and I still haven’t used that day off.
I think the worst charity is the Susan G. Komen Foundation which collects money for a pro-life cause, breast-cancer research, and then diverts some of that money to the anti-life Planned Parenthood.
That’s bait-and-switch.
ACLU, NOW, Planned Parenthood, Rainbow Coalition, HRC, etc, etc.
Peter G. Peterson is a billionaire. I wonder why he needs administrative expenses. Maybe some of these charities raise so little money that 45% for administrative expenses is actually not much money.
The Fords, Rockefellers, Carnegies, Gates, etc learned long ago to establish a charitable fund and then put yourself on the board of directors.
I’ve heard that they deduct such contributions to that charity from the “general aportionment” of generic UW contributions.
I don’t know if that is the case. I gave the same way you did, to a selected charity.
HUSUS and Peta should be on the list.
Unless you want to count executing pets as providing a direct benefit.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.