Jump to content


Photo

Comparing Non Profit Organizations with Research


  • Please log in to reply
2 replies to this topic

#1 admin

admin

    Board of Director - Founder

  • Root Admin
  • 1,039 posts

Posted 28 December 2012 - 07:29 PM

Comparing Non Profit Organizations

Comparing non profit organizations engaged in research will give you an idea of how they spend the donated funds. Yes, they spend funds on other services according to what the mission statement says they want to accomplish. But every one of these non profit organizations state in their mission statement that they sponsor research. If you carefully note, of the six non profit organizations listed below the Breast Cancer Research Foundation spends the most on research, while the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute comes in second. The four other non profit organizations spend very little on research and spend most of the donated funds on salaries or private contractors. The six examples are typical of how non profit organizations are run. 

 

National Rosacea Society
Total Revenue for 2007: $824,986
Total Program Expenses (Form 990, Part III): $706,007, of which $100,000 spent on rosacea research 
Compensation to Officers: 0
Salaries: 0

Private Contractors: $529,964

2007 Form 990 includes three contractors included in the Compensation of the 5 Highest Paid for Professional Services:

$420,540 to Glendale, $109,424 to Park, and $65,272 to DG Printing. DG Printing does not appear to be in any way connected to any of the board members of the NRS.

For every dollar donated to the NRS 12 cents in spent on rosacea research, making the NRS the leader in rosacea research non profit organizations. 

____________________________________________________________

Inflammatory Skin Disease Institute
Total Revenue for 2006: $137,642
Total Program Expenses (Form 990, Part III): $53,495, of which none was spent on rosacea research, but there is a report of two cash grants totaling $500 to two individual scholarships. 
Compensation to Officers: $50,000
Salaries: $9,952

If you consider $500 for two scholarships that is the only money spent on research. It would be fair to say that this organization doesn't spend much on research at all.

 

____________________________________________________________

The Skin Cancer Foundation
Total Revenue for 2006: $3,332,382
Total Program Expenses (Form 990, Part III):$1,820,560, of which $145,053 was spent on grants for skin cancer research and programs (Statement 4)

Compensation to officers: $693,520
Salaries: $733,118

For every dollar donated to the SCF 4 cents was spent on skin cancer research.
____________________________________________________________

The Breast Cancer Research Foundation
Total Revenue for 2007: $42.2 Million
Total Prgram Expenses (Form 990, Part III): $35.2 Million, of which all of this was for grants and allocations

Compensation to officers: $219,364
Salaries: $1.1 Million

For every dollar donated to the TBCRF 81 cents was spent on breast cancer research. This organization was rated A+ by the AIP. Check the details for yourself by clicking here
____________________________________________________________

Dana-Farber Cancer Institute
Total Revenue for 2005: $698,288,159
Total Program Expenses (Form 990, Part III): $532 million, of which $268 million was spent on cancer research 
Compensation to Officers: $6.3 million
Salaries: $188.9 million

For every dollar donated to Dana-Faber Cancer Institute 38 cents is spent on cancer research. 
_______________________________________________________________

The American Cancer Society (Group) 
Total Revenue for 2005: $971,279,823
Total Program Expenses (Form 990, Part III): $389 million, of which $7.9 million was spent on cancer research 
Compensation to Officers: 0
Salaries: $263.3 million

For every dollar donated to the ACS Group 0.8 cents (that is less than a penny!) is spent on cancer research. Carefully look at how much this non profit organization received in donations, which is almost a billion dollars. Less than a penny per dollar donated is spent on research. 
______________________________________________________________



#2 admin

admin

    Board of Director - Founder

  • Root Admin
  • 1,039 posts

Posted 17 July 2014 - 06:31 AM

Thought I would add comparing how Wikipedia spends its donated funds compared to other non profit organizations. 

 

Check out the Form 990 for the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. for 2012 and note how much was donated to this 501 c 3 non profit organization: 

 

Total Donations $45 Million 

 

Total percentage donated from the public 95.3%. 

 

Total spent on salaries and compensations: $17.4 Million 

Total spent on private contractors: $1.5 Million

Other Expenses: $16.2

Total Expenses $35.1 Million

 

So while a little more than half of the money was spent on people in the Wikimedia organization and private contractors, the other half of the money spent was on making Wikipedia the site that it is and you know how cool Wikipedia is and what it does. So for $45 million dollars, you can see how this non profit spends the public donations. Less than 5% of donations are from corporate sponsors. 

 

Now compare that with the NRS Form 990 2012 with these figures: 

 

Total Donations Received: $738,289

Total percentage donated from the public 30.69%

 

Total Spent on Private Contractors owned by the Director of the NRS: $427,863 (58% of the total donations)

Total Spent on Rosacea Research: $100,000 (13.5% of the total donations)

 

Almost 70% of the donations to the NRS came from corporate sponsors, mainly pharmaceutical companies. 



#3 Mister_Twiggy

Mister_Twiggy

    Member

  • Members
  • 4 posts

Posted 22 July 2014 - 03:21 AM

Hi Brady, thanks for digging in! This was very eye opening. I was very annoyed with this statement and I called the NRS for some answers.

 

After 2 days, the Director of the NRS gave me a call back. I asked him why so little goes to research and he said that almost all of the money from individual contributions goes to research (his numbers were ~$110,000 from individual contributors and ~$100,000 given to research). However, he stated that the rest of the money from corporate sponsors had "strings attached" and that it couldn't go to research, only promotions, pamphlets, etc. This obviously isn't ideal, but it's corporate money and they can spend it how they please.

 

I took him at his word, but let me know if there is something else I should have countered his argument with. Overall, I'm still pro-NRS for the moment.