I don’t give money to Komen. YMMV. I do donate to other cancer research and support organizations.
Charity Navigator gives them a 100 score (out of 100). It looks like 92-93% of their income goes into actually operating their program.
Charitywatch is a charity watchdog, applying sharp eyes and sharp pencils to the nonprofit sector. They grade charities on a scale for A to F.
Shriners earns an F for special reasons. While a low share of donations goes to fundraising and management, they have exceedingly high asset reserves, which Charitywatch doesn’t like. Specifically assets are 8.1 times annual outlays: Charitywatch will ding you if you are over 3 years, and give you an F if you are over 5 years.
I support Charitywatch, but disagree with this particular harsh stance of theirs. That said, I do think this factor is a legitimate one to take into consideration. Shriner’s unadjusted grade, based on how much they spend on fundraising and management, is A-. Which is very good.
ETA: Of the top 25 most highly compensated leaders of nonprofit organizations, Allison Scott, Orthopedic Surgeon at Shriner’s Hospital, earned 1.68 million dollars, inclusive of a 1.1 million supplemental executive retirement plan payment. At least it wasn’t going to the Presidential Suite.
I agree that donors should do what they want (though I would prefer that everyone do what I want! :-)). I would recommend that folks consider fundraising expenses when deciding on charitable gifts. With that in mind, here are a list of A rated charities listed under the Shriner’s category Health-General:
American Kidney Fund A+
American Liver Fund A
Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation A
Diabetes Action Research and Education Foundation A+
Hearing Health Foundation A+
Lupus Research Alliance A
Michael J Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research A
Partnership for a Healthier America A
Salk Institute for Biological Studies A
Then again, it’s arguably more important to avoid the grifters: many worthwhile charities earn Bs for example. Here are a list of charities in the Health-General category rated F because of high administrative/fundraising expenses:
Defeat Diabetes Foundation F
Heart Center of America (formerly Heart Support of America) F
National Caregiving Foundation F
Project Cure/National Diabetes Fund F
It’s interesting that Diabetes organizations cover the full spectrum of righteous and scammy.
Those interested in donating to organizations that will generate the greatest benefit and alleviate the most suffering per dollar can check out my links in post 5.
I’m not a Shriner and don’t have a dog in this fight, but the Shriner organization owns the hospitals, and if those are counted as assets in the Charitywatch model that may distort the metric.
I’m not wholly convinced of Charitywatch’s high asset policy, but it appears that they do not include fixed assets (land, equipment, buildings) in their definition:
…we conduct a review of a charity’s tax Form 990 and Audit balance sheets and prior to performing our end calculation of available assets, subtract out items such as the equity in Land, Buildings, and Equipment used in operations; Construction in Progress; Permanently Restricted Funds; Accounts Receivable due in greater than five years, and assets that a charity is prohibited by an outside party from using. We do not subtract out Cash, Investments, Temporarily Restricted, Board-Restricted, and other funds that the charity could use if it chose to do so. We also review audit notes for information related to assets, such as imminent and specific plans for large, capital outlays for which the charity is holding funds in reserve, or to see if the charity received an unusually large donation during the fiscal year that it would not reasonably be able to spend by the end of the fiscal period.
Cite: https://www.charitywatch.org/our-charity-rating-process#high-assets
Here’s an article from their website justifying their policy, using a hypothetical example which has a rough similarity to Shriners: https://www.charitywatch.org/charity-donating-articles/don39t-judge-a-not-for-profit-by-its-profits
Here’s a 2009 article from Charitywatch attacking Shriners: https://www.charitywatch.org/charity-donating-articles/large-asset-charity-threatens-to-close-hospitals
If I understand it correctly Shriners wanted to close some hospitals due to declines in their investment portfolio (associated with the Lesser Depression), something that Charitywatch was dubious about.
NYT, 2007:
ABILENE, Tex. — John C. Goline is living proof of the good work done by the Shriners. Struck by polio as a child, he can walk today only because of his six years in and out of the Shriners hospital in Shreveport, La., where, like all patients, he received free treatment.
… “They did wonders for me,” Mr. Goline said.
But his faith was shaken when he joined the leadership of the Suez Shriners in San Angelo, one of 191 temples affiliated with the order. He found that much of the money collected to support the hospitals was commingled with money used for liquor, parties and members’ travel to Shrine events. The Shrine’s national auditor largely confirmed his findings, but not before Mr. Goline was forced out of office.
His experience is not unique. An examination by The New York Times of Shrine records and minutes of Shrine meetings and interviews with current and former Shrine officials painted a picture of lax accounting procedures and oversight under which money earmarked for the hospitals instead financed temple activities.
Cite: https://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/19/us/19shrine.html
Maybe they’ve successfully reformed their procedures since then. Also, there’s a distinction between the Shriner’s fundraisers at local temples and the hospital organization itself: the first can have high fundraising expenses (booze, bingo cards, an occasional envelope with $1000 of cash in it(!)), while Shriner’s Hospital itself does not (though I wouldn’t call it a lean organization).
I have no compelling need to donate to children’s causes specifically. I view children as a subset of humanity and tend to support causes with broad systemic goals that will inevitably help children too. The organization I work for helps victims of intimate partner violence and their children. I donate a lot to my own org. I support the ACLU, Amnesty International and Men Can Stop Rape. Today’s children will eventually be impacted by all of these things.
“There are loads of wonderful charities out there that do incredible work. If I had all the money I wanted, I would happily contribute to xxx charity. Unfortunately, I do not - so I’ve had to pick a few charities to concentrate my donations. I’m sure there are just as many people who contribute to xxx charity who do not contribute to mine. I’m sure it all works out.”.
As long as we have a billionaire class why should anyone donate a dime to any charity? Nobody has to go without–not those in need, and not those who would give–if we incentivize the dragons to disgorge their hoards. Donating to charity may or may not help those in need, but it certainly takes the heat off the crazy-rich.
I’m pretty sure they’re all busy working on a solution to shoot all the needy hordes into space.