From BBB web site: "Some people question how much nonprofits spend on
programs. The BBB Wise Giving Alliance (a nonprofit organization itself)
recommends that nonprofits spend at least 50 percent on program
activity. Other organizations set this level as high as 80 percent. The
remainder is to be spent on nonprogram expenses, such as administrative
and fundraising costs. The amount spent on fundraising can vary widely
based upon whether the nonprofit is new or established with many donors.
However, no regulation exists to ensure that the majority of revenues
are spent on the cause for which the funds were collected."
http://www.referenceforbusiness.com/management/Mar-No/Nonprofit-Organizations.html
Neighbors,
Understanding the techniques of attack journalism and power is extremely
important. In the attack piece against the Committee of Seventy, Mr
West's "evaluating" and "measures"are absurd, made up standards, and are
meant to fool uncritical readers.
Most people don't need to understand program evaluation techniques to
recognize that averages are not acceptable "measures." The committee of
Seventy dismissed Mr. West's "evaluation" without comment because it's a
laughable technique that would never be used by honest evaluators;
especially as a guideline for evaluating a data set as variable as
non-profit budgets.
To illustrate, I've written social service grants for a community
group in which almost all outside revenue was to be dedicated to
salaries and yet the Clark Park festivals had 0% for salaries. Mr West
grabbed these averages from a web site and made them Tony West's law.
Had West given evidence of misuse of funds (WHICH HE DID NOT) to justify
his various attacks against Seventy, it still would not have proven his
main attack, asserting a failure of transparency. (In the Weekly Press,
Seventy willingly gave the correct figures from its budget showing no
intention of hiding anything. They explained that they made figures
available as the law required.) Of course, they completely ignored
West's law, his antics, and the city's tabloid, the Public Record.
Appropriately, they simply commented about West's incorrect facts and
corrected those.
Seventy was clearly being attacked because it advocates transparency in
government and in government dealings with fake non-profits. Those who
believe that Philadelphia should remain a collection of power blocks
that operate as fiefdoms, hate transparency like West and Tayoun and may
applaud this type of attack "journalism"
Look at Tayoun's opinion on the recent PA Supreme Court decision against
backroom dealings. He wants government to operate like the FOCP or
suggests private consultations must occur to protect the Philadelphia
tradition of secret backroom dealing! (e.g. The Clark Park Partnership)
After reading this, neighbors might understand why West tried this
ridiculous attack and made-up evaluation against an advocate for
transparency.
http://www.phillyrecord.com/?p=1019
<http://www.referenceforbusiness.com/management/Mar-No/Nonprofit-Organizations.html#ixzz16U3ZOUVx>
On 11/25/2010 9:03 PM, Anthony West wrote:
You are correct: I should have written, "Mrs. Contosta or me."
My article makes four different observations of fact, none of which
Stalberg disputed. One is that Committee of 70 does not comply with
the Better Business Bureau's recommendations for nonprofit charities,
which should publish their annual budget and latest tax return on
their website. The second is that its tax filings on GuideStar were
extremely late when the article was written. The third is that the
Pennsylvania Dept. of State reported standard measures based on 70's
2008 return. The fourth is that by three important measures, 70 had
been underspending on mission and overspending on housekeeping
functions -- all warning signs when evaluating a nonprofit.
The numbers I reported for 2008 were taken directly from the Dept. of
State website at that time. We still cannot see 70's 2009 tax return
or its 2010 budget on its website. These are not violations of law but
of good form.
If the Committee of 70 were in the business of running festivals or
schools or clinics, one might worry less about such form. But this
body's /main business is to advise how other bodies should conduct
public business. /That's what your charity dollar goes to buy with
them. So it's disconcerting that it doesn't take the advice of
independent, reputable bodies which perform the same service for 70's
own realm -- the nonprofit biz. It judges -- but it will not be judged.
Read the original story at http://www.phillyrecord.com/?p=963. And
happy Thanksgiving everyone, although it may be a happier one if
you've got better things to do.
-- Tony West
"On 11/25/2010 8:33 AM, Glenn wrote:
From the text, Mr West has tried to equate the broad recommendations
(averages) from some ngo/think tank as if they were law. He appears
to be using the ratios in their guidelines to make a case that the
Commiittee is avoiding transparency requirements in their
operations. His evidence does not address or prove a lack of
transparency. It's nonsense. It's the usual fallacious arguing
tricks we've come to know so well on this list.
The committee of seventy seems to have openly given its budget
numbers to the Weekly Press showing no desire to avoid transparency.
They simply assert that Mr. West got his facts wrong on what appears
to be an attack, such as destroyed the innocent and excellent group
Acorn (proven to have been innocent of all fake journalism charges)
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.872 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3278 - Release Date: 11/25/10
02:34:00
