You know what he said.
Posted on 03/21/2009 4:42:22 AM PDT by iowamark
Yes: Their conflicts of interest mean they don’t deliver on credibility
By GARY SNYDER
The charitable sector is struggling to keep the public’s confidence because it lacks good governance, financial accountability, transparency and provisions against conflicts of interests. It mirrors the attributes —- greed, arrogance and outrageous corporate behavior —- assigned to the for-profit sector.
Angel Food Ministries is an example. It joins the ever-growing list of nonprofits that feel their mission gives them reason not to subscribe to generally acceptable charitable guidelines. Their mission is not unique, but their practices are. Fat salaries, loans approved but not by an independent board and conflicts of interest —- all fail to pass the trust test the public is demanding of charities.
AFM may be fulfilling its mission by delivering food, but it is not delivering on credibility. In 2006, a $2.5 million salary in executive and family compensation does not sit well with supporters, even if the agency is helping the needy. Put in perspective, the median CEO salary at the nation’s largest nonprofit organizations in 2008 was $326,500, according to The Chronicle of Philanthropy. Many of these executives lead organizations with assets many times that of Angel Food Ministries, with some as high as $4 billion. Federal tax laws prohibit heads of tax-exempt nonprofit organizations from earning “unreasonable compensation.”
A submission to the IRS indicates about $1 million in additional loans to the same ministry family members. Although not illegal, unless prohibited by state law, it is imprudent unless it furthers the mission of the agency. The IRS frequently has expressed concerns about insiders determining their own compensation and loans without approval by a governing body that has no vested interest. The ministry board did not seemingly function like a proper board by providing checks and balances and protections against abuse of power. Studies are showing that the public is getting fed up with philanthropic misdeeds. Some have revealed that as low as 14 percent of those surveyed believe that the charitable sector spends its money wisely. Headlines are screaming of billions of donor dollars stolen or wasted and thousands of agencies not fulfilling their charitable mandate. One would think that would instill a practice of transparency and accountability. It hasn’t.
The Angel Food Ministries problems do not represent a sporadic problem; they symbolize systemic issues. There has been an explosion of comparable misdeeds led by stalwart organizations such as the American Red Cross, Smithsonian Institution and thousands of others that believe that nonprofits are their personal piggy bank. The closed-door, self-serving practices that have been exhibited by unscrupulous charity leaders have not gone unnoticed by Congress, the IRS and state regulators. Nevertheless, it’s an uphill climb to reset nonprofit business practices.
Good practices will rebuild confidence in the nonprofit world. But good practices do not include the enrichment of board members and senior staff. There needs to be a U-turn in agency practices of Angel Food Ministries and others.
Without significant cleansing of similar abuses, heavy-handed regulation will follow. Without winning the confidence and trust of the public, the charitable sector’s future is on the line.
> Gary R. Snyder is the author of “Nonprofits: On the Brink.”
* * *
No: Salary is within fair range after 5 years of working for free
By W. JOSEPH WINGO
A New York Times headline of a few weeks ago, “Newly Poor Swell Lines at Food Banks Nationwide,” confirms a growing class of Americans who need food.
Government cannot solve this problem alone, and many in the private or nonprofit sectors have been struggling to find solutions that work. Money is the key, yet for charities money is harder to raise.
Nonprofit organizations battling hunger are among the worst hit. Food pantries are drying, donations are dropping and the food conglomerates have figured out that they can sell their overstock and soon-to-expire goods to developing countries for cents on the dollar rather than give it away to the needy.
One alternative lies in the ability to reinvent the way nonprofits generate capital to serve those in need. In the case of Angel Food Ministries, that ability was born in 1994; and at $140 million in revenue last year, serving over six million boxes, it continues to feed hundreds of thousands without the need for cash or food donations. It is a simple plan and simple in operation, yet complex to establish. It has a volunteer base of nearly 45,000, which it treats as valuable donated capital, and 100 percent of that donation is used toward program services. Few organizations can claim that.
At the helm of this ministry is a fairly compensated CEO. My idea to help people grew with 17-hour workdays over 15 years, five of which were wholly unpaid. An independent compensation study in April 2008 determined that my salary and compensation “falls within a reasonable range of competitive practices for like positions among like organizations providing like services and is therefore reasonable.”
Angel Food buys fresh, quality foods at discounted prices through volume purchasing and upfront payments. Then, through its volunteers who come together twice a month in over 5,000 communities or host sites across 39 states, it distributes food boxes to thankful families, and even sends cash donations to the tune of $5.2 million last year and over $19 million since inception back into each and every local community via these host sites. The axiom that guides it is, “A Food Ministry with a Servant’s Heart,” for it feeds a family of four for $30 a week while building communities and families of people. It is a “hand up, not a hand out,” and it leaves what emergency food is still out there for those who truly need it.
It started from a back porch in Monroe with little real idea of how to run a national organization. Yet better oversight, expert consultants and specialized staff were put in place to create the infrastructure to serve people better.
In a critical time of need in this country, we cannot rely on or ask for money, cannot expect complimentary food donations, but must respond to the dire needs of an expanding impoverished class. A nonprofit service agency that is sustaining and growing with a business model without the need for contributions is a model that warrants duplication. Our hunger problem is not going away anytime soon.
> W. Joseph Wingo is CEO of Angel Food Ministries in Monroe.
http://newsok.com/angel-food-ministries-settles-lawsuit/article/3353025 "The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported March 6 that the agreement calls for the cancellation of the Wingos’ company credit cards and a financial audit of the ministry. Joseph Wingo also is expected to sign over to Angel Food a company he owns that rented a corporate jet to the ministry at a profit of $10,000 a month."
You know what he said.
I refuse to donate to any “charity” which has any employee that makes more than I do. My money should be going to help those who really need it, not to pad the cushy salaries of those who do not.
FWIW, I know people who have used AFM and they have been helped in a big way.
AFM does not discriminate against anyone wanting their services, as far as I know.
So the guy at the head of it does well? Big deal.
Ummmm, it’s a charity and not a for-profit company.
If you really believe that a $2.5 million salary is appropriate for the head of a charity, you must not give much to charities.
I like to make good use of my money when I do. This is simply throwing money down a toilet.
Several decades ago, I received a monthly economics/finance publication (long since defunct) that put money matters in plain language.
One of their ‘things’ was to trace the ‘giving’ of major donation-seeking organizations, such as the Red Cross, etc.
Their list for most of the ‘big’ organizations showed that less than 70% of donations (and closer to 50%) actually went to the ‘services’ of the organization. The remainder went to executive salaries and operations. Some organizations had less than 40% going to services, while 60% or more was going to executive salaries and operations.
This sounds like business entrepreneur: "I started this business in my parents' garage. I lived on ramen noodles for five years and maxed out all my credit cards before I ever saw a dime of profit. Now I deserve to be rich and live high!"
I think it's reasonable if the person is selling a product, but just doesn't work if he's asking people to donate to help the poor ... unless his fine house and jet is featured prominently in the organization's solicitation materials!
I don't think this type of situation needs more regulation - it just needs more publicity, so people can make informed decisions. "Charity Navigator" and "Evangelical Council on Financial Accountability" are good sources.
I learned that lesson about the big charity rackets a few years back myself. Most of the time I find that local charities are the best way to ensure that the money actually gets to the people who need it.
Catholic Relief Services- 92%.
Anyone have a picyure of this THIEF??? Joseph Wingo is a FRAUD......$2,500,000.00 for heading up a CHARITY???/ DISGUSTING!
I am so in the wrong racket.
They're simply a clearing house for people to send their money to, then the United Way doles out a portion of the money they take in to charities that fit the agenda of the corporate board.
Their collection policies were stronghanded, getting corporations to lean on their employees for donations, so the company would be cited as big givers. They also pretended that you could earmark your donation for a certain charity, which was a joke. Your selection altered the distribution of funds in no way.
But the big problem was that they were handing out something like 60% of what they took in.
So for the sole purpose of deciding for you who got your charity dollars, they took a 40% commission and handed it to their officers or spent it on lavish trips and fancy events.
Worthless bloodsuckers.
Welllllll.
One way to make people MORE DEPENDENT on the GOVERNMENT TEAT is to attack CHARITIES.
These 10 charities are not models of efficiency. Each directs more than 49% of its budget towards administrative costs. That means most of your money goes toward such expenses as liability insurance, accounting and legal services, administrative salaries, and investment expenses, not the programs you aim to support.
| Rank | Charity | Administrative Expense | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Jobs with Justice | 77.5% | |
| 2 | Boys Choir of Harlem | 66.3% | |
| 3 | National Council of Negro Women | 64.0% | |
| 4 | The Fresno Metropolitan Museum | 58.4% | |
| 5 | Cherokee National Historical Society | 58.2% | |
| 6 | Southeastern Center for Contemporary Art | 57.5% | |
| 7 | National Museum of Racing and Hall of Fame | 55.1% | |
| 8 | Angel Flight West | 51.8% | |
| 9 | Magic Johnson Foundation | 49.8% | |
| 10 | Japanese Cultural Center of Hawaii | 49.2% |
The only argument that I can see is that they are not taxed whereas a for-profit company would pay corporate taxes. The CEO compensation, however, is taxed.
Of course, I haven't noticed too many for-profits that will provide $70 worth of food for $30 with no eligibility requirements. Members of my local yahoo group have nothing but praise for Angel Food, and many use it regularly.
I don’t know about the income of this person, so I won’t comment. I do know about Angel Food and it provides food to a great many minimum wage working people. I hope the government doesn’t kill this program, but I’ve yet to see them do anything to really help the working poor.
FWIW, I know people who have used AFM and they have been helped in a big way.
AFM does not discriminate against anyone wanting their services, as far as I know.
So the guy at the head of it does well? Big deal.
I know many families who use AFM, they do a great job and the food is of high quality. No problem there.
If he wouldnt take a 2.5 mil salary he might be able to drop the $30 fee he collects to something a little lower, or add a bit more food to the boxes.
this is the first I’ve heard of the inner workings of AFM so I’ll sit back and learn
I’ve known a lot of people this program has helped. The FBI is probably investigating it so it can be shut down and make these people try and use government programs that you and I will finance for quadruple the cost to them.
Agree.
Today I am picking up 3 AFM baskets and delivering to the needy in the North Georgia area.
I do this every month at a cost of about $90.
A $30 basket of food will feed a family of four for about a week and contains about $60 worth of real food, not dented cans, expired cereals, etc.
I will continue to do this until the jealous shut them down. When and if they are shut down it will a terrible loss for this area. Trust me. Hundreds and hundreds in this area use this organization monthly.
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.