Here are a few more articles in the ongoing conversation of overhead and the “worst charities.”
“Overhead ratio”
7/11 – Chronicle of Philanthropy – Wounded Warrior CEO Rips Rating Systems as ‘Ineffective and Misinformed’ – CEO says Wounded Warrior could have modified their operations to manage the overhead ratio, but they choose instead to focus on long-term service to their community, which involved upfront costs and other efforts that affected ratios. They disagree with the attitude that overhead is bad and fundraising is either a sign of inefficiency or fraud. In the tell me how you really feel category, the CEO says this of the rating agencies:
“Essentially what these groups are doing is passing judgment on decisions that were made by charity boards and staff on how to best fulfill their missions, meet the needs of their constituencies, and sustain their organizations over the long term,” he said.
He also mentions what few others will discuss: not all charities are completely honest in their functional allocations.
7/15 – Huffington Post – Measuring Charity Effectiveness: Manage Your Mission, Not Your Rating – Steve Nardizzi, CEO of Wounded Warrior Project goes in-depth on why the overhead ratios and rating agency methodology is out of line. This is a must read if you have been following the overhead debate. Several quotes:
The two main issues with ratings agencies (sentence diagrammed by me for emphasis): (more…)