Charites ... why?

This past weekend I found myself mired deep in a discussion on a charity fundraiser and really got me wondering about a few things.....

This particular situation that popped up had to do with a fundraiser next year, basically how to raise the most funds. When it came up I was unaware of what had been going on with it all previously and found myself in the dark trying to understand the situation before a vote was possibly to take place.  I'm quietly whispering around to the few guys near me what a few terms meant, what the guys at the head able were referring to .. and many around me didn't have a clue either.  The individual to my right did know, was on the committee for it .. and was talking about resigning from that committee due to situations about it. Now, flags are going up. To make matters worse, many of us were having trouble even hearing what was going on due to too much noise from an A/C system.  Then .... things got heated.  A few people involved with it were eventually yelling at each other about specifics due to the emotions and knowledge, wrapped up in it all.  Eventually, it pretty much exploded at I was sitting there thinking ...... holy shit.

Now, my personality kicks in.  I've gone from "I don't give a shit - mode" to "what the fuck just happened and what they hell were they talking about? -mode "  As we moved on to other subjects in the meeting I'm quietly/slowly gathering Intel on the terms I'd just heard and why certain individuals had gotten hyped up about it. Along the way, I found myself back in a mode of questioning some charities as I have over the years. Things like, how much is actually raised? What are the incurred costs along the way?  What are the motivations for folks behind the scenes raising funds? Where do the funds raised actually go? This seems to be a common theme among them all. Transparency isn't always a given which makes things worse.

Well, the main issue in this particular one came down to   ......   a single event to occur in 2022 with is an annual event. As in any event, participation behind the scenes needs to happen but human nature or fact is . ....   not everyone wants to help with event, has the time to help with the event or may not be qualified to even help as needed.  Simple as that. In this case, it was proposed that two or three other 501c3 organizations would help by bringing in additional sponsors that could help raise more funds; a LOT more was being promised. Now, here's the twist. The vote being discussed was to limit the funds we would give to them, after the event occurred. In other words, if we raised say  $50,000 with it, should we cap the percentage of funds given to these charities, from our charity as a way of basically paying for their help to raise more funds that we possibly could have on our own.  Now, this is where things get interesting. Well, a shit storm might be a better description than "interesting."  Few things at the core are these issues.  First, why bring in others to do what you can do yourselves?  The assumption is one can't or won't do what they can do. Maybe they have contacts/abilities that one doesn't. Maybe they have experience that is deeper than one has.  My thought initially was ...   If we brought in say $20k ourselves, but they helped us get to $50k, wouldn't that be worth it?  If so, how does one determine how much they give to them for their effort?  And that was the heated subject at bay. Specifically the number being thrown around was 15%. For every dollar they bring to the table, we would donate fifteen cents of that back to their charities.  Seemed simple enough but the problem was nobody seemed to be able to agree on that number; any number. Even the person present representing one of those charities didn't speak up with a specific number and this is where shit hit the fan.  The person that was the most emotional about it all and pushing the hardest to get the vote done that was supposed to occur was pissed that no one would commit to that 15% max.  I get it.  I agree.  Hell, I would go further with specifics and ladder the percentages.  Being in sales, I deal with commission levels, accelerators based on revenue, margin, you name it; whatever creative incentives you can come up to push people to give their maximum effort and everyone still makes money. Seemed easy and obvious to me but I'm not on the committee.  But we still have two other issues about this all.

First one is ...   why not just buckle down and do it ones' self?  After the meeting I sat down with a close friend of mine whom was visiting , not part of the group but there with me waiting in the bar area to show back up after the meeting.  As soon as I sit down, I'm grabbing a cold beer and starting to explain to him what just happened; the fireworks show he missed out and I realize something as I start to speak.  The guy in front of me, has in-depth experience for many years on this specific type of fund raising event.. So, I quickly give him a summary of what just happened and he states the obvious.  WHY would you hire anyone, much less 'pay them' for what we could do ourselves , which isn't difficult to do. By the time we are done discussing this piece, he's now passionate about it all and will not back off of "why pay anyone from the funds raised?"  He has a valid point except for a few things. First is the charities we would 'pay back' have a similar mission on the folks we all help with the money. So, one could argue we're keeping it in the family and the same core eventually get the help via the funds. Secondly, based on history a lot of folks don't chip in to help on this specific fundraiser.  You know, the old 20/80 rule; twenty percent do the all the work.  But the second part of this which is the main reason I'm writing this is .. he asked "what's the other guy doing with the money? Do you really know where it's going? " which has been a common theme I've asked over the years on various charities. And THIS is why the conversation earlier was so heated because some folks don't trust one of the 501c3's that want to help out. There is a belief that everything isn't what it actually seems and we don't want to provide too much hence the limit of funds (15%) that would go that direction.  And I mentioned one more thing about this particular situation which got my buddy heated up and he asked a valid question. The guy running one of these 501c3's is actually part of OUR organization.  So my buddy is asking "why doesn't he just use all his expertise to help our charity vs try and get funds for his? Or, why doesn't he do his own fundraiser?  Initially I tried to back up this up with reasons why he would do it for his own, help us with the partnership, why it might be a good idea, etc.. .but when the smoke cleared it was a valid point.  Which brings me to the other reason I wrote this post.  What motivates people to start a charity?

Charities ......  when I wrote about this subject a year or so ago, I started searching for a specific charity here in the State of Texas that I'd just given some funds to (a LOT) to verify it was a good one and found a crazy amount of info on charities in general.  Hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of charities kept popping up.  I found myself thinking " HOLY SHIT! Why are there so many?  What's the value?"  Now, in my mind there are some obvious reasons why some of these are started.  Some folks become passionate about their charities and some of them accomplish some great things, especially those that are specific to veteran with disabilities and/or PTSD for example.  But sometimes I wonder ...... WHY were some of these started? And this is where I've always been concerned that some are for the wrong reasons. Why I get anal on the subject of showing the inner workings of where the funds are spent whether it be operating costs, management of the charity or where and how the charity funds are distributed. What drives someone to start one in the beginning? In the case of veteran charities, the vast majority of time folks come from the military and see situations where they or their fellow veterans had a need that wasn't met by the 'system' in which they served. So, they fill a void.  Help fix a broke system.  And most of the time these are good charities. But along the way, some falter.  Some find themselves in the news exposed with ridiculous operating costs and minimal funds given to veterans.  And that's just the one's we know about. How many are out there for the wrong reasons?  Now back to the matter at hand.  One of the 501c3s helping with this event has been questioned by several folks. Hell, even I have wondered about a few things over the last several years. And what I wondered isn't exclusive to this single entity .. but ... I wondered...

I wondered things like....   

Why was this particular organization started initially?  I mean .. .what drove this particular individual to create this charity for it's specific purpose.  He was in similar organizations previously.  For several years, in the same organization as myself.  So why not go balls to the wall in ours instead of his own. And if you're going to do your own, why not commit oneself 100% to it and not in ours?  Now this is where I wondered a few things. Is this person in ours to push his own to some degree? Sort of leverage one with the other?  If so, is this necessarily a bad thing or  is it a conflict of interest?  

Do folks start 501c3s for the benefits?  I mean ... if you start XYZ, you can now put that on the side of your vehicle and write if off with Uncle Sam. Much of your overhead can be written off.  Real Estate can be written off.  Trips can be partially or fully written off.  You can skim off it for your own pay. The list goes on and on.  But, I've always wondered  .. ' is all the effort worth those beni's'? '  To me it wouldn't be but I believe to some it is.

How much do folks make running a charity.  I believe for many especially the small ones, it's done out of pure passion and they don't 'take a check' but if someone is putting 100% of their time into one and they have no other job, shouldn't they get paid?  If so, then how much .  If a charity is bringing in $100k it's hard to phantom some would take a paycheck of $75k but I bet there are some that do?  Of move funds around behind the scenes to provide those type of funds to the person(s) running it? We hear all the time how these big charities have some enormous salaries for the CEOs and others in the organization.   

Do the assets of the 501c3 make it all worth it to run one?  I mean if you say had a large piece of real estate that had dirt bikes and side by sides on it, a shooting range, etc...  for the veterans to use .. is all that worth the headache of running on so the organizer of it all has access (free use)?  I bet to some it is, but not to me.  Again, what drives folks to do all this?

Charities ...  many do some awesome things.  One of the ones I'm involved with certainly does.  But not everyone .. sometimes to include myself .. has the time to do all the things asked of us on a daily or monthly basis.  We have other things going on in our lives that we have to make time for.  Some are passionate and donate a crazy amount of their personal time towards specific goals/events/programs.  The trick is to balance it all so we can maximize the most of our time which is limited, to accomplish the maximum outcome.

So now ... I find myself mired in this particular event of which I had minimal skin in the game with several days ago.  Now I want to ensure funds are not thrown away needlessly.  Now I want to ensure any funds provided to other entities is done correctly. So now, I'm in the mix holding on for the ride ensuring this has full support from most if not all, and to ensure this is all goes smooth.