How to read the data

From ANIMAL PEOPLE,  January/February 2003:

Who gets the money?  addenda

The data below updates and supplements the 13th annual ANIMAL
PEOPLE “Who gets the money?” report on the budgets,  assets,  and
salaries paid by the major U.S. animal-related charities,  plus
miscellaneous local activist groups,  humane societies,  and some
prominent organizations abroad,  published in our December 2002
Foreign data is stated in U.S. dollars at average 2001 exchange rates.
Most charities are identified in the second column by
apparent focus:  A for advocacy,  C for conservation of habitat via
acquisition,  E for education,  H for support of hunting (either for
“wildlife management” or recreation),  L for litigation,  N for
neutering,  P for publication,  R for animal rights,  S for
shelter/sanctuary maintenance,  V for focus on vivisection,  and W
for animal welfare.

Most of the financial data for U.S. organizations comes from
Internal Revenue Service Form 990 filings.   The basic data on any
U.S. charity and often full Form 990s are available–free–at
<>.  The data for foreign organizations,  and for
U.S. organizations when Form 990 is unavailable,  comes from
published balance sheets.
Who Gets The Money? enables donors to evaluate charities
using three different standard fiscal measures.
The yardstick most used by charity heads is the balance of
donations,  program service revenue,  and unrelated business income
(such as receipts from running a thrift store) with the expense of
running programs.
The ideal is that the program budget should equal the funds
raised or earned within the year,  while interest on reserves should
cover the cost of raising the money.  Capital-intensive special
projects,  e.g. building a shelter,  should be funded by grants and
This yardstick favors charities old enough to attract big
bequests.  If younger charities try to build reserves big enough to
pay interest equal to their fundraising cost,  they are at risk of
becoming direct mail mills.
Comparing program service to overhead expense is the
evaluative approach favored by the Wise Giving Alliance,  formed by a
merger of the Philanthropic Advisory Service of the Council of Better
Business Bureaus with the National Charities Information Bureau.
Their standard is that charities should spend at least 65% of their
budgets on programs,  excluding direct mail appeals.  This standard
is stricter–and more indicative of priorities–than IRS rules,
which allow charities to call some direct mail costs “program
service,  ” as “public education.”
The % column in our tables states each charity’s overhead and
fundraising costs as it declares them.
The ADJ column states those costs as they appear to be,  if
we ask of  each mailing,  “Would this have been sent if postal rules
forbade including a donor card and a return envelope?”  If the answer
is no,  the mailing should properly be called “fundraising.”
Differences between the declared and adjusted balance of
program and fundraising/ overhead spending appear in boldface.
Groups which collect interest on large endowments tend to have lower
overhead because they can do less fundraising.
The third standard evaluative approach is to compare budget
to assets.   Note that total assets may add up to less than the sum
of tangible assets plus funds and investments because of declared
liabilities,  such as mortgage debt on real estate.  Italics,  in the
asset columns,  indicate a deficit.
Says the Wise Giving Alliance,  “Usually,  the organization’s
net assets available for the next fiscal year should not be more than
twice the higher of the current year’s expenses or the next year’s
More complete explanations of how to read and analyze the
data was included in the December 2002 edition of ANIMAL PEOPLE,  and
is in the annual ANIMAL PEOPLE Watchdog Report on Animal Protection
Charities handbook ($20,  published each April).

Budgets,  Programs,  Overhead & Assets –
Data received after December 2002 deadline

Good Shepherd Foundation
TYPE             AE
GIVEN/EARNED     $       16,302
BUDGET           $       92,634
PROGRAMS         $       82,455

OVERHEAD         $       10,179
%                11%
ADJ              11%
NET ASSETS       $    1,774,976
TANGIBLE ASSETS  $      598,721
FUNDS/INVEST     $      985,212

NOTE:  Founded in 1949 by Rosalie Gordon,  The Good Shepherd
Foundation formerly operated an animal shelter,  spay/neuter project,
and thrift store in northern California.  After Gordon died in 1990,
the presidency passed to her niece,  then known as Tanya Keogh.  Her
husband Bill Keogh was charged with Animal Liberation Front activity
in 1990.  The charges were dropped when the prosecution refused to
identify a key source.  Divorcing him,  Tanya Keogh married Sydney
Ross Singer,  with whom she started the Institute for the Study of
Culturogenic Disease in 1991,  under the nonprofit umbrella of the
Good Shepherd Foundation.  She is now known as Soma
Grismaijer-Singer.  The California shelter burned down in 1995.  The
Good Shepherd Foundation relocated to Pahoa,  Hawaii.  Current
projects include amplifying claims that “flat sleeping causes brain
congestion and pressure,”  that “Breast disease is only a problem in
cultures where women wear bras,”  and that conventional toilet
posture is unhealthy.  The most prominent animal-related project is
opposition to proposed aerial spraying of caffeine,  hydrated lime,
and citric acid to combat the spread in Hawaii of at least four
species of Caribbean tree frog.  The Good Shepherd Foundation filing
of IRS Form 990 calls the proposed caffeine use “a potential hazard
to human life.”  Singer recently proposed to hand-capture the
estimated several thousand tree frogs by hand and repatriate them to
Puerto Rico.

Greek Animal Welfare Fund
TYPE             AES
GIVEN/EARNED     $      160,760
BUDGET           $      259,184
PROGRAMS         $      153,202
OVERHEAD         $      105,982
%                41%
ADJ              41%
NET ASSETS       $      550,334
TANGIBLE ASSETS  $        3,224
FUNDS/INVEST     $    1,006,850

Humane Society of Missouri
TYPE             S
GIVEN/EARNED     $    8,238,827
BUDGET           $    9,170,263
PROGRAMS         $    6,324,851
OVERHEAD         $    2,845,412
%                31%
ADJ              31%
NET ASSETS       $   56,807,194
TANGIBLE ASSETS  $    1,554,621
FUNDS/INVEST     $   16,280,181

NOTE:  The Humane Society of Missouri claims $27.2 million in assets
of a nature unclear from IRS Form 990 (filing of 9/21/2001).
President Kathy Warnick,  paid $41,538 for a partial year,  is
reportedly now paid circa $140,000/year.  Top-paid staff included
chief financial officer Granville Buckley,  $69,071,  plus
veterinarians Peter Cappel,  $94,868;  Lonny Dixon,  $70,990;  David
Noatch,  $61,588;  and Larry Alkire,  $59,260.

In Defence of Animals (INDIA)
TYPE              S
GIVEN/EARNED      $       30,661
BUDGET            $       41,613
PROGRAMS          $       35,947
OVERHEAD          $        5,666
%                 14%
ADJ               14%
NET ASSETS        $       19,174
TANGIBLE ASSETS   $        8,376
FUNDS/INVEST      $        9,457

NOTE:  In Defence of Animals in India has no connection with the U.S.
organization of similar name.

National Wildlife Federation
TYPE             AEH
GIVEN/EARNED     $   64,482,242
BUDGET           $  110,248,511
PROGRAMS         $   94,111,288
OVERHEAD         $   16,137,223
%                15%
ADJ              25%
NET ASSETS       $   25,547,384
TANGIBLE ASSETS  $   33,255,448
FUNDS/INVEST     $   12,857,088

NOTE:  The National Wildlife Federation top-paid staff were president
Mark Van Putten,  $297,810;  treasurer Lawrence J. Amon,  $185,368;
secretary Eileen John-son,  $159,649;  assistant treasurer Dulce
Gomez-Zormelo,  $106,835;  and assistant secretary Matthew Clanton,
$76,709.  NWF vice chair Edward Clark objected to a December 2002
ANIMAL PEOPLE mention that,  “The NWF was formed in 1936 as the
national umbrella for 48 state hunting clubs.”  Some NWF affiliates
have de-emphasized hunting,  but official NWF policy still states,
“We support hunting.”  ANIMAL PEOPLE has asked NWF repeatedly since
March 1998 if it has encouraged members and affiliates to refrain
from participating in prairie dog and ground squirrel killing
contests,  in view of  NWF efforts to list prairie dogs as a
threatened species.  Clark promised to try to get an answer,  but as
yet has not.  The unaffiliated but parallel Saskatoon Wildlife
Federation hosted a ground squirrel killing contest in spring 2002.
The also unaffiliated but parallel British Columbia Wildlife
Federation on November 25,  2002 celebrated the passage of the B.C.
Hunting and Fishing Heritage Act,  establishing a legal right to hunt
and fish.  The Ontario Wildlife Federation,  another unaffiliated but
parallel organization,  earlier in 2002 won passage of a similar bill.

PAWS Animal Rescue (IRELAND)
TYPE             S
GIVEN/EARNED     $      165,800
BUDGET           $      199,182
PROGRAMS         $      159,052
OVERHEAD         $       40,130
%                20%
ADJ              20%

NOTE:  PAWS Animal Rescue of Ireland haS no connection with the U.S.
organizations of similar name.

Primarily Primates
TYPE             S
GIVEN/EARNED     $      835,423
BUDGET           $      962,473
PROGRAMS         $      542,020
OVERHEAD         $      420,453
%                44%
ADJ              44%
NET ASSETS       $    2,333,572
TANGIBLE ASSETS  $    2,333,572
FUNDS/INVEST     $      114,179

SPA de Leon (FRANCE)
TYPE             S
GIVEN/EARNED     $    2,962,523
BUDGET           $    2,619,446
PROGRAMS         $    1,828,311
OVERHEAD         $    1,082,185
%                41%
ADJ              41%

Wildlife Waystation
TYPE             S
GIVEN/EARNED     $    1,922,833
BUDGET           $    3,564,721
PROGRAMS         $    2,458,892
OVERHEAD         $    1,105,829
%                31%
ADJ              31%
NET ASSETS       $    2,073,474
TANGIBLE ASSETS  $    1,612,587
FUNDS/INVEST     $    1,041,627

NOTE:  Wildlife Waystation president Martine Colette was paid
$60,000.  Secretary Bob Wenners (who left in mid-2002) was paid
$57,504.  Representing Wildlife Waystation throughout 2001,  direct
mail fundraiser Bruce Eberle said his firm was paid on a flat fee
basis,  but the Waystation filing of IRS Form 990 declares that no
professional fundraising fees were paid.

Print Friendly

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.