chiver78
Administrator
Current Events Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:04:45 GMT -5
Posts: 38,649
|
Post by chiver78 on Feb 2, 2012 10:12:37 GMT -5
and that reputation is becoming more and more that they place a higher importance on their image than actually being a charity. Really? Chatrity Navigator rates SGK as a 4 star Charity FYE 03/2010 With a total revenue of 311,855,544.00 and Total Expenses of the year of 316,267,770.00 Their Admin Expenses are 37,629,831.00 yeah, really. see kittensaver's post above yours. how much of those expenses were to sue other groups for mislabeling, or whatever else?
|
|
cme1201
Junior Associate
Tennis Elbow, Jock Itch, and Athletes Foot, every man has a sports life!
Joined: Apr 6, 2011 13:55:07 GMT -5
Posts: 5,503
|
Post by cme1201 on Feb 2, 2012 10:14:21 GMT -5
SGK did not publically do anything, Planned Parenthood is the one who has gone public. The SGK foundation did what it should have done, tried to keep the decision private. from the article in the OP
|
|
NancysSummerSip
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 19:19:42 GMT -5
Posts: 36,379
Today's Mood: Full of piss and vinegar
Favorite Drink: Anything with ice
|
Post by NancysSummerSip on Feb 2, 2012 10:15:00 GMT -5
No disputing the numbers, cme. Charity Navigator's job is to do just what you've posted. From their own site:
Charity Navigator, America's leading independent charity evaluator, works to advance a more efficient and responsive philanthropic marketplace by evaluating the Financial Health and Accountability and Transparency of America's largest charities.
No one can argue the money. No one has. It's the call they've made in regards to how they've handled the situation with PP that's gotten people's attention. The financial health of their organization is not in question.
|
|
Taxman10
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 15:12:43 GMT -5
Posts: 3,455
|
Post by Taxman10 on Feb 2, 2012 11:06:38 GMT -5
that is such an ignorant statement I don't even know where to begin.....
But "ok"
LOL
Once you give money to a non-profit, it's the NPO's money to use it as they see fit, unless you specifically restrict it for something. SGK has no obligation to give it to any other NPO. And I highly doubt too many people restrict their contributions to SGK as "for Planned Parenthood"
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 19, 2024 10:16:43 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2012 11:16:46 GMT -5
I think "buyer beware" should be in effect here. It's up to the donor to know what groups their charity supports.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Feb 2, 2012 11:24:32 GMT -5
I am poor people. More so than you could imagine. Health dept does mammograms once a year. Takes about two weeks and you have to make an appointment a year in advance. But it's there.
But you're making the assumption that all health departments across the US provide the same services.
Not so.
|
|
Taxman10
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 15:12:43 GMT -5
Posts: 3,455
|
Post by Taxman10 on Feb 2, 2012 11:26:42 GMT -5
I think "buyer beware" should be in effect here. It's up to the donor to know what groups their charity supports. Exactly...and this information is generally available on the charity's website or www.guidestar.org where you can find the 990.
|
|
cme1201
Junior Associate
Tennis Elbow, Jock Itch, and Athletes Foot, every man has a sports life!
Joined: Apr 6, 2011 13:55:07 GMT -5
Posts: 5,503
|
Post by cme1201 on Feb 2, 2012 11:43:26 GMT -5
how much of those expenses were to sue other groups for mislabeling, or whatever else?
On the only article I can really find addressing the issue is that roughly 1 million is used to protect the over 200 Trademarks that SGK Foundation has.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,345
|
Post by swamp on Feb 2, 2012 11:47:43 GMT -5
You don't know any poor people, do you? I am poor people. More so than you could imagine. Health dept does mammograms once a year. Takes about two weeks and you have to make an appointment a year in advance. But it's there. Bully for you. Here, there is a severe shortage of primary care doctors, even fewer doctors that take Medicaid, and 1 women's clinic for 110,000 people, not counting the 4 branches of Planned Parenthood.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,345
|
Post by swamp on Feb 2, 2012 11:51:03 GMT -5
that is such an ignorant statement I don't even know where to begin..... But "ok" LOL Once you give money to a non-profit, it's the NPO's money to use it as they see fit, unless you specifically restrict it for something. SGK has no obligation to give it to any other NPO. And I highly doubt too many people restrict their contributions to SGK as "for Planned Parenthood" I'm not an accountant, nor do I play one on TV, but I do serve on some non profit boards. Isn't there some IRS regulation that a certain percentage of a nonprofits funds have to be used in a certain way to maintain their status? It's not public money, but they do have some restrictions on how it can be used, right?
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,345
|
Post by swamp on Feb 2, 2012 11:52:27 GMT -5
how much of those expenses were to sue other groups for mislabeling, or whatever else? On the only article I can really find addressing the issue is that roughly 1 million is used to protect the over 200 Trademarks that SGK Foundation has. Specifically "For the Cure" So if I run a small golf tournament "For the Cure of Hemorrhoids" SGK is gonna come after me because I used the term "For the Cure" Do you think I should give out brown ribbons in my "for the Cure of Hemorrhoids" golf tourney?
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,615
|
Post by Tennesseer on Feb 2, 2012 11:55:50 GMT -5
I am not happy with the SGK move but I don't believe you shouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water.
As far as I know the SGK foundation does good and important work. Instead of completely cutting off support for SGK, why not make your point and show your support for both groups by making a donation to SGK in honor of Planned Parenthood or vice versa. Let each group know you support the other group.
|
|
gavinsnana
Senior Member
If we forget we are One Nation Under God, then we are a Nation gone under. Ronald Reagan
Joined: Oct 13, 2011 11:02:40 GMT -5
Posts: 3,201
|
Post by gavinsnana on Feb 2, 2012 12:06:43 GMT -5
I know why and understand why they are under investigation. If the Komen foundation cannot fund PPH, then fund another private clinic, a place where these women can get the test they need . I don't believe taxpayers should fund any of these programs, especially abortions.. and if they did anything illegal, it will come to light. But, IMO.. they just cannot yank these funds and leave these women without help. Agreed! Frankly, the reason they (PP) are "under investigation" stinks of politics and pressure (thus my follow-the-money comment). But it should also be noted that they (Komen) have been withdrawing funds from community non-profits all over the country for the last three years. Folks here and those burning up other websites and chat room today over this issue need to realize that the abortion debate is all huff and smoke and grandstanding. The real reason is that Komen is radically changing direction and moving away from their original mission (grass-roots, community-based prevention and early detection). As I said earlier, pull their Annual Reports for the last few years and pay close attention to how funding has shifted from report to report. Very sad for the needy communities that the original founder wanted to help so other women wouldn't end up like her sister . . . Kitty, do they have any proof that these funds were used for Abortions? If so, then they will be in deep poo. I know this is a touchy subject.. even though I am for the women's right to chose... I am against abortions.. but it is legal.. and IMO a moral issue (between you and God) and not you and the Government. I am against taxpayer money paying for it .. I don't believe that others should decide what you do with your body.. whether its an abortion, having an affair.. eat too much, eat too little or Peirce it or tattoo it. Its your business, but.. I don't want to pay for those decisions.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,615
|
Post by Tennesseer on Feb 2, 2012 12:08:39 GMT -5
You don't know any poor people, do you? I am poor people. More so than you could imagine. Health dept does mammograms once a year. Takes about two weeks and you have to make an appointment a year in advance. But it's there. You discover a lump in your breast. Do you really want to wait 12 months for your mammogram to discover the lump is malignant and you have stage IV cancer? The cost of treating the cancer and probability of death is greater having had to wait a year for your appointment rather than walking into your local Planned Parenthood office shortly after discovering of the lump.
|
|
Taxman10
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 15:12:43 GMT -5
Posts: 3,455
|
Post by Taxman10 on Feb 2, 2012 12:08:46 GMT -5
that is such an ignorant statement I don't even know where to begin..... But "ok" LOL Once you give money to a non-profit, it's the NPO's money to use it as they see fit, unless you specifically restrict it for something. SGK has no obligation to give it to any other NPO. And I highly doubt too many people restrict their contributions to SGK as "for Planned Parenthood" I'm not an accountant, nor do I play one on TV, but I do serve on some non profit boards. Isn't there some IRS regulation that a certain percentage of a nonprofits funds have to be used in a certain way to maintain their status? It's not public money, but they do have some restrictions on how it can be used, right? There are not "hard and fast" percentages that the IRS has (i.e. at least 50% of Expenses must be Program related) however, (and I've never seen a NPO like this) if your organization consistently had M,G&A over 70% or something crazy, you could very well get your 501(c)3 status pulled.
|
|
Taxman10
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 15:12:43 GMT -5
Posts: 3,455
|
Post by Taxman10 on Feb 2, 2012 12:10:16 GMT -5
how much of those expenses were to sue other groups for mislabeling, or whatever else? On the only article I can really find addressing the issue is that roughly 1 million is used to protect the over 200 Trademarks that SGK Foundation has. Specifically "For the Cure" So if I run a small golf tournament "For the Cure of Hemorrhoids" SGK is gonna come after me because I used the term "For the Cure" Do you think I should give out brown ribbons in my "for the Cure of Hemorrhoids" golf tourney? let me know when the "for the relief" of hemorrhoids golf tourney is - i would like to donate :-)
|
|
kittensaver
Junior Associate
We cannot do great things. We can only do small things with great love. - Mother Teresa
Joined: Nov 22, 2011 16:16:36 GMT -5
Posts: 7,983
|
Post by kittensaver on Feb 2, 2012 12:26:07 GMT -5
Aw, now I have to give kittensaver karma again. I think she's had her caffeine for the day. . In a good way, of course.
========
Aw thanks Nancy! (but it's not the caffeine. I'm wired because I've been up every 3 hours round the clock since Monday afternoon with a litter of orphaned bottlefeeders - thus the moniker).
|
|
kittensaver
Junior Associate
We cannot do great things. We can only do small things with great love. - Mother Teresa
Joined: Nov 22, 2011 16:16:36 GMT -5
Posts: 7,983
|
Post by kittensaver on Feb 2, 2012 12:39:32 GMT -5
that is such an ignorant statement I don't even know where to begin..... But "ok" LOL Once you give money to a non-profit, it's the NPO's money to use it as they see fit, unless you specifically restrict it for something. SGK has no obligation to give it to any other NPO. And I highly doubt too many people restrict their contributions to SGK as "for Planned Parenthood" No, this is NOT ignorant (or wrong). I work in the non-profit arena and respectfully invite you to read (or re-read) Section 501c of the tax code. You can argue semantics all week about who "owns" the money, but as I stated earlier, non-profits are the recipients of public trust funds (donations for stated charitable purposes) and must by law use those funds as intended. "Intended" means according to their Charitable Mission for which they originally received their tax-exempt status. Are they allowed to do what they want with it once they get it? Yes, and I already agreed with this. BUT - and this is a very big "but" - they still must use if for their charitable intended purpose. But by the nature of their business design their work is not private, and you can read any 990 of any agency you want online. Those who don't use their funds as defined CAN and DO lose their tax exemption.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Feb 2, 2012 12:49:15 GMT -5
And in three one-line quotes, we have a reasonable assessment of the situation. If this matter is about abortion (many here are suggesting otherwise), a charity has every right to funnel its proceeds to an organization that performs 100% mammograms and 0% child killing rather than 97% mammograms and 3% child killing. Ms. Tequila, the outrage you're sensing has nothing to do with availability of mammograms for poor women. Posters here know that SGK funds don't magically disappear; they're redirected to other organizations performing the same work (or other relevant cancer work). The perception is that SGK is withdrawing their support from PP due to the abortion issue. In so doing, they are (perceived as) taking an unofficial but still very definite position on the rightness of abortion—specifically that it is wrong. The "outrage" is a reaction by individuals who do not want to be told that the killing of unborn children is wrong. It's that simple. Of course, "How dare they say abortion is wrong." isn't a grievance many posters are willing to admit (or even acknowledge), which is why you've been striving in vain to make sense of their outrage.
|
|
chiver78
Administrator
Current Events Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:04:45 GMT -5
Posts: 38,649
|
Post by chiver78 on Feb 2, 2012 12:51:55 GMT -5
Ms. Tequila, the outrage you're sensing has nothing to do with availability of mammograms for poor women. Posters here know that SGK funds don't magically disappear; they're redirected to other organizations performing the same work (or other relevant cancer work). please find the organization that does everything PP does without the abortion services, for the same section of the population. I think MJ asked this 3 or 4 pages ago, and we haven't seen an answer. when that organization is found, I'd like to see SGK direct all the funds that used to go to PP that way - to continue supporting health services for women of all incomes.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,345
|
Post by swamp on Feb 2, 2012 12:54:16 GMT -5
I'd have no problem with SGK is doing if they announced they were funding a replacement program............
|
|
chiver78
Administrator
Current Events Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:04:45 GMT -5
Posts: 38,649
|
Post by chiver78 on Feb 2, 2012 12:54:48 GMT -5
I'd have no problem with SGK is doing if they announced they were funding a replacement program............
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Feb 2, 2012 13:03:12 GMT -5
A charitable organization passes a rule that they will not funnel their money to organizations under government investigation and people are angry about this?
|
|
kittensaver
Junior Associate
We cannot do great things. We can only do small things with great love. - Mother Teresa
Joined: Nov 22, 2011 16:16:36 GMT -5
Posts: 7,983
|
Post by kittensaver on Feb 2, 2012 13:08:39 GMT -5
Ms. Tequila, the outrage you're sensing has nothing to do with availability of mammograms for poor women. Posters here know that SGK funds don't magically disappear; they're redirected to other organizations performing the same work (or other relevant cancer work). please find the organization that does everything PP does without the abortion services, for the same section of the population. I think MJ asked this 3 or 4 pages ago, and we haven't seen an answer. when that organization is found, I'd like to see SGK direct all the funds that used to go to PP that way - to continue supporting health services for women of all incomes. ========= Okay, I'm gonna try one more time . . . I'm not outraged by the abortion debate. Rage on all you want about that one, but I'm out of it. I'm outraged because as a member of the non-profit community(*), I've spent the past 3 years watching SGK systematically withdraw funding from community providers for cancer prevention and early detection services. PP is simply the most recent (and most public and controversial) link in the chain. And no, that money has NOT gone elsewhere to other service providers - sorry - as much as we would like to hope or fantisize that it would. It is going back into their fundraising coffers and to big pharma. From where I sit, they are talking out of both sides of their mouths. The founder's original mission was to provide education, prevention and early intervention services to all women and local communities regardless of ability to pay, so that others would not have to die like her sister did. Their actions no longer match with their words. IMHO (*) = my agency has not and never will be a recipient of SGK or any other cancer charity funds
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Feb 2, 2012 13:10:07 GMT -5
Re: Planned Parenthood to lose funding « Reply #177 Today at 12:49pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote:I'm not sure I understand why everyone is so upset...this is a private organization who is choosing to direct their monies elsewhere....they have no obligation to fund Planned Parenthood or any other organization. My guess is they will still fund mammograms for the poor, just not through Planned Parenthood. I'm ok with that. Quote:Sorry folks, but I don't think people that oppose abortion should have to support it in any way. Especially financially. I don't necessarily think they should be able to make it illegal. But they should not be forced to have their money support it, either through donations or taxes. Quote:So if you don't contribute and you don't buy any of the products, why are you so pissed? The people that actually donate to SGK have spoken and they do not want their donations going to PP....shouldn't the people who are actually contributing have a say where their dollars go? And in three one-line quotes, we have a reasonable assessment of the situation. Two of those three one-line quotes were mine...YAY Tina!
|
|
kittensaver
Junior Associate
We cannot do great things. We can only do small things with great love. - Mother Teresa
Joined: Nov 22, 2011 16:16:36 GMT -5
Posts: 7,983
|
Post by kittensaver on Feb 2, 2012 13:10:16 GMT -5
I'd have no problem with SGK is doing if they announced they were funding a replacement program............ The problem is, this is not happening!
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Feb 2, 2012 13:10:54 GMT -5
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "A charitable organization passes a rule that they will not funnel their money to organizations under government investigation and people are angry about this? "
I'm not angry
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Feb 2, 2012 13:15:23 GMT -5
The problem is, this is not happening! I don't see it as a problem that someone won't make an announcement just because some people want them to.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Feb 2, 2012 13:16:45 GMT -5
Firstly, because none of us has the time to look at the million-and-one NPOs to determine which ones have mandates that overlap fully or in part with PP. The planners at SGK do.
Secondly, because it's irrelevant unless you believe SGK will redirect funds to "lesser-worthy" causes. Which is more worthy: helping to screen out breast cancer in poor women or helping poor women get proper eyecare? Free birth control pills or free prosthetic limbs? Even supposing the "worth" could be somehow quantified, I certainly couldn't tell you.
Who says they haven't? Is somebody here willing to wade through their press releases from anywhere between a month ago and a month from now?
This is a legitimate grievance. But it appears to be your personal grievance in the sense that nobody else here has mentioned it.
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Feb 2, 2012 13:18:37 GMT -5
"And no, that money has NOT gone elsewhere to other service providers - sorry - as much as we would like to hope or fantisize that it would. It is going back into their fundraising coffers and to big pharma."
So you're upset because their money is actually going toward trying to find a cure, which they've been publicly saying is their aim for a long time now?
|
|