What charities do you dislike and why?

[OmahaBlueDog]

I saw this graphic circulating. Note that I do not necessarily endorse the graphic and I have not vetted it for truthfulness...



Suffice to say, there are some bad actors in charity. What charities are your least favorite and why?

Also..comments on the graphic are welcomed and encouraged.

[Katashi_itto]

1. I despise United Way and Komen

[MurrayDelph]

46. I started refusing to give to United Way over 30 years ago

(before the Boy Scouts was unmasked as a hate group).

Back then, they had this program that they called "Your Fair Share," where they looked at your payroll information and determined how much they thought you should give. As someone who was not a public official, I informed them that my payroll was only of interest to myself, my employer, and the tax collector.

I always wondered whether the corporate rep who was responsible for getting us to contribute was either under pressure or getting some sort of reward, as they were always huffy towards those of us who didn't contribute.

I also believe that the very large (multinational) corporations I worked for back then would sit on the donated amounts for a very long time, and then send the donations in a lump sum (pocketing the interest back to the company).

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

52. "Huffy"? no kidding ...

... decline the deduction, and you work your way up the corporate ladder, meeting higher-level huffiness at each stage.

The big three automakers were like the mafia when it came to United Way.

[AngryOldDem]

71. That's exactly why I refuse to donate to United Way.

It pissed me off that they would base an "expected" contribution on what I was making.

I make my own decisions about to whom to donate.

I make my own decisions about how much to donate.

I make my own decisions about when to donate.

All United Way is is a way to make employers look good to the community when they hit the high participation numbers. That is NOT a reason to contribute to any charity. And I refuse to be strong-armed into doing so.

I detest United Way, almost for as long as you've not been donating to it.

[MurrayDelph]

79. That's what I told them

that my "fair share" was whatever the hell I felt like giving, and IF I gave, their responsibility was to say thank you, regardless of the amount.

[Buns_of_Fire]

108. The company I was working for was very heavy-handed about it.

Attendance-required company meetings (yes, attendance was taken), crap like that.

About the time of the Aramony scandal ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Aramony ), I decided that they didn't need my pittance.

A little later, during their yearly drive, a fellow peon happened upon a printout that an intern had left on the copier -- it was a list of everyone who hadn't given their "fair share", to be copied and distributed to all department managers. Why? Never found out (although rumors, as usual, spread very quickly).

That was the day I decided that there was no way in hell that the national organization would ever see a penny of my money ever again. If I ever had the money, it would go directly to the local chapters (who, by and large, were pretty upfront about their expenses), or, better still, to the individual charities.

[hamsterjill]

118. I worked for a company that was much the same way.

Heavy-handed about it is a good way of describing it. Rolls were also taken at meetings and if you chose not to give "your fair share" you could expect a visit from someone in the personnel office asking if you really, really didn't want to give.

I refused and made it known that I would be quite upset to think that I might be passed over for promotions, etc. because I refused to give to a designated charity so that the employer could be glorified by United Way for giving "their fair share".

At first, I was the only employee who refused to give. I stood my ground. Then, someone in the accounting office figured out that the employees who were paid weekly were having their deductions taken out on a weekly basis. Those amounts sat in the employer's bank account, drawing interest, until the end of the month, when the check was cut to the United Way (sans interest). At this point, once word of that was made known, there were actually several other employees who stopped their United Way deductions.

I have, and hopefully always will have the means to, support local charities that *I* choose to support. I don't want a corporation telling me that I have to support something that I don't believe in. By supporting local charities, I can watch and see how my donations are used, etc.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

53. I stopped giving to Komen after the kerfuffle

now I funnel the same money to Planned Parenthood.

I hope it does some bit of good.

[FarPoint]

65. So do I....No more Komen or anything pink.

That was a distressing moment for me....I felt used!

[CitizenLeft]

92. I used to be a big-time donor to United Way

When I started out with the big company I used to work for, I gave $15 a pay. Over the course of 19 years, while my salary grew, I gave more and more. During the last 6-7 years, I was giving $75 a pay. Not from pressure, but because I thought I was doing good.

That went on for years. Then I got laid off, lost my Mom, with whom I lived and had a nice pension, which meant my income dropped 65%. Lost two more jobs after that at the beginning of the recession, and almost lost my home. During that time, I called United Way for help twice, once to save the collapsing roof on my house, and the second time to save the house itself from foreclosure. I got ZERO help from them. They gave me generic phone #'s to other organizations, who also did zip to help me.

Now that I'm sort of on my feet again and working for a big organization, I'm being constantly asked to contribute. Not. Ever. Again.

Edit to add: when I was comfortable and giving money to other charities monthly (Care, PETA, WWF, Oxfam, UNCF, City Mission, ASPCA, HSUS), I was also giving to Disabled Vets. I'm glad to see them on that chart and in the "worthy" section.

Oh yeah, and one more thing... as broke as I always am these days, I can't resist the bell-swinging Santas every Christmas season. I might only have a few quarters to spare, but in they go into that red pot, if I can do it.

[AngryOldDem]

96. I put some bucks in the pot as well.

Yeah, I know...SA is rather persona non grata around here. But in the city where I used to live they did yeoman's work in getting homeless people (especially families) out of the shelter and into temporary and eventually permanent housing. The shelter could not have done a lot of its work without the SA, and I saw first-hand a lot of people who were greatly helped by SA's efforts.

And before anyone jumps, they did not discriminate -- if they had the housing, they were putting folks into it. Period.

[HERVEPA]

2. March of dimes (animal testing), Susan Komen, United Way,

Starvation Army

[Raine]

78. I absolutely won't give to any that do animal testing! nt

[Deep13]

81. Of course they do animal testing.

They need real scientific answers, not slogans and alternative hocus pocus. If you want to cure disease in humans, you need to use test animals. The idea that they are useable alternatives to that is a lie spread by that fanatic Ingrid Newkirk. And don't fool yourself. A decision not to use test animals is very much a decision to allow your friends and relatives to suffer from disease instead.

[Liberal Veteran]

86. As far as I know, pretty much EVERY prescription drug is tested on animals first.

It really is a no win situation with pharmaceutical research. Someone is always going to be pissed off. "You test on animals! You monster!" "My baby has flippers! Why didn't you monsters test this drug on animals first?"

[Deep13]

120. +1

[CrawlingChaos]

132. The March of Dimes = vivisectionists

In other words, the most unspeakably cruel practices.

You can learn about humane alternatives to animal testing here: http://www.pcrm.org/research/

Everything isn't about Ingrid Newkirk and Peta, for crying out loud.

[Deep13]

140. If there are alternatives, why do scientists use animals?

Seriously, keeping thousands of mice or whatever has got to be the most pain in the ass thing even. And Newkirk is the most vocal, and so far most effective, animal rights absolutist.

The website you provide appears to be ideologically, rather than scientifically, driven. If you are aware of any peer-reviewed scholarly articles on the subject, I would like to know about it.

[CrawlingChaos]

142. Seriously, that's your argument?

The fact that an industry continues to cling to old methods should be taken as evidence there cannot be be a better, more humane way? That is the most backwards logic imaginable.

Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine is a highly regarded group of doctors and scientists dedicated to promoting humane methods of research. It is entirely science-based.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

3. Guns For Tots

Especially their slogan "An armed preschool is a polite preschool".

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

54. got a link? nt

[Pretzel_Warrior]

56. here you go

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-may-12-2005/banned-aid

From the way back machine

[BlueJazz]

68. LOL!!

[eqfan592]

4. The CEO of The Red Cross would be making SIGNIFICANTLY more in a for profit corporation.

Over 90% of donations go directly to program expenses.

Meanwhile, at least one of your "Green" charities actively discriminates against the LGBT community. Color me 100% unimpressed with your list.

[bettyellen]

64. the Red Cross was a fraud riddled mess during Katrina- millions of dollars dissappeared, most

donations given to Katrina went to a "fund" for later use instead of where it was sorely needed. People wanted to - and thought they were helping Katrina victims, it was misleading.
They actually blocked locals from doing their own boat rescues and food distribution when areas were already doing a good job, and forced them to stop and get less help from green volunteers who knew less about what was needed.
They have been too political for my liking, hiring Libby Dole and all. No thank you.

[eqfan592]

89. Sorry, but I don't buy what you're selling.

While there were some investigations into fraud related issues, that's not all that unusual with an organization as large as the Red Cross, and they responded by changing their policy and ensuring that volunteers in critical situations received appropriate background checks.

And the rest of your post is either unsupported hearsay or issues that are nearly 2 decades in the past.

[Aerows]

102. I went through Katrina

and my families business repaired Red Cross vehicles. I can tell you first hand that there is a good bit of fraud in the Red Cross.

[eqfan592]

103. They acknowledged the fraud during Katrina.

The national org seems to be the source of the issues, and even those are over blown. Never once witnessed any fraud while working with them in the mid 2000's.

[Aerows]

104. You didn't look very hard then

Just saying.

[eqfan592]

107. I was a first responder.

I helped to make sure people got taken care of once they had lost everything. And at least at my local chapter I never once even smelled a whiff of fraud. I'm not saying it never happens, but I am saying that these stories get way over blown. And that's a good thing to a degree, because they SHOULD be held to the highest standard.

But people who can't be reasonable and would rather rip on a non discriminatory organization that helps millions of people each year aren't worth a shit in my book.

Just sayin.

[Aerows]

109. I was there first hand

two and a half weeks after the storm, a Red Cross truck came by and asked "Ya'll need any water?" If we had, by the time they got there we'd have been dead. They tried to get out of paying for repairs that were done on their vehicles, as well.

The Red Cross does some good things in this world, but they also have some poor managers of their services. To be fair, it was such hell after Katrina that we might as well have been living in a third world country for weeks.

[KittyWampus]

112. backing you up on the Red Cross, too heavily connected to republicans, too many scandals.

As I've read many times, they are first in for the photos ops and first out after the initial press rush.

[eqfan592]

115. The entire Katrina response was a massive cluster fuck.

Yes, the Red Cross is expected to respond, but there's a certain amount of help from organizations like FEMA that is expected to go along with that, because there are some situations that the Red Cross isn't equipped to handle, and that hindered things a great deal.

[KittyWampus]

130. Oh, it was much, much more than just Katrina.

[bettyellen]

133. don't give a damn about your book, you are biased because of your former employment there.

that is pretty obvious. I guess you missed a lot about the admitted fraud and scandals, while you were cashing those checks.

[eqfan592]

137. I was a volunteer. And that's not the only topic you're completely ignorant on.

Ignore.

[el_bryanto]

5. You'll get in trouble for having the Salvation Army up there. nt

[eqfan592]

7. For very good reasons. nt

[OmahaBlueDog]

17. As I state in the post -- it's not "my" list

it's a graphic that's circulating.

[oldhippie]

59. That doesn't matter .....

.... you circulated it here.

[OmahaBlueDog]

139. So if I circulate a graphic the "Mona Lisa" that makes it mine? I think not.

Lots of folks here on DU circulate articles and graphics that originated elsewhere.

My motive was to start discussion. I clearly stated I didn't necessarily endorse and hadn't vetted the graphic.

I've been on the flip side of that as well when I posted graphic and photos I obviously didn't take and got 300+ recs.

[frazzled]

6. I think that chart is very unfair

I'm not opposed to the directors of large charities getting salaries, even large ones (if it's proportional to the size and complexity of the organization). Note that the low or no-salary organizations listed in the top row of the second category are all pretty right-wing. Some are known to discriminate. Some involve themselves in political activity (I'm thinking of you VFW, when you endorsed the Republican, who had never even been in the military, over Tammy Duckworth, an actual wounded veteran of a foreign war.)

I judge charities more by what they actually accomplish with the monies they collect. And for all the controversy about executive director pay, the Red Cross usually does manage to provide disaster relief on a large scale.

I like it when charities or organizations actually tell me what they're doing. So, for instance, I donate to Southern Poverty Law Center, and they are very good about letting you know how they're spending your money. They actually do stuff. I also give to Diabetes research (whatever it's called), because I've had a lot of people in my family with that disease. But you know what? I haven't seen much advancement whatsoever from their efforts. I'm not sure it's really a good use of my limited funds. Maybe it would be better to give to an organization that helps people with diabetes directly, with equipment and testing.

[eqfan592]

15. Very well said. +1. nt

[NuclearDem]

8. We have a homeless shelter here in Indy that I refuse to donate to.

It's a Christian organization that mandates religious services for the people it takes in.

[BlueStreak]

9. Sorry, I cannot support the Salvation Army

And it is not just because of their stance on gays (I am straight, but I don't like their position on that.) It is the whole premise of the organization that "salvation" is a thing, and that they are helping people by forcing them to comply with that cult behavior if they want any shelter or food.

How about just helping people?

[OnionPatch]

73. Yep, this irks me as well.

I really hate that so many religious organizations use "helping the poor" as a way to recruit people. I know not all of them do this but I have first hand experience of this from my childhood when my family went through some hard times.

I think this actually plays into why conservatives hate our social safety net. People getting help without having to get "the Lord", too?! Positively evil!

[Deep13]

82. Agreed. One can help without the indocrination. nt

[mucifer]

84. and they put a lot of pressure on their employees to go to church

[octoberlib]

10. Komen. Less than 12% of their donations actually go towards finding a cure.

In fact a documentary was made about it.

Breast cancer has become the poster child of corporate cause-related marketing campaigns. Countless women and men walk, bike, climb and shop for the cure. Each year, millions of dollars are raised in the name of breast cancer, but where does this money go and what does it actually achieve? Pink Ribbons, Inc. is a feature documentary that shows how the devastating reality of breast cancer, which marketing experts have labelled a "dream cause," becomes obfuscated by a shiny, pink story of success.

[OmahaBlueDog]

11. Komen has been a brilliant marketing campaign

My sense is that American Cancer Society is still the charity of choice for fighting any form of cancer.

[eqfan592]

18. The info on Charity Navigator disagrees with your 12% claim...

... http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=4509#.UrCKC_RAG2Y

Tho perhaps they are just doing some clever working of the books?

And for those interested, here's the ACS:

http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=6495#.UrCKDPRAG2Z

[octoberlib]

27. (Percent of the charity’s budget spent on the programs and services it delivers)

This could cover a lot of things and charity navigator doesn't go into specifics. I got the 12% claim form the documentary. It contains interviews with a lot of prominent breast cancer researchers who are extremely frustrated with the lack of funding.

[eqfan592]

31. That wouldn't shock me at all.

Just thought off share the info.

[BlueStreak]

97. Right. Their funding is all over the map.

I suppose most of it is "breast cancer-related" by some stretch, but if you are interested in seeing your money go into hard research for the cure (Isn't that Komen's slogan?) don't put your money there.

[pinboy3niner]

12. I've never heard of "The Vietnam Veterans Association"

The principal national organization of Vietnam veterans is VVA--Vietnam Veterans of America.

The fact that the graphic is so skewed toward vets' orgs is one clue that it's BS. Sources that evaluate charities, like Charity Navigator, are much better sources of information.

http://www.charitynavigator.org/

[Delphinus]

99. Thanks for this link

to charitynavigator.org. I'll check it out.

[Fla Dem]

135. I was just going to post the Charity Navigator link when I saw your post. Great site. nt

[eqfan592]

13. Also, your chart has some outright factual errors.

For example, 100% of donations do NOT go to program expenses for Make a Wish. It's actually 72.6%.

http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=4038#.UrCH6fRAG2Y

Similar Story for St. Jude.

http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=12847#.UrCI3PRAG2Y

I'm sure investigating the others would find similar discrepancies. Tho you can't find the info for orgs like The Salvation Army on there because it's a religious organization and they are exempt.

[BlueStreak]

14. There are many really good charities that need our support

http://www.charitynavigator.org/

[Wait Wut]

22. Heh...

...you beat me to it downthread.

Great site!

[FatBuddy]

16. there is no dignity in charity

social and economic justice allow create dignity.

[el_bryanto]

26. There's precious little dignity in going hungry or being homeless to begin with nt

[FatBuddy]

32. yes

that is why social and economic justice are of vital importance. so is the concept of the common weal.

[sammythecat]

48. I hear ya

Charities are a sign of a dysfunctional society. Around here if you go into one of the little convenience stores there's always a jar on the counter with a little sign telling the story of a child in need of a transplant or someone else victimized by misfortune. It's a shame they have to beg for change from strangers. Obviously it's wonderful that some give but it doesn't seem right that these people have to hope and beg for help and then be indebted to the givers. Like you say, it's a matter of dignity.

We'll probably never have a utopia, but it should be the goal we work toward. Lately we've been sliding back in the wrong direction year by year.

[lame54]

19. The lame54 foundation...

cause nobody's given a damn cent

[pinboy3niner]

23. Well damn, why haven't you made a graphic and circulated it yet?

Time's a-wastin'!

[Wait Wut]

20. This is a site that I find helpful:

http://www.charitynavigator.org/?bay=topten

I linked to the 'Top 10' page for the options.

[sharp_stick]

21. Snopes has a lengthy reply

to this.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/charities.asp

[OmahaBlueDog]

38. Thanks!

..even though Snopes is a mouthpiece for the Obama administration that is funded by George Soros

[BlueStreak]

41. While the SNopes data differs from the graphic, it is still damning

in most cases. OK, an exec "only" makes $700K instead of $1.2M. We're supposed to feel better about that? These are people who depend on the charity of others a lot less well off than the execs. They should act like a charity.

Screw them all. No charity should be compensating their execs at more than 10 times the poverty level.

And what about their explanation of the Goodwill stores? They seemed to excuse that as "Oh they are franchise outlets". How does that make things better? I have been wondering how they could open up big stores all over the city, and now I know. They basically franchise these stores to independent operators who are able to draw their own big salaries out of the operations while treating it as a tax-free charity. If I donate $100 worth of good, how much of that actually goes into a program that benefits a needy person? I bet less than a nickel once you pay all the people in this multi-layer structure. Bad as Awway, it seems.

[eqfan592]

90. OH what bullshit.

Some of these organizations are massive, with hundreds of millions (or even billions) in terms of assets that need to be effectively managed in order to meet their stated purpose. Somebody taking on that sort of job making a high salary (tho MUCH less than they would outside of a charity) is something I have no issue with.

Sorry, but get over yourself.

[BlueStreak]

98. There are plenty of qualified people who would be willing to do this

at a salary commensurate with a charity. What is BULLSHIT is the idea that the CEO does everything himself or herself. The CEO is a leader. The CEO doesn't carry out every task personally, and the CEO doesn't have to have every possible skill ever known to mankind.

There are lots of people with senior executive experience who either have retired, or have reached a point in their career where they have way more money than needed to retire, and might be looking for something more fulfilling in their lives.

But the big charities are an old boy network. They are getting fat on these huge compensation packages that are barely different from the for-profit world. And none of the good old boys wants to be known as the charity that started the trend toward treating the ENTIRE operation as a charity.

If an exec is getting a million bucks or "just" $700,000 a year, this ain't no charity. There is no reason why the biggest charities can't find solid CEOs willing to work for $250,000 a year or less -- *IF* they wanted to. They don't want to. They want to keep that gravy train rolling.

[eqfan592]

105. yeah, ok then.

Anybody who thinks a CEO of an organization that manages over $1.5 BILLION in assets yet makes less than a million a year in compensation is anywhere close to what a private sector CEO of a similar sized corp makes is disconnected with reality.

[BlueStreak]

111. I never said that. I said they are charities

and they ought to act like it. I said there are plenty of qualified people with excellent executive experience who would be willing to serve in a charity for wages that are more in keeping with the concept of it being a charity -- you know, one of those places that depends on the generosity of people making $50,000 a year.

It is an old boy network that has nothing to do with charity. They are just money machines and the people at the top make sure they get theirs. I wouldn't give a nickel to an organization that pays their top people a half million bucks a year.

Here is what real charities pay their leaders.
http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=topten.detail&listid=92

Here is what "charity scams" look like.
http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=topten.detail&listid=8

Yes, I agree the leader of Red Cross carries a heavier load than the Brazos County Food Bank. But $250,000 ought to be enough to get a well experienced, highly qualified executive to head an organization like the Red Cross. Obviously such a person should be able to make more in a for-profit industry, but that is completely irrelevant. These are charities and there are a lot of qualified people who are willing to serve a worthy charity for a lot less than a million bucks a year.

[eqfan592]

117. Lets just do some math, shall we?

The number one "real charity," as you called them, is International Crisis Aid. Their total revenue is $1,649,015, expenses $1,524,388. CEO compensation is $48,463, or 3.17% of expenses.

The American Red Cross has a total revenue of $3,154,538,043, expenses of $3,329,153,707, and CEO compensation of $591,122, or 0.01% of expenses.

How that is, in your book, an unacceptable level of compensation, when even by the metrics YOU provided, the Red Crosses CEO is taking up several orders of magnitude fewer available resources to their organization than the one for International Crisis Aid, is completely baffling to me.

If the CEO of ICA were making the same percentage as the CEO of the Red Cross, they'd be making $152 a year.

EDIT: BTW, companies that are valued in the same range as the Red Cross have CEO's that are paid literally around 10 times the amount the Red Cross pays theirs.

[BlueStreak]

121. What difference does any of that make?

Do you understand what the word "Charity" means?

[eqfan592]

122. Yes, in fact i do.

And working for an organization at one tenth the salary you'd otherwise be qualified for isn't half bad in my book.

[tenderfoot]

24. Eduardo Galeano on Charity...

"I don't believe in charity. I believe in solidarity. Charity is vertical, so it's humiliating. It goes from the top to the bottom. Solidarity is horizontal. It respects the other and learns from the other. I have a lot to learn from other people."

I happen to agree with him.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

51. Solidarity is better, that's true ...

... but we don't have it.

Charity is second best.

It still beats doing nothing (Republicanism).

[bettyellen]

63. when I donate to the local shelter, it goes horizontally across town six blocks...

and the food gets served ASAP....sounds like solidarity to me.

[sinkingfeeling]

25. Don't think I'd use that as a guide. Best charities rank UNICEF as a B+.

[jberryhill]

28. The Punch A Kitten Foundation

For $5, they will punch a kitten.

I don't like that.

They should lower it to $1.

[FSogol]

34. LOL

[Johonny]

45. +1

[catbyte]

29. I wish that Salvation Army wasn't so rabidly anti-gay. I just cannot support that.

[Common Sense Party]

30. Laughably inaccurate. One glance at what it says about Goodwill

is enough to know that this is all internet B.S.

Goodwill: Goodwill Industries International is not a business that takes in donated items and resells them for a profit. It is a not-for-profit organization that provides job training, employment placement services and other community-based programs for people who have disabilities, lack education or job experience, or face employment challenges. Goodwill raises money for their programs through a chain of thrift stores which also operate as non-profits.

The CEO of Goodwill Industries International is not Mark Curran, nor does he make $2.3 million a year. The current President and CEO of Goodwill is Jim Gibbons, who in 2011 received a total reported compensation of $725,000.
Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/charities.asp#2BwdcU1XmFJ1Lw3a.99

[KamaAina]

37. Goodwill pays some of its disabled workers far less than minimum wage

in some cases as little as 22 cents per hour, which is comparable to what prisoners make.

This is all perfectly legal with the use of something called a Section 14(c) subminimum wage certificate.

[shraby]

33. The Red Cross and the March of Dimes

The Red Cross because I found out from my father who was at the Battle of the Bulge that the Red Cross served donuts and coffee during the war near the front lines, and charged them for the donuts and coffee.

The March of Dimes because in the 1960s the newspaper published the salary of the head mucky muck. He made over $60,000 per year way back then and my husband made $9,000 per year, and they were asking ME for dimes. It takes a lot of dimes just to pay the $60,000. I never gave them another one, and never will.

[KamaAina]

36. My NOLA friend told me the Red Cross sold bread during Hurricane Betsy

[brooklynite]

42. So you don't like the Red Cross because of a policy they had in 1944?

[shraby]

69. My father was the victim of their policy.

and his was the life on the line every day, not theirs. People in the states were under the impression they were doing good for the men in uniform. All a lie..and no one much knew until they came home.

[brooklynite]

70. And if any of the implementers of that policy are still alive...

...feel free to hold them responsible. But since they're all dead, maybe you should think about what the new management is doing?

[eqfan592]

91. Some people can't let go of shit.

And because of that, some of them put their money into an organization that is rabidly anti-gay and discriminatory.

But hey, they were "on the front lines" with "Free coffee" back in the day, so I guess that totally makes up for it.

[Warpy]

62. My father remembered that bitterly, too

but as I recall it was because of a kerfluffle between the US Red Cross and the European organization.

The Salvation Army came in with the free coffee and donuts so that's where my dad's money went over the years.

I don't donate much to Aunt Sally because they are phobes, but I do in the memory of a friend they pulled out of extreme poverty and for my dad.

[Mariana]

67. The March of Dimes used to say they would disband

when polio had been solved. We see how that went.

[Raine]

77. My father too & he never forgot it, neither have I. Since then there are things just as bad

that makes me never ever willing to give to them.

[marybourg]

87. I heard the same story from 2 uncles,

one who landed on D-day and one who took islands in the Pacific, except that the R.C. was not near the front lines, but way back at Command HQ. The Sally Army, on the other hand were crawling up the beaches on their hands and knees right behind the troops, so the uncles both said. That's powerful stuff and I've been inclined to support their disaster relief efforts ever since.

[KamaAina]

35. Ugh. Salvation Army.

Homophobia 'R Us.

[moondust]

39. Chart looks like bullshit.

Where did it come from? Link?

Charity Navigator gives 4/4 stars to UNICEF and says the CEO makes less than half of what this chart claims. A Rolls Royce? Gimme a break.

UNICEF itself says this:

Anonymous emails claim that the U.S. Fund for UNICEF's CEO earns more than $1 million and has use of a Rolls Royce. These assertions are false.

As President and CEO of the U.S. Fund for UNICEF, Caryl Stern earns $454,855.00. She does not have a company car; she drives a 2007 Prius which she purchased in 2009.

The chart appears to heavily favor former military, which could be an indication that it was put together by RW nutbags trying to steer donations to their favorites.



Also, when did Veterans of Foreign Wars become a charity? In my experience it's a fraternal organization where old war vets can go to tell war stories and drown their bad memories in alcohol.

[lumberjack_jeff]

40. Shitty metrics for evaluating charity effectiveness.

When disaster strikes, it's the Red Cross that rolls into town, not the American Legion.

[eqfan592]

93. Bingo.

A lot of folks do realize all the small disasters the Red Cross responds to. The vast majority of times I got called out to respond when I was a volunteer we were responding to house or apartment fires, helping out folks who very often lost everything. Some of the most worthwhile work I ever did.

[lumberjack_jeff]

43. Donate locally.

Very little of your donation to major national organizations make it to the community level. If you're interested in youth, donate to your local YMCA, not the national organization - same with The Red Cross or the United Way.

[SomethingFishy]

49. +1.. Food Banks are also good...

There are plenty of ways to help without helping someone make 6 or 7 figures for doing "charity" work.

This thread reminds me of the days when I used to do lighting for "society" functions. A bunch of rich people get together and spend 3 million on a lavish party to raise $100,000 for "charity". And to raise the money they had to have an "auction" because none of them wanted to just donate money they had to get something in return...

[AngryOldDem]

72. Yep.

But sadly, the one and only homeless shelter in my city is a fundie outfit that predicates help on hearing a sermon first. Can't support that, and won't.

The food bank here, though, is an awesome organization.

[brooklynite]

44. UNREC

If you want to share your personal opinions on charities, great. Just reprinting an inaccurate infographic that is based on one metric of performance is a waste of time.

[lpbk2713]

47. Comment on the graphic ...

USO does a lot of good work. Not only for their well known entertainment
activities but for helping service members in need. The USO facilities I have
seen when I was in the Navy were well run and always worth the visit.

[Blue_In_AK]

50. Kids Wish Network

They call me all the time, and I've read that they're the absolute worst for the percentage of money that actually goes to the kids.

[loyalsister]

55. MDA

uses pity stereotypes to raise money.

[KentuckyWoman]

57. The US government puts all the other bad actors to shame

Just think of how many trillions they've donated to the poor little predator class. Very little of the money I give to the US government ends up helping the needy - if any.

I'm being obtuse but I'm also serious. We don't think of the US government as a charity but financially we are talking about money given by one group (the 99) to benefit another group (the 1%). That's what charities do.....

[KittyWampus]

114. Ever hear of FEMA?

[Shrike47]

58. Komen. And I stopped Catholic Charities over their Planned Parenthood stance.

I sent the Catholic Charities money to P.P.

[CTyankee]

60. Any info on Paralyzed Veterans? I have sent them money in the past...

how about Wounded Warriors? Their commercial makes me want to cry...

[yeoman6987]

106. how about Wounded Warriors?

Wounded Warriors is a great organization. At least they actually help wounded warriors unlike some organizations (including military organizations) who don't. They are a relatively new organization so they haven't gotten into that whole "too big" for their own good type...yet.

[CTyankee]

116. Thanks. Good to know...

[Warpy]

61. United Way, hands down

because of the heavy handed way they try to extort donations from employees in workplaces by dangling awards to bosses for 100% donation records. Fuck them with a chainsaw, sideways.

Second would be the National Red Cross because of their consistent misallocation of money they raise, sitting on it instead of getting it to people in desperate need. Local Red Cross groups are better.

Others I won't donate to because of their constant mailings, showing me that a lot of my donation would go toward printing glossy come-ons rather than going to people in need. Unfortunately, Heifer International has become such an organization in recent years.

I deplore Aunt Sally's morbid fear and loathing of LGBT people, but their head doesn't live like a potentate and their donations do go to people in need, like a friend they pulled out of a migrant worker camp and supported through school. Also, I've never seen them ask what anyone's sexuality was when they've set up coffee and donuts at an evacuation center.

The local food bank is going to be the big winner in my end of year giving this year. They only mail stuff once a year, at Thanksgiving, and they distribute a tremendous amount of food to people in a poor state who desperately need it.

[MurrayDelph]

83. I wish Red Cross

didn't have a virtual monopoly over blood donations.

I give every now and then, when convenient. The last time was at an event 100 miles from the small town I now live in. After he fourth follow-up call where they wanted me to make a two-hour-each-way drive each for a 90-minute donation procedure, I was able to convince them to not call if they ever wanted me to donate again.

I don't mind giving, but they do live up to the no good deed rule.

[ItTakesAllKinds...]

66. I would rather say what I like:

Heifer International and Mennonites. Both seem very hands-on and giving the vast majority to their causes versus sending me free crap and begging letters.

[Delphinus]

101. Excellent!

Nice to hear this. Thank you and welcome to DU!

[Eleanors38]

113. I am considering Heifer International; for now, local food banks get my $.

[Holly_Hobby]

74. The United Way

Because I was subjected to extortion by several bosses to donate "or else". I refused both times. I would not donate just so they could get their "100% Participation" plaques. The United Way never got a dime from me and never will. These were two separate incidents at two different employers.

"Charity is a coat we put on twice a year." - George Michael

I give money to local animal rescues and donate my time to old people in my neighborhood.

[Raine]

75. Red Cross and Komen in particular, there are a few others too that I will never ever give to. nt

[El_Johns]

76. I doubt the ones that say "100% goes to provide...". I don't believe there's any big charity that

puts 100% of its donations into whatever service they offer. There's always overhead.

[OmahaBlueDog]

125. Agreed..that is always a red flag

I know that ESPN claims the "V Foundation" (the cancer charity named for Jim Valvano) has an endowment that covers overhead, and therefore can donate 100% of collections to aid and research. Again, I don't know/can't verify if that claim is true.

[Deep13]

80. I'd like to see some evidence before crediting...

...a list that smears Unicef, the March of Dimes, and Goodwill, but promotes religious and military charities.

[OmahaBlueDog]

131. Just to be clear: I don't endorse the list

It circulated on Facebook. I've actually used some of the links debunking the list contained upthread in response to the posts I've seen.

[davidpdx]

85. For me I would recommend "buyer beware"

Use the same caution you would if you were buying something because in giving money you are buying relief for a cause. Do research on the organization and know what their stances are and how much money actually goes to help people. If in doubt, ask. If you don't get an answer then don't donate to them.

There are no particular ones I like or dislike.

[Arugula Latte]

88. Fuck the anti-gay Salvation Army!

DO. NOT. DONATE. to them.

[CitizenLeft]

94. what I'll do when I'm better able to help out...

Local food bank. I'd start there.

Give to animal rescue groups, some of the small ones that really do the hands-on help. There's a guy in California named Eldad, Paws for Hope, I think. The Bill Foundation also. There are some local groups here in OH too.

I'll still give to some of the large groups, but the small orgs need help too.

[Prophet 451]

95. Komen and Salvation Army

Komen for reasons already posted upthread, Salvation Army for both their homophobia and for forcing the needy to listen to sermons before helping them.

We donate to the Cat's Protection League, Heifer International and the PDSA (charity here that provides free vet care to poor people). My SO and I have agreed to donate a million to each of them if we win the lottery.

[Romulox]

100. Not a penny to the American Red Cross; they lied to me after 9/11. nt

[eqfan592]

123. oh really? how so? nt

[KittyWampus]

110. The Red Cross- stacked with Republicans, are first in to get photo ops and first out after cameras

leave.

[eqfan592]

124. complete bullshit. nt

[KittyWampus]

129. not at all. I could link to you plenty of information about the Red Cross & Republican cronism

and a multitude of scandals but you're too busy getting upset over the Salvation Army.

[hamsterjill]

119. I support several local organizations.

For myself, I mostly support animal rescue organizations. I give locally and can personally see how my donations are used. When there have been national disasters, I've still supported locally because so many of the small organizations go into disaster areas for rescues. When many of the smaller organizations work together, they can (and do) get much accomplished.

I refuse to subsidize some CEO who already makes millions.

[Ineeda]

126. Won't give anymore to 'disease' charities,

because I've come to believe that none of them are actually working toward an actual cure as they claim. I believe that these charities and, of course, the pharma industry are, at best, working to make [their] diseases eventually chronic. Keeps the money flowing, doncha know. They don't want to kill the goose that's laying all those golden eggs. I also never give to any religion-affiliated organization, and that includes the Salvation Army.

[PDJane]

127. I do not give anything to Goodwill, ever.

Why? As far as I can see, from my experience, they are a for-profit institution.

I don't give to Salvation Army, either. They were the ones who called my mother after our house went up in flames to ask her for goods for a bake sale. They were very upset when she wouldn't donate. We had the clothes on our backs, the dog and cat, and little else. Moreover, they are institutionally homophobic, and they oversold the 'church' that they built in our neighbourhood...which is a minor cavil, but annoying. They made it sound as though it would be part of the neighbourhood; we haven't seen hide nor hair since.

I do give some money to ecological causes, but most of those above aren't on my list for one reason or another.

[riverbendviewgal]

128. there are a few

Doctors without borders, international red cross, green peace, and ammesty international and war amps. Local hospital.

[LeftishBrit]

134. This graphic is mostly wrong: see Snopes

http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/charities.asp

According to the research done for Snopes, most of the charities listed at the top are much more efficient than some of those listed at the bottom.

As regards charities to which I wouldn't donate: anything closely linked to the religious right or political pro-life movement; e.g. the LIFE charity in the UK.

[OmahaBlueDog]

138. Thanks. Several have pointed that out

I've also sent responses to people outside DU who circulated the graphic with the Snopes link.

The problem wiith Snopes (as I responded sarcastically upthread) is that your "consevative uncle" has a pat answer for that: "Snopes is a George Soros funded tool of the administration. If you want accurate information, you'd better start loking at balanced outlets, like FOX News and Investors Business Daily." Hopefully, you and your uncle do not now start a fight that will end up in family lore for three generations.

I think the link to Charity Navigator works better, because you can show that even if a "National Commander" takes nothing (and most of those claims were BS), that huge portions of some of those "Green" charities go to fundraising expenses.

[stranger81]

136. Salvation Army.

Because bigotry.

[jmowreader]

141. Turns out all of that is bullshit

http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/charities.asp

[OmahaBlueDog]

144. Thanks. That was posted upthread

My response was here http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4200650

[JoeyT]

143. Least favorite?

Red Cross, Salvation Army, and United Way.

The ones my money generally goes to are Planned Parenthood, ASPCA, Doctors Without Borders, and our volunteer Fire and Rescue. (Just a reminder: If you have one of those, they're generally strapped for cash. Most of the time the city or county they belong to doesn't give them much more for equipment than it does for paychecks. )