America's Worst Charities

[GGG]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I heard the United Way is really bad for the ratio of money raised that actually ends up going to overhead and charity workers, but they aren't listed in the top 50. Maybe I had bad information.

United way is a little different than other charities since they are just a pure fund raising arm and don't do anything. They alot money to other charities who then do work. So the overhead of United way is purely a fundraising cost. So if you know what charity you want to donate to you are better off donating directly to them instead of the unitied way.

I believe the uinited way overhead is about 13% which is very low compared the bad charities but it doesn't include the overhead of the charities the united way sends money to. So you cant quite directly compare a fund raising vehicle to a charity that actually provides services.

I perfer to donate directly to smaller charities rather than large fund raising bodies.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by meanmachine13

At the end of the day, I am not surprised by this. It takes a lot of money to get the word out and to try to get donations from people. I am sure if a lot of charities spent half the money they did on soliciting, they would lose more than half the money they bring in.

But is this a good use of the total charitable dollars that are available. Does the extra marketing dollars spent just shift dollars from one charity to antoher or does it increase the total charitable dollars spend by all Canadians?

Are we better off with a lot of non-professional volunteer charities with low overhead or large fundraising organizations that cost a lot of money. At some point a dollar spend on overhead to raise 1.10 of charity dollars isn't worth it.

A good example is all of runs in exotic locals that people have to raise 10k to go on. What you don't here is that they get a 3k paid for trip to the raise they are going to. Sure they raised a net of 7k but they got a free trip out of it.

[To Be Quite Honest]

Way to go Cancer!

2 Cancer Fund of America $98.0 million $80.4 million 0.9%
4 American Breast Cancer Foundation $80.8 million $59.8 million 5.3%
6 Breast Cancer Relief Foundation $63.9 million $44.8 million 2.2%
10 Children's Cancer Fund of America $37.5 million $29.2 million 5.3%
11 Children's Cancer Recovery Foundation $34.7 million $27.6 million 0.6%
21 National Cancer Coalition $41.5 million $14.0 million 1.1%
22 Woman To Woman Breast Cancer Foundation $14.5 million $13.7 million 0.4%
38 United Breast Cancer Foundation $11.6 million $6.6 million 6.3%
50 Hope Cancer Fund $1.9 million $1.6 million 0.5%

[PsYcNeT]

If you really want to be depressed, go check out my or para transit fellows links and scope out the pay of the heads of these organizations :'(

[GGG]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

If you really want to be depressed, go check out my or para transit fellows links and scope out the pay of the heads of these organizations :'(

One always needs to ask for these CEO and executive Salaries is should someone have to take a paycut to work for a charitable oraganization or should they be paid at the industry rate? In my opinion they should be paid at or around the industry rate. You want qualified people to do the job.

[Drury18]

Originally Posted by GGG

One always needs to ask for these CEO and executive Salaries is should someone have to take a paycut to work for a charitable oraganization or should they be paid at the industry rate? In my opinion they should be paid at or around the industry rate. You want qualified people to do the job.

When the employees that work for these organizations are being paid below market value and being told it is due to the fact it is a charitable organization, I do believe it is reasonable to expect the CEO's of these organizations take a below market salary as well. They are supposed to be the leadership, so they need to lead by example.

Having a $250,000+/year CEO with expense accounts and perks while the majority of your employees are making below Living Wage isn't correct. And doesn't promote fiscal responsiblity.

[chemgear]

Originally Posted by Drury18

Having a $250,000/year CEO

That seems really cheap to me.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by Drury18

When the employees that work for these organizations are being paid below market value and being told it is due to the fact it is a charitable organization, I do believe it is reasonable to expect the CEO's of these organizations take a below market salary as well. They are supposed to be the leadership, so they need to lead by example.

Having a $250,000+/year CEO with expense accounts and perks while the majority of your employees are making below Living Wage isn't correct. And doesn't promote fiscal responsiblity.

What does a CEO make for a comparably sized for-profit business?

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by GGG

One always needs to ask for these CEO and executive Salaries is should someone have to take a paycut to work for a charitable oraganization or should they be paid at the industry rate? In my opinion they should be paid at or around the industry rate. You want qualified people to do the job.

Except when you're looking at charities that have a 1% rate of charitable return, and a CEO making 400k a year. Then it is pretty obvious that its a hugely bloated behemoth that solely exists to feed itself.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Flabbibulin

I wonder how much evangelicals could change the scope of poverty and hunger if their weekly tithe went towards poverty and hunger instead of the operational costs of the endless number of churches out there?

Churches exist for more than just charity. They also provide a service to the members of their congregations. It's a fundamental human right that people should be able to practice whichever religion they want.

That being said, the financial records should be transparent to the people donating to them. There are also some churches that clearly abuse their tax exempt status and operate full on for profit businesses. That being said, removing all exemption would be a case of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by blankall

Churches exist for more than just charity. They also provide a service to the members of their congregations. It's a fundamental human right that people should be able to practice whichever religion they want.

That being said, the financial records should be transparent to the people donating to them. There are also some churches that clearly abuse their tax exempt status and operate full on for profit businesses. That being said, removing all exemption would be a case of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Are churches subjected to the same level of scrutiny as not-for-profits? Ie, yearly deep audits?

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by Flabbibulin

I wonder how much evangelicals could change the scope of poverty and hunger if their weekly tithe went towards poverty and hunger instead of the operational costs of the endless number of churches out there?

I'm just as turned off as most, with regard to administrative costs by various charities, but in my experience, money given to churches is money well spent as it pertains to charitable work by church members.

[Flabbibulin]

Originally Posted by blankall

Churches exist for more than just charity. They also provide a service to the members of their congregations. It's a fundamental human right that people should be able to practice whichever religion they want.

That being said, the financial records should be transparent to the people donating to them. There are also some churches that clearly abuse their tax exempt status and operate full on for profit businesses. That being said, removing all exemption would be a case of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

My standpoint is that Christians are ignoring one of the most important commissions given to them in the Gospels- take care of the poor. The reality is that there isn't enough money to go around for the average tither. They won't contribute 10% of their earnings to the church and then give elsewhere in addition to that. The majority of tithing income, particularly in the smaller churches, goes to sustaining operational costs of the church.

[Drury18]

Originally Posted by Rathji

What does a CEO make for a comparably sized for-profit business?

United Way of Calgary and Area – 2011 Fundraising Total/Revenue - $58,526, 288
Salary of Dr. Lucy Miller - $300,000 - $350,000

Terra Energy – 2011 Revenue - $63,005,000
Salary of Cas Morel - $258,550

Carfinco Financial – 2011 Revenue - $59,583,000
Salary of Tracy Graf - $175,000

Rock Energy – 2011 Revenue - $54,832,000
Salary of Allen Bey - $240,000

Source: Companies from Alberta Venture 250 Highest Grossing Companies List. Salary Data from Bloomberg.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by Drury18

United Way of Calgary and Area – 2011 Fundraising Total/Revenue - $58,526, 288
Salary of Dr. Lucy Miller - $300,000 - $350,000

Terra Energy – 2011 Revenue - $63,005,000
Salary of Cas Morel - $258,550

Carfinco Financial – 2011 Revenue - $59,583,000
Salary of Tracy Graf - $175,000

Rock Energy – 2011 Revenue - $54,832,000
Salary of Allen Bey - $240,000

Source: Companies from Alberta Venture 250 Highest Grossing Companies List. Salary Data from Bloomberg.

This is a gross table.

[Derek Sutton]

The difference to me is that most churches focus solely on their Parrishoners for contributions, not going door to door, advertising on TV etc... for money, they do not go outside of the church community. I know my church, probably everyone else's as well do yearly financial statements that are available to all those who attend.
On another note, fundraising for cancer is big business, how many jobs will be lost when cancer is finally cured? I'm not really one for conspiracy theories but....I also read somewhere recently the the Red Cross is one of the best organizations when it comes to money getting where it needs to be, then someone went off about how it is all christian hogwash and everything just went downhill from there.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by Derek Sutton

On another note, fundraising for cancer is big business, how many jobs will be lost when cancer is finally cured?

Not to get too OT here, but the company that does release a cancer cure (lol because there's only 1 type of cancer rite) will make so much goddamn money. They won't give a #### about charities or treatment clinics or whatever, they will announce it to massive fanfare and get all the money.

[Derek Sutton]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

Not to get too OT here, but the company that does release a cancer cure (lol because there's only 1 type of cancer rite) will make so much goddamn money. They won't give a #### about charities or treatment clinics or whatever, they will announce it to massive fanfare and get all the money.

I know it is OT and I do agree with your statement. I just think that cancer fundraising has become a career for a lot of people and that shouldn't be, nor was ever intended to be the case.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Drury18

United Way of Calgary and Area – 2011 Fundraising Total/Revenue - $58,526, 288
Salary of Dr. Lucy Miller - $300,000 - $350,000

Terra Energy – 2011 Revenue - $63,005,000
Salary of Cas Morel - $258,550

Carfinco Financial – 2011 Revenue - $59,583,000
Salary of Tracy Graf - $175,000

Rock Energy – 2011 Revenue - $54,832,000
Salary of Allen Bey - $240,000

Source: Companies from Alberta Venture 250 Highest Grossing Companies List. Salary Data from Bloomberg.

How much are the stock options of those oil executives worth. You need to look at total cash-equivalent compensation. Even an entry level employee for a producer recieves 30% of their compensation in options and bonuses.

350k seams reasonable as a max salary.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Lukemia and Lymphoma Society
Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation
Local Red Cross disaster relief

Nothing else.