Wouned Warrior Project a scam?

[echoes]

Originally Posted by TrapLine

I think the link at the bottom of this page is the place to start.

Me Too!!! And told my family members today who were wanting to start giving, to give to the GBF. That way, it is known for sure the gift will go to help those who need it most.

Originally Posted by Kasik

Donations, like rounds on target, have the greatest impact.

Very Well Said, Sir! :-)

Originally Posted by MR2

Closing in on $10,000 in donations to the Special Operations Warrior Foundation. You'd think I could get a coffee mug from them or somethin'... LOL

How about a great big (((hug)))???

Originally Posted by Stiletto11

Sometimes I wonder if they even need my paltry donation.

Sir, it is only my small little opinion, but I believe every thing helps.
And thank you, for your service, and sacrifice. You are always in our thoughts and prayers.

[Golf1echo]

Originally Posted by MR2

Closing in on $10,000 in donations to the Special Operations Warrior Foundation. You'd think I could get a coffee mug from them or somethin'... LOL
I'll see what I can make happen*, are you getting the mailer? ...
Rated 4-Star Charity Eight Consecutive Years
SOWF has received a four-star rating (out of four stars) for its eighth year from Charity Navigator, the nation's leading charity watchdog group. Only 1% of the charities they evaluate have earned this distinction.

There are something like 700 children in the breach each and every contribution means something. I did notice their overheads went up from 7 % on charity navigator ( their site lists a 5% administration expense). Interesting how when notoriety gets bigger so do overheads. I saw when you have more and more groups involved they require more and more time...
* I had to move on after 10+ years of supporting SOWF ( SOARHighlands ) but it was some of the best time I ever spent! SOWF is pretty responsive. Looking to support this Foundation now.

[Gypsy]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

Their right to draw that kind of salary makes me a lot less likely to donate to their causes, particularly when there are other comparable charities with far lower overhead doing the same work.

TR

Couldn't agree more. I am not interested in paying someone's salary when I make a donation.

[Detonics]

I've always heard good things about Hope for The Warriors, a charity that actor Gary Sinise has been involved with for some time. They appear to have a good rating on the "Charity Navigator" site with approximately 80% of donations going to the program. Sinise also tours with the "Lt. Dan Band" entertaining the troops and raising money.

[echoes]

Originally Posted by Gypsy

Couldn't agree more. I am not interested in paying someone's salary when I make a donation.

Great Point Gypsy! Especially this time of year when folks are venerable, and unsure where to donate...but want to HELP!

My vote is for the GBF! Link at the bottom of the page folks!

Holly

[Roguish Lawyer]

http://greenberetfoundation.org/financials.html

Let me note that these expense numbers can be a bit misleading. For example, let's assume (using easy rounded numbers that I am using solely to illustrate a point) you throw a big fundraising dinner and charge $1000 a plate. The dinners cost $100 each. Assume another $100 a plate for other expenses like renting the facility, printing invitations, etc. The $200 in expenses is treated as an expense even if the organization manages to get enough advance deposits to cover all expenses so they didn't have to pay a dime out of pocket. So the event has an 80% dollars raised-to-expense ratio, which kills you on your overall ratio that gets reported. If you want to keep a great ratio number like GBF has, you have to cut down on certain kinds of fundraising events, which creates a silly disincentive IMO.

[booker]

Originally Posted by Roguish Lawyer

http://greenberetfoundation.org/financials.html

Let me note that these expense numbers can be a bit misleading. For example, let's assume (using easy rounded numbers that I am using solely to illustrate a point) you throw a big fundraising dinner and charge $1000 a plate. The dinners cost $100 each. Assume another $100 a plate for other expenses like renting the facility, printing invitations, etc. The $200 in expenses is treated as an expense even if the organization manages to get enough advance deposits to cover all expenses so they didn't have to pay a dime out of pocket. So the event has an 80% dollars raised-to-expense ratio, which kills you on your overall ratio that gets reported. If you want to keep a great ratio number like GBF has, you have to cut down on certain kinds of fundraising events, which creates a silly disincentive IMO.

Interesting, didn't know that was how the system worked. Thanks RL.

Originally Posted by Roguish Lawyer

http://greenberetfoundation.org/financials.html

Let me note that these expense numbers can be a bit misleading. For example, let's assume (using easy rounded numbers that I am using solely to illustrate a point) you throw a big fundraising dinner and charge $1000 a plate. The dinners cost $100 each. Assume another $100 a plate for other expenses like renting the facility, printing invitations, etc. The $200 in expenses is treated as an expense even if the organization manages to get enough advance deposits to cover all expenses so they didn't have to pay a dime out of pocket. So the event has an 80% dollars raised-to-expense ratio, which kills you on your overall ratio that gets reported. If you want to keep a great ratio number like GBF has, you have to cut down on certain kinds of fundraising events, which creates a silly disincentive IMO.

Expenses being treated as expenses...how novel!!!

[Roguish Lawyer]

Originally Posted by WCH

Expenses being treated as expenses...how novel!!!

IMO there is a massive difference between expenses at an in-person fundraiser and things like overhead. I'd rather see the revenue treated on a net basis from events like that, or otherwise you get the impression that money is being pissed away when it is not.