Back to In The News

An abuse of goodwill

St. Petersburg Times
A Times Editorial
01.02.08

At this most generous time of year, it is disappointing to learn that too many so-called charitable organizations use heartfelt empathy for military veterans to rip off the American public. Actually, disappointing is too tame a word. Call the tactics of these faux charities what they really are: disgusting, even immoral.

With little oversight by Congress, such charities can spend less than $1 in every $3 they collect for their stated purpose and face no disciplinary action. Lawmakers are starting to pay attention, with recent hearings by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. The testimony has been an eye-opener.

Of the 29 veterans charities monitored by American Institute of Philanthropy, a respected watchdog group, 20 of them fail to meet standards of efficiency or transparency. Three others - the official charities of the Army, Air Force and Navy/Marine Corps - are professionally run but set such strict eligibility requirements (less than 10 percent of the funds' accumulated $638-million is distributed) that they deserve failing marks, said AIP president Daniel Borochoff. It's not much of a charity if so few needy vets qualify.

Many private charities have even worse records. Some well-known organizations received failing marks from AIP for their fundraising practices, including AMVETS and Paralyzed Veterans of America, even though they are chartered by acts of Congress. Others, including American Veterans Relief Foundation and American Ex-Prisoners of War Service Foundation, waste 80 percent of the money they collect on fundraising expenses.

One questionable practice used to inflate the amount some charities say they spend on program services involves "donated" goods and services. Something called Coalition to Support America's Heroes reported an $18-million donation of "phone cards" for soldiers overseas. But the phone cards couldn't be used to call families back home. Instead, the cards connected callers to recorded sports scores that included advertising. Help Hospitalized Veterans, a related charity, also counted the cards as a donation and expense. Meanwhile, Roger Chapin, president of the two organizations, reported $426,000 in salary and benefits and his wife $113,000 last year. Those charities received a failing grade, in part because they spend from $39 to $61 to raise $100. It would be better to have fewer charities that are more efficient, Borochoff said.

Americans who want to size up a charity seeking donations for active soldiers or military veterans should do some homework, making sure that the charity spends at least 65 percent of its cash donations for real services and programs. Some charities receiving excellent marks for the high percentage of collections they spend on useful activities are: Fisher House Foundation, Intrepid Fallen Heroes Fund, National Military Family Association and Armed Services YMCA of the USA.

Sadly, Borochoff concluded in his remarks to Congress, much money is diverted from its intended purpose because for-profit fundraising companies know "that people are more likely to respond to solicitations from (veterans charities) than just about any other type of group."

Congress needs to put an end to abusive practices done in the name of patriotism. When someone gives money to a military charity, most of it should end up actually helping soldiers and their families.

Back to In The News