Study Faults Charities for Veterans

[Team Sergeant]

And some of these people call themselves Americans. Disgusting scumbags.

There's an SOF charity that the president pays himself a six figure salary and ProfessionalSoldiers.com will no longer assist in that charity.....





Study Faults Charities for Veterans
Some Nonprofits Shortchange Troops, Watchdog Group Says

By Philip Rucker
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, December 13, 2007; Page A01

Americans gave millions of dollars in the past year to veterans charities designed to help troops wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan, but several of the groups spent relatively little money on the wounded, according to a leading watchdog organization and federal tax filings.

Eight veterans charities, including some of the nation's largest, gave less than a third of the money raised to the causes they champion, far below the recommended standard, the American Institute of Philanthropy says in a report. One group passed along 1 cent for every dollar raised, the report says. Another paid its founder and his wife a combined $540,000 in compensation and benefits last year, a Washington Post analysis of tax filings showed.

"We need to make sure that the generous contributions of Americans to veterans will help veterans," Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) said. (By Michael Lutzky -- The Washington Post)

There are no laws regulating the amount of money charities spend on overhead, fundraising or giving. But the institute's report suggests that 20 of the 29 military charities studied were managing their resources poorly, paying high overhead costs and direct-mail fundraising fees and, in some cases, providing their leaders with six-figure salaries.

The 12 charities rated as failing by the institute -- including the Military Order of the Purple Heart Service Foundation, the AMVETS National Service Foundation and the Freedom Alliance -- collected at least $266 million in the past fiscal year.




One egregious example, Borochoff said, is Help Hospitalized Veterans, which was founded in 1971 by Roger Chapin, a veteran of the Army Finance Corps and a San Diego real estate developer. The charity, which provides therapeutic arts and crafts kits to hospitalized veterans, reported income of $71.3 million last year and spent about one-third of that money on charitable work, the philanthropy institute said.

In its tax filings, Help Hospitalized Veterans reported paying more than $4 million to direct-mail fundraising consultants. The group also has run television advertisements featuring actor Sam Waterston, game show host Pat Sajak and other celebrities.

Chapin, 75, the charity's president, received $426,434 in salary and benefits in the past fiscal year, according to a filing with the Internal Revenue Service. His wife, Elizabeth, 73, received $113,623 in salary and benefits as "newsletter editor," the Post's review of the tax filing showed.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...121202657.html

[82ndtrooper]

Disgusting.

I spent two years on the board of a University foundation. We payed the director $75,500 and even that was debated to be too much based on his role and responsiblity for overseeing the foundation.

By the way, his wife would not have been permitted, per by laws, to have been employed in any capacity within the foundation, not even as a secretary.

[The Reaper]

How does the SOWF stack up?

TR

[lksteve]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

How does the SOWF stack up?

4 Star rating...see for yourself...

http://charitynavigator.org/index.cf...search.results

[The Reaper]

Good for them, and AER.

TR

[Team Sergeant]

Originally Posted by lksteve

4 Star rating...see for yourself...

http://charitynavigator.org/index.cf...search.results

I noticed that SOWF sure seems to swing toward AF personnel, and even Air Force personnel not assigned to SOF......

Also seems that the president (a retired AF COL) is now paid $150,000 a year. Nice raise, I'm sure he needs the money.

[lksteve]

Originally Posted by Team Sergeant

I noticed that SOWF sure seems to swing toward AF personnel, and even Air Force personnel not assigned to SOF.......

I suspect proximity to MacDill may have something to do with it...I don't know...when I first became aware of it (SOWF), my perception was that it leaned heavily toward Ranger and other DA type outfits...


A

Originally Posted by Team Sergeant

lso seems that the president (a retired AF COL) is now paid $150,000 a year. Nice raise, I'm sure he needs the money.

I am curious about the 4 star rating myself...5.7% seems a bit much in terms of salary to gross revenue...If it were 2-3%, I'd say he was worth his keep...at 5+%, he seems a bit over compensated...there were a couple of charities without a 4 star rating where the CEO received less compensation as a ratio of donations, so I suspect the ratings may have something to do with the overall functioning of the fund, with the CEO's salary being less of a factor...

[afchic]

I guess I will have to do more research into the Military Order of the Purple Heart. My husband and I have been donating to them for a few years now. The only place of I know of that does a very good job of providing the percentages of donations given to the actual charities vs administrative costs is CFC. Are there any other reputable websites out that provide that kind of information?

[QRQ 30]

http://www.purpleheartfoundation.org/

The MOPH uses 80% of donations for its ptograms. I would say that is above average.

What I find interesting is that charities in general fail to produce. Why the emphasis of veterans right noe? - elections? A few years ago heads rolled at the American Red Cross as well as other high profile "charities".

[lksteve]

Originally Posted by QRQ 30

What I find interesting is that charities in general fail to produce. Why the emphasis of veterans right noe? - elections?

I suspect that it is because a fair number of folks are giving to these charities these days and investigative reporters flock to stories that show public trust being mishandled...but then, I am quite the cynic...

[Ret10Echo]

Chief of Veterans Charities Grilled on Groups' Spending

By Philip Rucker
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, January 18, 2008; A01



A congressional investigation yesterday uncovered new allegations of questionable spending practices at two veterans charities, including one that paid retired Army Gen. Tommy Franks $100,000 to appear in its solicitation letters using money the nonprofit raised to help soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.

At a raucous, three-hour hearing yesterday, House members questioned California entrepreneur Roger Chapin about his management of two charities. One charity, Help Hospitalized Veterans, spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations that were to help wounded soldiers on personal expenses for Chapin, executive director Mike Lynch and Richard A. Viguerie, to whom the charity has awarded millions of dollars in fundraising-consulting contracts, the hearing found.

The expenses included at least $340,000 in meals, hotels and entertainment; a $135,000 loan to Lynch for a divorce settlement with his former wife; a $17,000 country club membership; three airplane tickets to Hawaii; and a $1 million loan to Viguerie for a start-up initiative at his firm, several members of the committee said.

The second charity, the Coalition to Support America's Heroes, used Franks in its solicitation letters, the House Committee on Government Oversight and Reform found.

Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.), chairman of the committee, said Help Hospitalized Veterans raised more than $168 million from 2004 to 2006. The charity spent a quarter of those donations on the veterans, with the rest going to direct-mail fundraising, salaries and other expenses, Waxman said.

Republicans and Democrats voiced outrage over what Waxman called "an intolerable fraud."

"Most of the millions they receive never reach veterans or their families," Waxman said. "Instead, the groups waste those contributions on bloated overhead costs and self-enrichment."

There are no laws that regulate how much charities spend on fundraising and overhead costs. There also are no requirements that nonprofit groups disclose such breakdowns in their solicitations. Several lawmakers signaled yesterday that they may introduce legislation aimed at helping donors better understand the finances of nonprofit groups.

Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.) asked Chapin what would happen if his charities told donors how their donations were spent.

"If we disclose, which I'm more than happy to do, we'd all be out of business," Chapin said. "Nobody would donate. It would dry up."

Chapin said few people know how expensive fundraising can be.

"If I could do better, I would," Chapin said. "I've tried television, I've tried radio, I've tried foundations, I've tried corporations and the only thing that works is direct mail."

Waxman said Chapin evaded U.S. marshals trying to serve him with a subpoena to testify at a hearing in December, but has since cooperated by submitting internal records and sitting for a lengthy deposition last week.

Chapin's nonprofit groups are two of several veterans charities under scrutiny for their spending practices. The American Institute of Philanthropy, a leading watchdog group, has suggested that Chapin's groups are among 19 military-oriented charities that manage their resources poorly.

Some other veterans charities consistently received high marks from the institute and other watchdog groups.

The Washington Post previously documented the six-figure salary that Help Hospitalized Veterans pays Chapin, as well as more than $200 million it reported in federal tax filings to have spent on fundraising and public education campaigns from 1997 to 2005.

In one heated exchange yesterday, Rep. Elijah E. Cummings (D-Md.) questioned Chapin's compensation. In 2006, Chapin and his wife took home a combined $561,971 in salary, bonuses and pension contributions, the committee said.

"I've tried everything under the sun to lower our fundraising costs," Chapin said.

"How about reducing your salary?" Cummings said. "You appear to be doing quite well for yourself and your wife."

"By whose standards?" Chapin shouted back.

"The public thought this money was going to veterans, but instead it went to you and your wife," Cummings said. "This sounds like a great business for you and Mr. Viguerie, but a lousy deal for contributors and veterans."

As House members introduced the committee's findings, Chapin acknowledged them and offered impassioned defenses.

"Throughout my life I have endeavored to do well for my family while I try to do good for the world," said Chapin, 75.

Defending the millions of dollars his charity pays Viguerie's firm, Chapin said he does "the best I can."

Viguerie said direct-mail flyers, stickers and trinkets do "far more" than bring in donations, raising awareness of the problems some veterans face. He said that fundraising for a national charity is "an enormous operation." Mass-mailings are a costly way to raise money, considering high printing fees and postage as well as the limited yield on investment.

A committee member, Rep. Chris Cannon (R-Utah), expressed anger over his colleagues' harsh scrutiny of Chapin's charities.

"I am deeply concerned that we're whacking on groups that are supporting the military," Cannon said.

Rep. Diane Watson (D-Calif.) questioned expenses such as flights to Hawaii and the country club membership. Chapin said he later repaid the charity for the flights and said the golf club membership was a "perk" for board members.

Chapin then asked lawmakers about their own use of campaign funds, to which an angry Watson slammed her hand several times on the wooden dais.

"The commitment that you said you have made to veterans seems to be squandered," she said. "This is not a campaign. This is your organization that collects money to be able to give to veterans."

Diana Aviv, president of the Independent Sector, a national umbrella organization of nonprofit groups, said in an interview that donors have the right to "be ensured that the money will be used for the purposes intended."

Chapin said he did not see anything wrong with the Coalition to Support America's Heroes paying Franks $100,000. Chapin said the former Iraq war commander helped raise millions of dollars for the nonprofit group, which it otherwise might not have collected.

"I thought it was totally appropriate," Chapin said.

A spokesman for Franks said the retired general made several speeches for the charity in 2004 and 2005, as well as allowing his name to appear on direct mailings for about a year. He ended his support "when he learned that the percentage of money raised that was going to the troops was less than 85 percent, a figure which was then and remains today, his criteria for supporting charitable organizations," said retired Col. Michael Hayes, Franks's chief of staff.

Lynch told The Post this week that Help Hospitalized Veterans meets the Better Business Bureau's standards, but bureau President H. Art Taylor said yesterday that both Chapin charities do not.

[Ret10Echo]

Gen. Tommy Franks Paid $100,000 To Endorse 'F' Veterans Charity
Congressional Investigators Say Only 25 Percent of Charity's Raised Funds Went to Vets
By BRIAN ROSS
Jan. 17, 2008—


Retired U.S. Army Gen. Tommy Franks, who led the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, was paid $100,000 to endorse a veterans charity that watchdog groups say is ripping off donors and wounded veterans by using only a small portion of the money raised for veterans services, according to testimony in Congress today.

Gen. Franks' involvement was revealed as members of Congress questioned Roger Chapin, who operates Help Hospitalized Veterans and the Coalition to Salute America's Heroes Foundation, charities that congressional investigators say spend only 25 percent of the money they raise on projects for wounded veterans.

The charities were graded "F" by the American Institute of Philanthropy because so little of the money is used for actual charity projects or services.

Chapin testified he approached Gen. Franks in 2005, and he agreed to let his signature be used on mass mailings seeking contributions to his charities.

"He helped us raise millions and millions of dollars more than we would have," Chapin told the hearing, chaired by Congressman Henry Waxman, D- Calif.

Congressman Waxman said Gen. Franks had since disassociated himself from Chapin's charities and asked that his name be removed from the solicitation.

"General Franks was paid $100,000 to lend his name. We understand he developed misgivings and asked that his name be taken off," Congressman Waxman said.

"Gen. Franks did support the Coalition to Support American Heroes back in 2004 and 2005. The General made several speeches for the organization because he supports the idea of taking care of our disabled veterans. He also premitted the use of his name in direct mailings for about a year," Michael Hayes, chief of staff for Franks & Associates LLC, said. "He ended his support for the CSAH in late 2005 when he learned that the percent of money raised that was going to the troops was less than 85 percent, a figure which was then and remains today his critertia for supporting charitable organizations."

Chapin also revealed that his charity paid $5,000 a month for the endorsement of retired Air Force Brig. Gen. Arthur "Chip" Diehl.

Contacted by ABCNews.com, Gen. Diehl said he had "no comment."

Chapin said it was "an insult" to suggest that Gen. Franks or Gen. Diehl had "sold their integrity."

Congressional investigators say they found that of the $168 million that Chapin has raised in donations to help veterans, only 25 percent "has been expended on goods and services for veterans." The remainder, investigators say, went for administrative costs, salaries and to pay for direct mail fundraising.

Under questioning today, Chapin also acknowledged the charity paid his $17,000 membership in a California golf club and salaries for himself and his wife of $561,971.

Congressional investigators also reported that the charity reimbursed the Chapins for more than $340,000 in expenses for meals, hotels and entertainment. The charity also purchased a $444,600 condominium in northern Virginia that is used by the Chapins, investigators said.

[CPTAUSRET]

This crap sucks!

These jerks could not define integrity!

[The Reaper]

Hell should have reserved seating waiting for them.

Maybe he will come back as a wounded vet, and have to live the rest of his life as they do, while some fat cat gets rich soliciting funds on his behelf.

TR

[Razor]

GEN Franks may want to consider donating part of that $100K to a better run charity to avoid some bad publicity, seeings as how the reason for his "success" rests squarely on the shoulders of his former troops.