quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

Try reading the tax return instead of the article. The main purpose of FA is providing college scholarships to children of those killed in the Iraq War and later.

That is not true.  We all read the article just like you did and that is not what it says.

How many of those killed even have kids of college age yet?


Since this war is being fought with the national guard I would imagine that there are quite a few but you do bring up an interesting point.  Why don't you take a few key strokes through google and tell us how many ?

The compensation of the officers and staff is entirely reasonable. SH was paid $0.
You did notice the cost of the "expenses" did you not?

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

Try reading the tax return instead of the article. The main purpose of FA is providing college scholarships to children of those killed in the Iraq War and later. How many of those killed even have kids of college age yet?

A charitable trust was established that has nearly $10 million in assets. $1 million has been paid directly to students. That alone is more than 39% of total revenues devoted to its charitable purpose, which is very typical. "3.68% paid out" is a meaningless number given the primary purpose

The compensation of the officers and staff is entirely reasonable. SH was paid $0.

Much ado about very little.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

Try reading the tax return instead of the article. The main purpose of FA is providing college scholarships to children of those killed in the Iraq War and later. How many of those killed even have kids of college age yet?

A charitable trust was established that has nearly $10 million in assets. $1 million has been paid directly to students. That alone is more than 39% of total revenues devoted to its charitable purpose, which is very typical. "3.68% paid out" is a meaningless number given the primary purpose

The compensation of the officers and staff is entirely reasonable. SH was paid $0.

Much ado about very little.

39% of a charities revenues going to the actual charitable work is an atrociously low percentage. Good charities spend at least 75% of revenues on their programs and less than 25% on other stuff.

quote:

That depends on your definition of "good". 75% is the very top of the range, which is far beyond good and it is achieved only by high volume low cost charities like United Way that have coroporate affiliations to defray costs. FA is low volume, very high cost because of the nature of a concert tour, where you have to rent venues, pay for security, pay for the acts, pay for insurance, pay for the union workers that set up and tear down the equipment.

39% is not at all low for that kind of operation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

Try reading the tax return instead of the article. The main purpose of FA is providing college scholarships to children of those killed in the Iraq War and later. How many of those killed even have kids of college age yet?

A charitable trust was established that has nearly $10 million in assets. $1 million has been paid directly to students. That alone is more than 39% of total revenues devoted to its charitable purpose, which is very typical. "3.68% paid out" is a meaningless number given the primary purpose

The compensation of the officers and staff is entirely reasonable. SH was paid $0.

Much ado about very little.

39% of a charities revenues going to the actual charitable work is an atrociously low percentage. Good charities spend at least 75% of revenues on their programs and less than 25% on other stuff.

That depends on your definition of "good". 75% is the very top of the range, which is far beyond good and it is achieved only by high volume low cost charities like United Way that have coroporate affiliations to defray costs. FA is low volume, very high cost because of the nature of a concert tour, where you have to rent venues, pay for security, pay for the acts, pay for insurance, pay for the union workers that set up and tear down the equipment.

39% is not at all low for that kind of operation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy
That depends on your definition of "good". 75% is the very top of the range, which is far beyond good and it is achieved only by high volume low cost charities like United Way that have coroporate affiliations to defray costs. FA is low volume, very high cost because of the nature of a concert tour, where you have to rent venues, pay for security, pay for the acts, pay for insurance, pay for the union workers that set up and tear down the equipment.

39% is not at all low for that kind of operation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

Try reading the tax return instead of the article. The main purpose of FA is providing college scholarships to children of those killed in the Iraq War and later. How many of those killed even have kids of college age yet?

A charitable trust was established that has nearly $10 million in assets. $1 million has been paid directly to students. That alone is more than 39% of total revenues devoted to its charitable purpose, which is very typical. "3.68% paid out" is a meaningless number given the primary purpose

The compensation of the officers and staff is entirely reasonable. SH was paid $0.

Much ado about very little.

quote:

That depends on your definition of "good". 75% is the very top of the range, which is far beyond good