We wrote last week about a curious pitch for donations -- from Starbucks, of all places -- to something called the Opportunity Finance Network (and don't forget the ®). That organization presents itself as "national network of community development financial institutions (CDFIs) investing in opportunities that benefit low-income, low-wealth, and other disadvantaged communities across America." To us, it sounded like asking average Joes to donate money to banks, which is the height of absurdity.
We've been digging a little deeper, and discover that OFN is a Philadelphia-based tax-exempt membership organization of CDFIs. Its president, Mark Pinsky, is paid about $225,000 a year, plus benefits worth about $17,000. It's got five vice presidents each making about $125,000 a year. It also paid an outside financial consultant another $150,000 in the year 2010.
OFN's membership includes two organizations operating in Oregon: CASA of Oregon, based in Sherwood; and Enterprise Cascadia, based in Ilwaco, Washington (just across from Astoria). Enterprise, whose real name is Shorebank Enterprise Group Pacific, recently received $231,000 from the Starbucks seed fund. Both are section 501(c)(3) organizations, with CASA of Oregon's mission being to help farm workers and Enterprise Cascadia's being to promote "environmentally restorative" businesses, especially in coastal areas. They both make loans to help their constituencies. From their financial statements (here and here), they both seem to be lean organizations -- far more so than OFN.
From our perspective, if one wanted to chip in a few bucks to promote the making of loans to worthy small businesses, it would probably make more sense to send the donation straight to CASA of Oregon or Enterprise Cascadia, rather than funnel it through Starbucks and OFN. Although the latter may be a nonprofit organization, it has lots of overhead that the local outfits don't. Eliminate the middle man, buy locally -- pick your cliché.
Comments (9)
In order to give to charities one has to do some real research, IMO.
Just like most things in this life giving takes time, energy, knowledge, and hard work to achieve success.
Do the homework!
The objective of the 501 (3c) Federal tax deduction is to assist in the ability of charitable institutions to do good works. I always cringe when I see Directors of non-profits paying themselves large salaries. I would like to see the IRS institute limits on renumeration based on the volume and percentage of donations that are actually delivered to the clients of the non-profits. If the non-profit doesnt meet a minimum percentage of its receipts actually going to the clients then the Directors should not receive a salary at all. Perhaps maximum salaries could be established based on the scale of the operation and the percent effiency. The point is, neither the individuals or the organization operating as a non-profit should show profits beyond the bare minimum to get the job done. This could make a great debate!
I have worked in nonprofits my entire adult life. Most nonprofits do not give money directly to clients. Most provide services, via staff, to clients. And everyone working for that nonprofit is, in some way, contributing to that effort. Even the people in administration who have no contact with the clients - because you can't run a nonprofit without fiscal, development, and other departments.
Most salaries are scaled down from what the boss makes...just about anywhere - for- and non-profit alike. But in most nonprofits there isn't a lot of $$ for extra staff and most Executive Directors work hard and very long hours and give up a lot of personal time when it comes to their agencies. Smart people who have years of experience in the field and advanced degrees expect a certain amount of renumeration for that. If you cap salaries you will see a distinct lack of talent at the head of nonprofits or you will only find rich people taking those jobs.
I buy my own pens and other things to make my work life more liveable and make way less than most folks my age with my education. My choice, yes it is, but being told that an executive director has to max out their salary or that the IRS should institute limits is just seriously insulting.
Those of us who dedicate their professional life to trying to make things better did not take a vow of poverty or some 'nonprofit oath' and we generally do not enjoy how low our salaries are. We just enjoy what we do and like that we make our living by some other means than making someone else rich. If you spent a week with some of our local mid-sized agency executive directors, I'd be willing to bet that you'd agree that 6 figures is not at all extravagant. They are the equivalent of a CEO...in fact, ours is a CEO.
But OK, how about we start with the faith-based organizations - especially those that are nonsecular? Let's limit their tax-exempt status based on the separation of church and state. Why should my tax dollars subsidize the building of a church and why should a wealthy religious entity not have to pay taxes at all when most of what they do is self-serving for them and their flock?
I agree that people should give directly to the nonprofit they want to support rather than the larger conduit organizations. But, I also understand why these organizations exist. Essentially that is what United Way is. I'm guessing their compensation is probably similar.
I run a small nonprofit and I don't have the staff or time to do the type of fundraising I need to do. I've thought long and hard about whether I should hire someone, but then I'd need to make sure I raised enough money to cover their salary and healthcare coverage, and then I'd want them to bring in more than they cost.
Membership in an organization like OFN might be the best way for me to get donations. We haven't done it yet, but it might be in our future.
Charamba, Douro 2008
Horse Heaven Hills, Cabernet 2010
Lorelle, Horse Heaven Hills Pinot Grigio 2011
Avignonesi, Montepulciano 2004
Lorelle, Willamette Valley Pinot Noir 2011
Villa Antinori, Toscana 2007
Mercedes Eguren, Cabernet Sauvignon 2009
Lorelle, Columbia Valley Cabernet 2011
Purple Moon, Merlot 2011
Purple Moon, Chardonnnay 2011
Abacela, Vintner's Blend No. 12
Opula Red Blend 2010
Liberte, Pinot Noir 2010
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Indian Wells Red Blend 2010
Woodbridge, Chardonnay 2011
King Estate, Pinot Noir 2011
Famille Perrin, Cotes du Rhone Villages 2010
Columbia Crest, Les Chevaux Red 2010
14 Hands, Hot to Trot White Blend
Familia Bianchi, Malbec 2009
Terrapin Cellars, Pinot Gris 2011
Columbia Crest, Walter Clore Private Reserve 2009
Campo Viejo, Rioja, Termpranillo 2010
Ravenswood, Cabernet Sauvignon 2009
Quinta das Amoras, Vinho Tinto 2010
Waterbrook, Reserve Merlot 2009
Lorelle, Horse Heaven Hills, Pinot Grigio 2011
Tarantas, Rose
Chateau Lajarre, Bordeaux 2009
La Vielle Ferme, Rose 2011
Benvolio, Pinot Grigio 2011
Nobilo Icon, Pinot Noir 2009
Lello, Douro Tinto 2009
Quinson Fils, Cotes de Provence Rose 2011
Anindor, Pinot Gris 2010
Buenas Ondas, Syrah Rose 2010
Les Fiefs d'Anglars, Malbec 2009
14 Hands, Pinot Gris 2011
Conundrum 2012
Condes de Albarei, Albariño 2011
Columbia Crest, Walter Clore Private Reserve 2007
Penelope Sanchez, Garnacha Syrah 2010
Canoe Ridge, Merlot 2007
Atalaya do Mar, Godello 2010
Vega Montan, Mencia
Benvolio, Pinot Grigio
Nobilo Icon, Pinot Noir, Marlborough 2009
Portuga, Rose 2011
Revelation, Chardonnay, Pays d'Oc 2010
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Rutherford 2005
Monte Alto, Tinto Reserva 2005
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Cabernet, Indian Wells 2009
Espiral, Vinho Rose
Vin-Koru, Pinot Gris 2011
14 Hands, Hot to Trot Red 2009
Rodney Strong, Cabernet, Sonoma 2009
Abacela, Vintner's Blend #11
Portuga, White 2010
La Bourgeoisie, Red 2009
Januik, Red 2009
Three Rivers, River's Red 2008
Kirkland, Alexander Valley Merlot 2008
Muga, Rioja Rose 2010
Quinta das Amoras, Vinho Tinto 2009
Mauro Molino, Barbera d'Alba 2009
Garda Chiaretto Rose
Columbia Crest, Two Vines Vineyard 10 White
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Pinot Gris, Columbia Valley 2009
L'Hortus, Rose de Saignee 2010
Maculan, Pino & Toi 2008
McKinley Springs, Bombing Range Red 2008
Trader Joe's Pinot Gris 2009
Montes Alpha, Cabernet 2007
Gran Sasso, Sangiovese, Terre di Chieti 2009
Garda, Classico Chiaretto Rose
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Rutherford 1999
Picos del Montgo, Tempranillo 2008
Chateau de Montmirail, Vacqueyras 2008
La Granja 360, Syrah 2009
Montgras, Carmenere Reserva 2009
Lange, Pinot Gris 2009
Columbia Crest, Horse Heaven Hills Cabernet 2008
Kirkland, Pinot Grigio 2010
Trader Joe's Coastal Syrah 2009
Columbia Crest, Horse Heaven Hills Merlot 2008
Trader Joe's Coastal Chardonnay 2009
Vieux Papes Red
Domaine de l'Aujardiere, Chardonnay 2009
Santa Rita, Cabernet, Medalla Real 2007
Penfold's, Koonunga Hill Shiraz Cabernet 2008
Guild, Red, Lot #02 2008
Dievole, Dievolino Sangiovese 2008
Laforet, Burgogne Chardonnay 2009
Columbia Winery, Merlot 2007
Bonterra, Cabernet 2008
Elk Cove, Pinot Gris 2009
Maquis Lien 2006
Scott Paul, Pinot Noir, Le Paulee 2007
The Occasional Book
Neil Young - Waging Heavy Peace
Mark Bego - Aretha Franklin, the Queen of Soul (2012 ed.)
Jenny Lawson - Let's Pretend This Never Happened
J.D. Salinger - Franny and Zooey
Charles Dickens - A Christmas Carol
Timothy Egan - The Big Burn
Deborah Eisenberg - Transactions in a Foreign Currency
Kurt Vonnegut Jr. - Slaughterhouse Five
Kathryn Lance - Pandora's Genes
Cheryl Strayed - Wild
Fyodor Dostoyevsky - The Brothers Karamazov
Jack London - The House of Pride, and Other Tales of Hawaii
Jack Walker - The Extraordinary Rendition of Vincent Dellamaria
Colum McCann - Let the Great World Spin
Niccolò Machiavelli - The Prince
Harper Lee - To Kill a Mockingbird
Emma McLaughlin & Nicola Kraus - The Nanny Diaries
Brian Selznick - The Invention of Hugo Cabret
Sharon Creech - Walk Two Moons
Keith Richards - Life
F. Sionil Jose - Dusk
Natalie Babbitt - Tuck Everlasting
Justin Halpern - S#*t My Dad Says
Mark Herrmann - The Curmudgeon's Guide to Practicing Law
Barry Glassner - The Gospel of Food
Phil Stanford - The Peyton-Allan Files
Jesse Katz - The Opposite Field
Evelyn Waugh - Brideshead Revisited
J.K. Rowling - Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone
David Sedaris - Holidays on Ice
Donald Miller - A Million Miles in a Thousand Years
Mitch Albom - Have a Little Faith
C.S. Lewis - The Magician's Nephew
F. Scott Fitzgerald - The Great Gatsby
William Shakespeare - A Midsummer Night's Dream
Ivan Doig - Bucking the Sun
Penda Diakité - I Lost My Tooth in Africa
Grace Lin - The Year of the Rat
Oscar Hijuelos - Mr. Ives' Christmas
Madeline L'Engle - A Wrinkle in Time
Steven Hart - The Last Three Miles
David Sedaris - Me Talk Pretty One Day
Karen Armstrong - The Spiral Staircase
Charles Larson - The Portland Murders
Adrian Wojnarowski - The Miracle of St. Anthony
William H. Colby - Long Goodbye
Steven D. Stark - Meet the Beatles
Phil Stanford - Portland Confidential
Rick Moody - Garden State
Jonathan Schwartz - All in Good Time
David Sedaris - Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim
Anthony Holden - Big Deal
Robert J. Spitzer - The Spirit of Leadership
James McManus - Positively Fifth Street
Jeff Noon - Vurt
Road Work
Miles run year to date: 21
At this date last year: 52
Total run in 2012: 129
In 2011: 113
In 2010: 125
In 2009: 67
In 2008: 28
In 2007: 113
In 2006: 100
In 2005: 149
In 2004: 204
In 2003: 269
Comments (9)
In order to give to charities one has to do some real research, IMO.
Just like most things in this life giving takes time, energy, knowledge, and hard work to achieve success.
Do the homework!
Posted by Portland Native | November 7, 2011 9:32 AM
Having an account at guidestar.org is invaluable in that regard.
Posted by Jack Bog | November 7, 2011 9:34 AM
I'm confused. I though CASA was a nonprofit that provides advocates for children in foster care?
Posted by Robert | November 7, 2011 9:50 AM
Guidestar is my first resource. They are excellent.
Posted by portland native | November 7, 2011 10:39 AM
nonprofit that provides advocates for children in foster care?
Different CASA.
Posted by Jack Bog | November 7, 2011 12:29 PM
The objective of the 501 (3c) Federal tax deduction is to assist in the ability of charitable institutions to do good works. I always cringe when I see Directors of non-profits paying themselves large salaries. I would like to see the IRS institute limits on renumeration based on the volume and percentage of donations that are actually delivered to the clients of the non-profits. If the non-profit doesnt meet a minimum percentage of its receipts actually going to the clients then the Directors should not receive a salary at all. Perhaps maximum salaries could be established based on the scale of the operation and the percent effiency. The point is, neither the individuals or the organization operating as a non-profit should show profits beyond the bare minimum to get the job done. This could make a great debate!
Posted by dean | November 7, 2011 1:07 PM
I have worked in nonprofits my entire adult life. Most nonprofits do not give money directly to clients. Most provide services, via staff, to clients. And everyone working for that nonprofit is, in some way, contributing to that effort. Even the people in administration who have no contact with the clients - because you can't run a nonprofit without fiscal, development, and other departments.
Most salaries are scaled down from what the boss makes...just about anywhere - for- and non-profit alike. But in most nonprofits there isn't a lot of $$ for extra staff and most Executive Directors work hard and very long hours and give up a lot of personal time when it comes to their agencies. Smart people who have years of experience in the field and advanced degrees expect a certain amount of renumeration for that. If you cap salaries you will see a distinct lack of talent at the head of nonprofits or you will only find rich people taking those jobs.
I buy my own pens and other things to make my work life more liveable and make way less than most folks my age with my education. My choice, yes it is, but being told that an executive director has to max out their salary or that the IRS should institute limits is just seriously insulting.
Those of us who dedicate their professional life to trying to make things better did not take a vow of poverty or some 'nonprofit oath' and we generally do not enjoy how low our salaries are. We just enjoy what we do and like that we make our living by some other means than making someone else rich. If you spent a week with some of our local mid-sized agency executive directors, I'd be willing to bet that you'd agree that 6 figures is not at all extravagant. They are the equivalent of a CEO...in fact, ours is a CEO.
But OK, how about we start with the faith-based organizations - especially those that are nonsecular? Let's limit their tax-exempt status based on the separation of church and state. Why should my tax dollars subsidize the building of a church and why should a wealthy religious entity not have to pay taxes at all when most of what they do is self-serving for them and their flock?
Posted by Jill-O | November 7, 2011 1:48 PM
I agree that people should give directly to the nonprofit they want to support rather than the larger conduit organizations. But, I also understand why these organizations exist. Essentially that is what United Way is. I'm guessing their compensation is probably similar.
I run a small nonprofit and I don't have the staff or time to do the type of fundraising I need to do. I've thought long and hard about whether I should hire someone, but then I'd need to make sure I raised enough money to cover their salary and healthcare coverage, and then I'd want them to bring in more than they cost.
Membership in an organization like OFN might be the best way for me to get donations. We haven't done it yet, but it might be in our future.
Posted by PDXPessimist | November 7, 2011 3:36 PM
We pulled out of United Way long ago. We can figure out where we want our charitable donations to go without paying middlemen (and middlewomen).
Posted by Jack Bog | November 8, 2011 12:43 AM