Posted on 11/26/2013 5:20:03 AM PST by afraidfortherepublic
WASHINGTON — BY all outward indications, the U.S. Navy Veterans Association was a leader in the charitable community. Founded in 2002 to provide support to Navy veterans in need, the charity recorded astonishing financial success. In its first eight years, it raised around $100 million in charitable contributions, almost all of it through a direct marketing campaign. The organization, headed by Jack L. Nimitz, boasted of 41 state chapters and some 66,000 members.
This would be a great story of charitable success, except for the fact that virtually everything about the association turned out to be false: no state chapters, no members, no leader with the name redolent of naval history. Instead, there was one guy: a man calling himself Bobby Thompson who worked from a duplex across the street from the Cuesta-Rey cigar factory in the Ybor City neighborhood of Tampa.
But the money raised was real enough, generated by a series of for-profit telemarketers. The victims, by and large, were unsuspecting small-money donors who received urgent solicitations asking for support for needy naval veterans. Most of the money raised stayed with the fund-raisers, though plenty apparently dripped through to Mr. Thompson and a succession of Republican lawmakers who received generous contributions from the association’s political arm. But little ever made it to the intended beneficiaries. In 2010, the scheme was unwound by two reporters for what is now The Tampa Bay Times, but not before Mr. Thompson had fled the state of Florida.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
“, we conduct in-depth research aiming to determine how much good a given program accomplishes (in terms of lives saved, lives improved, etc.) per dollar spent. “
I looked at this link and am,frankly, stunned by its rankings and choice of top charities. I do give as much as I can, checking the efficiency of those organizations using the Overheard Percentage, etc. I find this much more effective than something called “lives improved”, which smacks of “jobs saved” as a metric.
Two of my favorites are Dana Farber Cancer Institute and Wounded Warriors. Much as I am sympathetic to the plight of others, I feel we must take care of our own first, then help others.
My advice is to give where you can actually see and hear the impact of the work.
Craigslist is eat up with Christmas scams this year.
“I want to have a good Christmas for my 3 kids.”
One person asked for the new Grand Theft Auto for her 11 year-old. He’s not even old enough to buy it.
I apologize for the link. I just grabbed it, thinking it was a standard ranking service. I was wrong.
Personally, I give to Catholic Charities, Salvation Army; and Milwaukee Rescue Mission. All have a terrific record of ROI.
I have always been rather more personal in contributions. They go straight to the intended recipient. No middlemen. It focuses me and has tended to increase my efforts, just because I can see the results. Some is for long term things, some for the immediate. I have supported a Vietnamese lass from 8th grade through MBA. I have paid the electric bill for a family in my parish, et al. Money to an organization is diluted by the time it does any actual good for someone in need. Donating to an individual’s cancer operation (who is otherwise denied) is much more cost effective than giving to an anti cancer group. If you prefer giving less personally then money into the poor box at church is excellent and efficient. It pays no fundraisers and executives, at least in churches with which I am familiar.
I give ONLY to my Church and it’s associated Missions. ALL THE REST CAN PACK SAND!
Almost as bad as Wounded Warrior Project...almost.
I have wondered about Wounded Warrior Project. I get so many solicitations from them. And the ads on TV are incessant. What is their record?
There are better places to contribute to help veterans. According to CharityWatch, only 43 percent of the Wounded Warrior Project’s annual spending went for programs, with $31M of the $74M annual funding going for salaries, fundraising and other administrative costs. The charity’s financial practices earned it a “D” grade from CharityWatch, an independent organization that rates and evaluates nonprofits.
Fisher House is a good alternative charity. They provide free or low cost lodging to veteran’s and military families receiving treatment at military medical centers, withg 96.6% of donations going to the troops, and only 3.2% used for admin costs and fundraising.
See post #9
In the past few years, I decided to donate to organizations where I can volunteer or to my former schools.
As a volunteer and an active alumnus, I can get a basic idea as to how the money is being used. It tends to keep my money local, but it avoids scams.
Fisher House has proven themselves recently to be THE place to contribute to.
If it weren’t political backing, Wounded Warrior Project would have been proven to be one of the most fraudulent organizations and would have been stripped of their ‘not for profit’ status.
Wounded warriors are tough are nails and don’t need to be pitied like discarded and mistreated dogs but that’s exactly what WWP does in their ‘commercials’.
Fisher House yes. Wounded Warriors, not so much.
false flag operation?
“I apologize for the link. “
No apology needed. Your post raised a good issue and educated me re: Wounded Warriors.
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.