Atlanteax
05-21-2015, 04:00 PM
http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/charities-dont-need-to-break-laws-to-waste-your-money/
A Tennessee family is accused of using a fraudulent network of charities to take more than $187 million from donors and spend it on themselves. The Federal Trade Commission filed suit against three members of the Reynolds family but is unlikely to recover the money it says their charities scammed out of donors. The Cancer Fund of America and three additional groups made their money by hiring telemarketers to cold-call people and ask for $20 donations.
In 2013, for-profit telemarketers persuaded New Yorkers to donate $302 million to charity. More than half of that money, $156 million, went straight to the telemarketing firms, rather than the charities they were working for. So, for every dollar a New Yorker gave, only 48 cents reached the group they were trying to give to, and some of that will be spent on salaries, offices and other overhead costs, leaving less than donors might expect for the people the group ostensibly serves.
Utterly terrible.
Even charities with 'honest intentions' are plagued by significant inefficiencies, which is part of why I question the merits of supporting them.
.
Too bad government programs essentially functions the same way, albeit with 'mandatory donations'.
A Tennessee family is accused of using a fraudulent network of charities to take more than $187 million from donors and spend it on themselves. The Federal Trade Commission filed suit against three members of the Reynolds family but is unlikely to recover the money it says their charities scammed out of donors. The Cancer Fund of America and three additional groups made their money by hiring telemarketers to cold-call people and ask for $20 donations.
In 2013, for-profit telemarketers persuaded New Yorkers to donate $302 million to charity. More than half of that money, $156 million, went straight to the telemarketing firms, rather than the charities they were working for. So, for every dollar a New Yorker gave, only 48 cents reached the group they were trying to give to, and some of that will be spent on salaries, offices and other overhead costs, leaving less than donors might expect for the people the group ostensibly serves.
Utterly terrible.
Even charities with 'honest intentions' are plagued by significant inefficiencies, which is part of why I question the merits of supporting them.
.
Too bad government programs essentially functions the same way, albeit with 'mandatory donations'.