Not all charities are created equally; at least, not all of them spend equally. The ways in which a charity spends its donors’ dollars have been coming under increasing scrutiny in the past few years, as wave upon wave of scandals has rocked the nonprofit sector: greedy CEOs, misappropriated funds, and dirty dealings that would seem more fitting to a corporate boardroom or political campaign. The website Charity Navigator was created in 2001 as a guide for potential donors. The site evaluates charities based on a number of a criteria, and gives out the details of informational tax returns, letting people know how their benevolent donations are being spent. We’ve compiled a list of their seven most untrustworthy charities, with an additional three organizations whose scandalous greed may surprise you.

Salvation Army

Image Source

The Salvation Army portrays itself as a humble religious charity, doing missionary work that reflects the gospel of Jesus. In reality, the SA is very much a business, and despite its “not for profit” status and evangelizing, the organization does fairly well for itself. Because the Salvation Army is a church, it’s exempt from declaring its revenues. In addition, the organization owns an unknown amount of high-end real estate, in which it houses its high-ranking officers; some of the houses go for upwards of $900,000. They’ve also been accused of selling off properties that have been bequeathed to them for profit, even displacing poor and vulnerable populations to do so. In England, the SA came under public scrutiny when it teamed up with the textile company Kettering Textiles Limited to run a recycled clothing scheme; it earned the organization about $26 million, and the business’s directors a combined $16 million over three years.

The SA is also not a fan of turning the other cheek. In 2006, the SA went to court with Greenpeace over the latter’s share of a $264 million dollar estate. The estate, according to the will of its owner, Hector Di Stefano, was to be divided equally among eight charities upon his death. Because of a clerical error, the Salvation Army demanded that Greenpeace was not entitled to its share of the bequest, and that the $33 million should instead be divided equally to the other beneficiaries named in the will, itself included. The two organizations eventually settled out of court. 


Texas Heart Institute

Image Source



The Texas Heart Institute, founded in 1962, is dedicated to researching the prevention and treatment of cardiovascular disease. It is also dedicated to lining its executives officers pockets. The CEO of the nonprofit has an annual salary of $466,000, while the president and founder makes an incredible $600,000. Together, their salaries comprise nearly 3.5% of the charities annual budget. 


Fine Arts Museum of San Francisco

Image Source

The Fine Arts Museums of Chicago (comprised of two separate museums, the de Young and the Legion of Honor) have an annual revenue of $31,860,497. The President of the organization earns about $365,000 a year. About half of the Museums’ revenue goes towards fundraising efforts and administrative costs. 
 


Disabled Veteran’s Association

Image Source

The Disabled Veteran’s Association claims that it is “Supporting the unsung heroes that fought for our freedom.” In reality, the charity is mostly supporting professional fundraisers, workers that generally work for profit-driven agencies. Nearly 95% of the DVA’s revenues go towards paying these people; the charity spends about $.84 fundraising for every dollar that they make.

Coalition Against Breast Cancer

Image Source

The Coalition Against Breast Cancer claims that it sincerely believes that breast cancer can be eradicated. Its efforts seem to be somewhat token, however: only 18% of its revenue goes towards actual prevention, diagnosis, and support programs. The rest of it is spent on fundraising and administrative costs. 


Children’s Charitable Fund

Image Source

The Children’s Charitable Fund, an organization that roughly resembles the Make-A-Wish foundation, was given a poor rating by both Charity Navigator and the Better Business Bureau. It spends only 10% of its revenues on charitable programs, and has not shown itself to be either forthcoming or transparent with its finances. In addition, nearly 2% of revenues are given over to pay that CEO’s salary. 


Martin Luther King, Jr. National Memorial Project Foundation

Image Source

Is there anything worse than using the legacy of a great humanitarian — one who worked tirelessly to alleviate poverty and crusade for social justice — to try and make money? The CEO of the charity in charge of building MLK’s memorial makes $265,085, a full 6% of its annual revenues. Meanwhile, half of its revenues go right back into fundraising efforts, hosting lavish dinners and parties.

Children’s Charity Fund Inc.

Image Source

The Children’s Charity Fund Inc. was founded in 1991. It claims to work to educate the public about the needs of disabled children, and by providing free medical equipment and referrals to families. However, according to Charity Navigator, only 5.6% of its revenues are going towards these programs. That comes out to about $77,000, which is actually less than its CEO’s salary. 




The Nature Conservancy

Image Source

The Nature Conservancy actually earns a fairly good rating on Charity Navigator: 58 points, or 3 out of 4 stars. It’s one of the oldest environmental nonprofit organizations in America, having been founded in 1951. It currently holds over 119 million acres of land, all over the world, and spends hundreds of millions of dollars in conservation efforts each year.

Critics, however, have been quick to point out that the land that is held isn’t always kept in anything even resembling pristine condition. The Nature Conservancy has been known to allow its big-business partners — including corporations like Dow Chemical, General Electric, American Electric Power– to use the land as they see fit, including mining and drilling in these supposedly “protected areas”. The Conservancy came under intense fire last year, in the wake of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, when the Washington Post published an article detailing the close relationship between BP and the environmental charity. The Nature Conservancy has also been accused of selling its own land to its board members, and making profits off of land that was left in trust to the organization. 


The Central Asia Institute

Image Source

The Central Asia Institute is dedicated to supporting community education initiatives in Afghanistan and Pakistan. It was founded by Greg Mortenson, a former mountain climber, in 1996, after being inspired by the life-saving hospitality of a tiny Pakistani village. Mortenson detailed the dramatic beginnings of the charity, as well as several other adventures in fulfilling the school’s mission, in the bestselling memoir Three Cups of Tea. He’s an inspiring, almost saintly figure.

Or at least, he was. In April of 2011, 60 Minutes broke a story on Mortenson, alleging that the CAI had mishandled its donated funds and that Mortenson had actually fabricated several of the stories in his book. Jon Krakauer, a fellow author and former supporter of CAI, started digging into Mortenson’s stories after hearing from disgruntled donors and employees of the charity. In an interview on CBS, he said of Mortenson’s story, “It’s beautiful, and it’s a lie”.

If this weren’t enough, there is the troubling state of the CAI’s finances. The charity has had only one auditing in the past 14 years. Current investigations into its budget has shown that the organization spends far more money domestically promoting itself than it does on its actual mission of building and funding schools. There have been Additionally, Mortenson’s own finances are suspiciously intertwined with his charity’s. The CAI paid $1.7 million dollars in “book related expenses” in 2009, according to its financial records. This includes paying for all of Mortenson’s travel expenses, and buying thousands of books at retail prices for distribution at the events. Mortenson also received an honorarium of up to $30,000 for some of his lectures. None of the royalties from Mortenson’s books go to the charity; they are instead kept by Mortenson himself.

The CAI is being actively investigated by the Attorney General of Montana, where the organization is located. Mortenson is the subject of a lawsuit filed jointly by two former donors. Viking, who published Three Cups of Tea and its sequel Stones into Schools, is reviewing the claims made in both books. The world has become a slightly more cynical place. Considering, however, the lack of oversight in many charitable organizations, we can’t help but wonder if this could be for the best.

Toshiba just announced that it will release two new glasses-free 3D TVs in Japan this December, a 12-inch and a 20-inch. The announcement comes on the heels of last week’s Nintendo 3DS handheld gaming device details. PCWorld has more on Toshiba’s new 3D TVs:

Toshiba’s new TVs have a thin sheet of small lenses in front of the display. Behind this lens screen is a custom-developed LCD (liquid crystal display) panel. Each screen has 8.29 million pixels — four times the number of pixels in a conventional “full HD” television — organized into groups of nine pixels of each color. The nine lenses split light from each bank of pixels and send it to nine points in front of the TV

(The TVs will) cost around ¥120,000 (US$1,430) and ¥240,000 respectively. The company is waiting on larger screens before it launches the TVs outside of Japan, said Masaaki Oosumi, president of Toshiba’s digital media network unit, at a news conference. Markets such as the U.S. demand televisions with screen sizes starting at about 40 inches, making these first models a little small.

CNN covers Nintendo’s 3DS handheld gaming device, which will debut in next February in Japan for about $300, and will arrive in the US next March:

Unlike 3-D games for the PlayStation 3 or those utilizing NVIDIA’s 3-D Vision technology, which adds three-dimensional special effects to PC titles, software for the Nintendo 3DS doesn’t require the use of cumbersome stereoscopic glasses.

Additional support for 3-D TV shows and films should further buoy the Nintendo 3DS’ popularity as a portable entertainment device. The gadget also offers the benefit of on-demand game updates and downloads via Wi-Fi connection.

Screen Digest says that 28% of homes will have 3D TVs within the next four years, according to this Screenrant post. That estimate seems high at today’s costs, but if manufacturers can improve technology while driving prices down, that could be a viable estimate.

Screenrant also makes the point that studios are hesitant to release 3D Blu-rays or DVDs. They want to wait until more people have 3D home entertainment systems, which in turn would make margins more secure.

It also looks like mobile developers are jumping on the 3D bandwagon, with new silicon and software platforms that enable mobile viewers to see content in 3D on their phones and tablets.

I had my doubts about 3D until reading about Toshiba and Nintendo’s glasses-free versions. As long as the companies with an interest in this technology can persuade consumers that it’s the next big thing, they’ll be able successfully upcharge for it and, if all goes well, even standardize it. Consumer reception will be 3D’s X-factor for the next year or so.

If you have $10-20 to give this season, a foundation called Modest Needs lets you find an individual or organization for whom that amount could make a positive difference. The cool thing about Modest Needs, which was just featured in CNN, is that it crowdsources small donations to make big changes for a person or charity whose cause means a lot to you.

I’m excited that somebody made it so easy to help people stuck in a personal financial crisis situation (these days, there are many). CNN has more:

Here’s how it works: People e-mail their requests — help with rent or a car repair or a medical bill, for example — to Modest Needs, whose seven-person staff researches and verifies their legitimacy. The vetted requests are then posted on ModestNeeds.org, where donors can choose which ones they want to help fund. Once the funding level is reached, a check is sent out.

“It’s wonderful to see what this does for people,” Taylor said. “You don’t find out until after the fact what kind of an impact these little contributions that people are making; … you have no idea what kind of a change you really are making in the person’s life.”

It’s nice to give back to people in your own country, Kiva-style. I encourage you to check out the site.

The Insurance Institute of Highway Safety released its annual list of the safest cars for the upcoming year. This year’s list, for 2010 models, highlights Subaru, Ford, and Volkswagen cars. The Triangle Business Journal has more:

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety released its top safety picks among 2010 model year vehicles, and the results might have Subaru, Ford and Volkswagen/Audi dealers gearing up for sales spikes in coming months.

The winners (as quoted from the article):

Large cars
Buick LaCrosse
Ford Taurus
Lincoln MKS
Volvo S80

Midsize cars
Audi A3
Chevrolet Malibu built after October 2009
Chrysler Sebring 4-door
Dodge Avenger
Mercedes C class
Subaru Legacy
Subaru Outback
Volkswagen Jetta sedan
Volkswagen Passat sedan
Volvo C30

Small cars
Honda Civic 4-door models (except Si)
Kia Soul
Nissan Cube
Subaru Impreza except WRX
Volkswagen Golf 4-door

Midsize SUVs
Dodge Journey
Subaru Tribeca
Volvo XC60
Volvo XC90

Small SUVs
Honda Element
Jeep Patriot
Subaru Forester
Volkswagen Tiguan

Erickson Retirement Communities, one of the biggest retirement community developers in the country, has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. Reuters has more:

LLC, a U.S. retirement community developer, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, and reached an agreement to sell its assets to Redwood Capital LLC, court documents showed.

Maryland-based Erickson Communities, which was founded in 1983, currently includes 19 campuses and houses more than 22,000 people and has about 12,000 employees.

Erickson has 20 retirement communities around the country, according to their website. The Baltimore Sun reports on the reasons behind Erickson’s bankruptcy filing:

Erickson’s real estate arm, which acquires land for campuses and builds projects, has been hurt by the recession, as seniors who couldn’t sell existing homes put off moving to continuing-care communities.

Erickson was in the midst of large developments outside Maryland but couldn’t get seniors to put down the money to move in. When the credit markets collapsed, Erickson couldn’t restructure its loans.

PETA is sending President Barack Obama a Katcha Bug Humane Bug Catcher after witnessing him murder a fly on CNBC earlier this week. Sky News has more:

Peta spokesman Bruce Friedrich said: “We support compassion even for the most curious, smallest and least sympathetic animals. We believe that people, where they can be compassionate, should be, for all animals.” He said Mr Obama would soon receive a Katcha Bug Humane Bug Catcher which will allow him to trap flies before releasing them outside.

“We’re happy to say that we wish he hadn’t.”

The Bug Katcha

PETA describes the Katcha Bug, which costs $8, as follows:

Simply place Katcha Bug over the bug and slowly slide its plastic trapdoor shut. The bug will step onto the trapdoor as it closes, and you can carry Katcha Bug outside, where all you need to do is slide the trap door open, allowing the bug to walk away. You’ll have no problem catching even large spiders with this handy gadget. Katcha Bug measures 9 inches in length, so you won’t have to get too close for comfort.

Can you think of any other organization that would get this much national coverage sending a product to a global leader? PETA is good.

I joined the board of a large non-profit this year and we recently spent several hours on planning for our year at the helm. Once we’d hammered out what we thought was a pretty near perfect vision and plan for the organization, a former board member dashed our enthusiasm with these words:

This is not a strategic plan. This is an annual plan.

And for the life of me and my cohorts, we could not get a straight answer out of this person as to what was missing from our so-called annual plan that would make it a strategic plan. I’m still grappling with the differences but here’s how I understand it so far.

Strategic plans address fundamental and directional issues. They are over-arching, visionary, and long term.

Annual plans (operational or management plans) target the day-to-day implementation of strategic decisions. These are the immediate (less than one year) objectives and imperatives.

Strategic plans take into account the unpredictability of the future, but plan for it anyway. They develop strategies based on the organization’s strength and weaknesses relative to the opportunities and threats in the external environment. Got it.

Annual plans take on future goals as something to accomplish now. They focus on short-term goals and go into greater detail about how specific tasks will be accomplished. Check.

Okay, so for example, in our organization one strategic goal was to raise our profile in the community. And one of the corresponding annual plan goals to accomplish this was to develop our website as an external (marketing) tool.  To me that’s strategy and operations. But the former board member still says – nope, that’s not strategic. According to her, strategic is more like, ‘Become a benchmark organization for online communication”.

• Is it just that we’re not thinking big enough?
• Just how detailed should long-term goals be?
• And must they always be measurable?

I’m still confused, and betting I’m not alone. Planning seems to get pushed to the back of the list in order to put out today’s fires and we all know that’s not the best practice. It’s exciting to be part of an organization with such a forward thinking planning model. Now if only I could wrap my mind around it!

Please, strategic thinkers out there – enlighten us! (Okay… me.)

Image Credit: Wolfgang Staudt, Flickr

Found this odd claim reported in the Christian Science Monitor:

In San Diego, mobile users pay more than $3 per minute on average. The Utility Consumers’ Action Network surveyed 700 cellphone users and found that the average cellphone bill went down since 2004, falling from $57.92 for a single-line account to $37.15 today.

However, “cost per minute can be outrageous,” says the report. “Doing the simplest of calculations – dividing the total cost by the number of minutes – we find that the average ‘account’ is paying $3.02 a minute.” This average is driven up by a small slice of consumers who buy large plans but rarely use them. If you cut out these big-spenders, the average falls somewhere between 50 cents and $1 per minute – far more than the “10 cents a minute” claim made in many ads.

The study says that part of the problem comes from consumers overestimating how many minutes they need, which makes them overpay for plans (study claims that they only use 32% of their total time allowance). In addition, consumers rarely change their contracts once they’ve signed up.

This is a strange study. How could an average cell phone user possibly pay $3/minute? The study doesn’t mention data usage, cost of the phone (which is heavily discounted with most contracts), night/weekend/anytime minutes, text messaging, or taxes.

The study (located here) needs to clarify its claims. At the moment, they don’t make much sense.

It’s IHOP Pancake Day 2009, and what better way to celebrate free food than to feel guilty if you don’t pay for it? ABC has details on the event:

It’s National Pancake Day and to celebrate, free pancakes will be handed out all over the (nation) today… as local IHOPs join with that chain’s restaurants across the country to help the Children’s Miracle Network.

Since beginning its National Pancake Day celebration in 2006, IHOP has raised nearly two million dollars to support charities in the communities in which it operates. With your help, we hope to raise $1,000,000 for Children’s Miracle Network in 2009!

IHOP will serve one free short stack per customer, then ask for a donation for the Children’s Miracle Network. In other words, if you take the free pancakes and don’t donate, you’re a soulless freeloader. If you do donate, the pancakes aren’t free.

But hey, it’s for a good cause, so get out there!