rickjump1 0 #1 November 15, 2013 This hit me like a ton of bricks. I give these people a monthly donation, and now this? Anybody know different? I believed in these people. http://freepatriot.org/2013/11/13/wounded-warrior-project-is-a-fraud-making-millions-off-disabled-veterans/Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 26 #2 November 15, 2013 Did you think 100% of any donation to any charity go to the cause they serve? To me, it looks like the analysis of their performance is respectable. http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=12842#.UoZJnPmxd8FRemster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BigMikeH77 0 #3 November 15, 2013 Yes this looks legit to me. I've see much more popular charities with significantly greater operating expenses - for example, the Make-A-Wish foundation. These are still great organizations. Not-for-profit doesn't mean that the organizers work for free. Sorry to burst your bubble Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 7 #4 November 15, 2013 http://www.charitynavigator.org/ Here's an eye opener~ Vietnam Veterans Memorial Presidents Compensation - $228,131 Vietnam Veterans of Foreign Wars National Home for children Executive Directors Compensation - $93,046 Veterans for America Presidents Compensation - $202,500 Paralyzed Veterans of America Executive Directors Compensation - $187,253 Chief Financial Officers Compensation - $212,275 General Counsel Compensation - $202,960 Director of Development Compensation - $201,648 National Military Family Association Executive Director Compensation - $78,129 Marine Semper Fi Fund President, CEO & Founders Compensation - $91,239 AMVETS Executive Directors Compensation - $152,054 a year Veterans of Foreign Wars President (Compensated through affiliates) - $187,246 Wounded Warrior Project Executive Director Compensation - $199,171 FORMER Officer Compensation - $230,00 Make A Wish Foundation President, CEO Compensation - $439,256 American Red Cross President, CEO Compensation - $995,718 Habitat For Humanity President, CEO Compensation - $239,338 Vice President, Asia Office Compensation - $270,751 National Director-Senegal compensation - $249,128 Lions Club Executive Director Compensation - $199,951 AARP President Compensation - $235,237 AIDS United President, CEO Compensation - $171,845 Each Goodwill has their own per state, but since I’m from the southern Wisconsin area here you go Goodwill Industries of Southern Wisconsin President, CEO Compensation - $380,290 Greenpeace Fund Executive Director Compensation - $11,941 Executive Director Compensation from Affiliates - $107,467 FORMER Executive Director Compensation - $66,902 FORMER Executive Director Compensation from Affiliates - $66,902 International Humane Society President Compensation - $192,603 Susan G Komen for the Cure – GUESS WHAT YOU GET WHEN YOU LEAVE THIS ORGANIZATION FORMER President, CEO Compensation - $456,437 Breast Cancer Research Foundation President Compensation - $557,992 Breast Cancer.org Executive Director Compensation - $185,506 Founder, President Compensation - $199,409 The American Cancer Society CEO Compensation - $914,906 National Vice President of Divisional Services (RETIRED) Compensation - $1,550,705 Deputy CEO (RETIRED) Compensation - $1,407,719 WWW.SAVE-A-VET.ORG -not listed with Charity Navigator but if you’d like to see any financials as they are a 501c3 organization and these are public records... PRESIDENT, CEO – NO COMPENSATION FROM ORGANIZATION OR AFFILIATES. 100% VOLUNTEER VICE PRESIDENT - NO COMPENSATION FROM ORGANIZATION OR AFFILIATES. 100% VOLUNTEER CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER - NO COMPENSATION FROM ORGANIZATION OR AFFILIATES. 100% VOLUNTEER ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rickjump1 0 #5 November 15, 2013 RemsterDid you think 100% of any donation to any charity go to the cause they serve? To me, it looks like the analysis of their performance is respectable. http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=12842#.UoZJnPmxd8F Not 100%, and the CEO should not be compensated $311,000. Hardly respectable (unless you are the CEO). Looks like this charity was set up to make money for the top executives. It's legal, but it's wrong. [url]http://asknod.wordpress.com/2013/08/19/wounded-warriors-project-a-scam/Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rickjump1 0 #6 November 15, 2013 It appears so many were created just to make money for the employees. Some of these are for veterans http://www.tampabay.com/americas-worst-charities/. On a personal level, one of the biggest scams I saw while on active duty was making troops contribute to the "United Way" on payday. I doubt if the whole 2d Armored Division could cough up that CEO's salary.Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rickjump1 0 #7 November 15, 2013 okDo your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WickedWingsuits 0 #8 November 15, 2013 rickjump1***Did you think 100% of any donation to any charity go to the cause they serve? To me, it looks like the analysis of their performance is respectable. http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=12842#.UoZJnPmxd8F Not 100%, and the CEO should not be compensated $311,000. Hardly respectable (unless you are the CEO). Looks like this charity was set up to make money for the top executives. It's legal, but it's wrong. [url]http://asknod.wordpress.com/2013/08/19/wounded-warriors-project-a-scam/ Why shouldn't someone running and expanding a business be compensated well? Do you think you get the best from industry by paying peanuts? A non-profit is still a business you know. I like to see executive pay tied to performance but you don't tend to be able to slack at the top very long. The last few years have been hard on charities and keeping some even afloat has been a challenge.Summer Rental special, 5 weeks for the price of 4! That is $160 a month. Try before You Buy with Wicked Wingsuits - WingsuitRental.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BigMikeH77 0 #9 November 15, 2013 Quotethe CEO should not be compensated $311,000. Hardly respectable (unless you are the CEO). Looks like this charity was set up to make money for the top executives. It's legal, but it's wrong. Do you think a CEO and the executive board of, say, McDonalds making millions upon millions in salary and tangible benefits is respectable? They line their pockets with the profits from slaving their workers for less-than-living wages, and have the public pick up the slack by providing medicaid/food stamps/other subsidies.. Tell me why it's wrong for aomeone in charge of running a multi,multi million-dollar charity that benefits veterans to have a salary of roughly one-tenth of what a for-profit CEO would make? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rickjump1 0 #10 November 15, 2013 BigMikeH77Quotethe CEO should not be compensated $311,000. Hardly respectable (unless you are the CEO). Looks like this charity was set up to make money for the top executives. It's legal, but it's wrong. Do you think a CEO and the executive board of, say, McDonalds making millions upon millions in salary and tangible benefits is respectable? They line their pockets with the profits from slaving their workers for less-than-living wages, and have the public pick up the slack by providing medicaid/food stamps/other subsidies.. Tell me why it's wrong for aomeone in charge of running a multi,multi million-dollar charity that benefits veterans to have a salary of roughly one-tenth of what a for-profit CEO would make? McDonalds? Slave workers? Call your congressmen. It's called charity- 1: "full of love for and goodwill toward or love of humanity". You can call it a business, but not a charity. It's already been pointed out that some of the CEOs of the largest charities receive zero compensation.Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LouDiamond 1 #11 November 15, 2013 To throw even more salt on the wound, WWF is also anti 2nd Amendment and will not openly support any organization related to hunting, shooting, etc raising money for veterans, yet they will accept contributions from these same organizations all day long. If you want to donate to good organizations, two that are highly recommended and have helped veterans out considerably with the disbursement of funds are; The Green Beret foundation : http://www.greenberetfoundation.org Special Operations Warrior Foundation: http://www.specialops.org"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required" Some people dream about flying, I live my dream SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BIGUN 1,230 #12 November 15, 2013 While I do not not fault non-profits for paying high salaries to the top-level executives, there are percentage thresholds that indicate what percent of the money is going to research/help. In short, 1) WWP kinda lost its way on the percentages and got called on it, 2) the Obama administration bailed them out by helping to adjust those percentages through a federal donation program via government employees - and, it's not a hard leap to see the quid pro quo exchange for the 2nd amendment. Read these to get some history: http://www.military-money-matters.com/wounded-warrior-project-tax-returns-analyzed.html#axzz2CRWXIdJg http://gunsnplanes.blogspot.com/2012/11/wounded-warrior-project-rejects-gun.html This was on their website last year: WWP is proud to be a part of the Combined Federal Campaign (CFC). The mission of the CFC is to promote and support philanthropy through a program that is employee-focused, cost-efficient, and effective in providing all federal employees with the opportunity to improve the quality of life for all. WWP's CFC is #11425. This is the new version: http://www.woundedwarriorproject.org/donate/combined-federal-campaign.aspx FROM an email to WWP (Note: this is from last year) WWP does not co-brand, create cause marketing campaigns or receive a percentage or a portion of proceeds from companies in which the product or message is sexual, political or religious in nature, or from alcohol or firearms companies. Thank you for your inquiry. LESLIE A. COLEMAN Public Relations Director O: 904.405.1433 M: 904.654.8138 F: 904.296.7347 Wounded Warrior Project 4899 Belfort Road, Suite 300 Jacksonville, Florida 32256 And, if you visit their website; they retain the services of a direct ad-marketing firm Scroll to the bottom of this page: https://support.woundedwarriorproject.org/default.aspx?tsid=66&campaignSource=WEBSITE&source=ONLINE You'll see the banner ad for this firm: http://www.charityengine.net/ Money that could be better spent on the WW's.Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rickjump1 0 #13 November 15, 2013 I'm done (effective this afternoon) with Wounded Warrior Project. I will continue giving "carefully" to others helping veterans.Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tkhayes 265 #14 November 16, 2013 http://www.bbb.org/charity-reviews/national/veterans-and-military/wounded-warrior-project-in-jacksonville-fl-3806 Thumbs up from the BBB as well. Lots of charities are very very large organizations. That takes manpower. A recent Wounded Warrior Project Golf tournament was probably the largest demo we ever jumped into, tens of thousands of people at a golf tournament at a ritzy place in Tampa. Golf tournaments are often high-dollar events, with rich people. If you want to rub elbows with those rich people to get them interested in your charity, then arguably you need to be part of that 'class' to access them. 84% of their collections going to their programs sounds pretty reasonable to me looking at the worst charities below.... Your choice whether or not they are worth it. If you don't like it then don't donate - that simple. there are far worse charities out there and simple searches can help you discern. http://www.tampabay.com/americas-worst-charities/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnMitchell 16 #15 November 16, 2013 Remster Did you think 100% of any donation to any charity go to the cause they serve? Leap for Lupus Foundation does just that. Last year we raised and gave over $20K to the University of Washington for Lupus research. Of course, we're a small charity, all volunteer and funded out-of-pocket (mostly mine ). 100% of the money raised in our annual gear raffle, wonderfully supported by the gear manufacturers and dealers, goes directly to research. Even our t-shirts are purchased and silk screened by Valinda and me. Beer at the boogie? Sometimes donated, sometimes I just buy it myself.Our sole payout is when people make a Leap for Lupus tandem jump after collecting $500 or more in donations, similar to a walk-a-thon. Then, of course, we have to pay the DZ for that jump. But most DZO's are very good at giving us a great discount rate. I think they appreciate what we're doing. I always say "If you have too much spare time and money, start up a non-profit charity. That will take care of both." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Duckwater 0 #16 November 18, 2013 I find that most 'charities' are in business to keep themselves in business…. I have had cancer, there is no cure, but people donate millions to "awareness"…All the $$$ donated to live strong and Komen could have been better spent elsewhere Cancer screening should be free for everyone anyway…. I was in First Class (on passes) on AA one day and sat next to the CEO of St Judes. He told me they have only like 70 beds… I found out later he made 800 grand a year. All he does is fly around in first class begging for $$$…. How can he live with himself with that salary knowing people who donated are thinking they are helping sick kids? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 724 #17 November 18, 2013 "not for profit" simply means you have to spend all you take in. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Phil1111 1,084 #18 November 18, 2013 WickedWingsuits******Did you think 100% of any donation to any charity go to the cause they serve? To me, it looks like the analysis of their performance is respectable. http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=12842#.UoZJnPmxd8F Not 100%, and the CEO should not be compensated $311,000. Hardly respectable (unless you are the CEO). Looks like this charity was set up to make money for the top executives. It's legal, but it's wrong. [url]http://asknod.wordpress.com/2013/08/19/wounded-warriors-project-a-scam/ Why shouldn't someone running and expanding a business be compensated well? Do you think you get the best from industry by paying peanuts? A non-profit is still a business you know. I like to see executive pay tied to performance but you don't tend to be able to slack at the top very long. The last few years have been hard on charities and keeping some even afloat has been a challenge. WRONG! A charity non profit is not a business. its a charity. Its purpose is to to collect funds for the designated purposes as set out in the charter. It doesn't have "competition per say. Doesn't have shareholders to answer to. Typically doesn't have bondholders and debts to service, etc. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,318 #19 November 18, 2013 They are a form of business. I think some salaries are abusive, but a well-run charity will be more effective than a poorly-run charity. And one way to get a well-run charity is to pay someone who's good at running them. 2 primary measures of a charity include its effectiveness in addressing whatever cause it addresses, and the amount of money that it spends on addressing the cause vs. administration, advertising and salaries. The numbers of well-run charities are normally public (it might be part of its being a 501(c)3 -- I don't know), and they can be compared. If you think that a low-paid CEO is important, here is a list of 10 with low-paid CEO's. Personally, I think effectiveness and overall administration vs. income are the best judges; after all, an overpaid CEO probably will drive that second number down noticeably, putting it beyond a good evaluation regardless. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
davjohns 1 #20 November 18, 2013 I can't get to the link from work. I'm trying to recall where I got it from...but generally a not-for-profit is not considered heavy in overhead until they are over 25%. ARC President is close to seven figures in salary. You haven't been snookered....anymore than anyone else who donates to large organizations. If you really want to make a difference, visit any retirement home, veterans home, etc. during the holidays. Take the children if they are well behaved. Call ahead of time to ask the staff what little gifts you could bring. Socks, lap blankets, large print books, etc are nice. It teaches the kids a great lesson and the folks there appreciate it. You don't get to write it off, but it really hits home.I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,318 #21 November 18, 2013 Yep. Loneliness and feelings of irrelevance are two things that many old and/or disabled people really fight. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BIGUN 1,230 #22 November 18, 2013 DuckwaterI find that most 'charities' are in business to keep themselves in business…. I have had cancer, there is no cure, but people donate millions to "awareness"…All the $$$ donated to live strong and Komen could have been better spent elsewhere Cancer screening should be free for everyone anyway…. I was in First Class (on passes) on AA one day and sat next to the CEO of St Judes. He told me they have only like 70 beds… I found out later he made 800 grand a year. All he does is fly around in first class begging for $$$…. How can he live with himself with that salary knowing people who donated are thinking they are helping sick kids? Partly true. http://www.stjude.org/stjude/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=8310ef5d00670110VgnVCM1000001e0215acRCRD&cpsextcurrchannel=1 They help approximately 65,000 children a year. Couple of highlights: Since St. Jude was established, the survival rate for acute lymphoblastic leukemia, the most common type of childhood cancer, has increased from 4 percent in 1962 to 94 percent today. All medically eligible patients who are accepted for treatment at St. Jude are treated without regard to the family's ability to pay. St. Jude is one of a few pediatric research organizations in the United States where families never pay for treatments that are not covered by insurance, and families without insurance are never asked to pay. In addition to providing medical services to eligible patients, St. Jude also assists families with transportation, lodging, and meals. Three separate specially-designed patient housing facilities—Grizzly House for short-term (up to one week), Ronald McDonald House for medium-term (one week to 3 months), and Target House for long-term (3 months or more)—provide housing for patients and up to three family members, with no cost to the patient. These policies, along with research expenses and other costs, cause the hospital to incur more than $1.8 million in operating costs each day. SOURCE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Jude_Children%27s_Research_Hospital EDIT: In short; the CEO is responsible for an ~$657,000,000 annual budget. In lieu of presents to each other at Christmas; my family donates money to them each year. Been a family tradition since the 60'sNobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Phil1111 1,084 #23 November 18, 2013 wmw999They are a form of business. I think some salaries are abusive, but a well-run charity will be more effective than a poorly-run charity. And one way to get a well-run charity is to pay someone who's good at running them. 2 primary measures of a charity include its effectiveness in addressing whatever cause it addresses, and the amount of money that it spends on addressing the cause vs. administration, advertising and salaries. The numbers of well-run charities are normally public (it might be part of its being a 501(c)3 -- I don't know), and they can be compared. If you think that a low-paid CEO is important, here is a list of 10 with low-paid CEO's. Personally, I think effectiveness and overall administration vs. income are the best judges; after all, an overpaid CEO probably will drive that second number down noticeably, putting it beyond a good evaluation regardless. Wendy P. Without beating a dead horse. The definition of a business is to operate a commercial enterprise to earn a profit to return such profits to the owner/shareholders. All of which is strictly excluded from a charity. The Harvard Business Review, Wall St. Journal, etc. have all published many studies that show NO link between Executive compensation and performance. In addition other studies have shown that it often leads to excessive risk taking and short term objectives vr. long term goals. Setting aside all the examples of CEO's that bankrupt or destroy companies and yet still walk away with the "golden parachute". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,318 #24 November 18, 2013 QuoteThe definition of a business is to operate a commercial enterprise to earn a profit to return such profits to the owner/shareholders. All of which is strictly excluded from a charity.And the definition of a charity is an enterprise that tries to maximize the value of its donations and assets to benefit its cause (as opposed to stockholders). I agree there's often no connection between executive compensation and performance -- at some levels. It'd be foolish to promote someone who was recently a janitor simply because they come cheap. There are tons of examples of charities that have had assets and/or income siphoned off by either incompetent or dishonest employees. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,294 #25 November 20, 2013 rickjump1***Did you think 100% of any donation to any charity go to the cause they serve? To me, it looks like the analysis of their performance is respectable. http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=12842#.UoZJnPmxd8F Not 100%, and the CEO should not be compensated $311,000. Hardly respectable (unless you are the CEO). Looks like this charity was set up to make money for the top executives. It's legal, but it's wrong. [url]http://asknod.wordpress.com/2013/08/19/wounded-warriors-project-a-scam/ I don't know anything about WWP, so cannot comment on that. However I don't agree with the above premise. You cannot only look at CEO pay. As a non-profit would you not be better off with a leader, making $350,000 per year, being succesful in driving donations to $10,000,000, than a volunteer leader who can drive donations to $2,000,000? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites