comment by thundara

a thoughtful web.

Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking. Login or Take a Tour!

comment by thundara

thundara · 4651 days ago · link · · parent · post: Not so fast on the KONY2012 thing. Please get the facts before you give.

http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=glossary.word&...

Fundraising Efficiency: The amount spent to raise $1 in charitable contributions. To calculate a charity's fundraising efficiency, we divide its fundraising expenses by the total contributions it receives.

Smaller is better

markup tips · 0

Saydrah · 4651 days ago · link ·

Well, shit. I was thinking of the fundraising efficiency coefficient used in the org I worked with years ago -- amount of each $1 raised that goes directly to aid recipients -- $0.02 of every dollar raised would not be that abnormal after fundraising expenses, salaries, etc., so it didn't look that outlandish. At lot of orgs spend hardly any money on aid. I've been looking at this wrong looking at CN for at least three years. Don't I feel stupid. (I'd still like to see some sort of independent confirmation that Invisible Children does anything besides make movies and pay $90,000 salaries to their founders though.)

+discuss+discuss

–

thenewgreen · 4651 days ago · link ·

This brings up a question. Lets say that an organization does tremendous work and its efficacy is indisputable. Would you find fault in their founders earning $150,000 a year?

I'm sure you know that this is not a lot of money for a CEO or founder to make in the private sector. I would also assume that the reason the organization is so well run and effective is largely in part to the founder. This means that this person is good at what they do, which means they could likely earn $200k+ in the private sector. So, they have effectively taken a $50k pay cut to work on something they think is commendable and are also (likely) working much greater hours on their charity than they would in the private sector.

I guess my point is $90k isn't that much money for a CEO or a founder of an organization. It IS a lot of money for one that isn't doing squat... but then so would $50k.

Why do we expect people that start charitable organizations to make demonstrably less money than they could in the private sector? This makes no sense to me.

+discuss+discuss

–

Saydrah · 4651 days ago · link ·

I don't really have a problem with high salaries in the nonprofit sector, IF the organization paying the high salaries can show ROI. Many founders of organizations work for a small stipend or volunteer their time, then using donations to hire an experienced Executive Director. There's a little bit of a conflict of interest, IMO, if someone founds an organization, solicits funds for charitable work, and then insists on being the recipient of the highest salary in the organization. I don't know that these two young filmmakers are necessarily the best people to direct an international nonprofit. They might be the best people to make movies about Joseph Kony, but they're paying themselves from donor funds to make movies that represent the organization as directly aiding children in Uganda, when it may or may not do that at all.

Call me old-fashioned, but these guys just strike me as more interested in their personal fame and going on an exciting crusade (have you seen that pic of them posing with assault rifles and the Ugandan army?) than in actually helping Ugandan children. Especially when Kony is no longer even active in Uganda, I wonder why else they would continue to fund an army that is itself known for sexual assault and other atrocities.