FARK.com: (12747096) NFL quarterback scams charity out of millions of dollars. No not that one

It's Not News, It's Fark

If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)		NFL quarterback scams charity out of millions of dollars. No not that one (denversports.com)		42
		More: Asinine, Denver Broncos, Fundraising, National Football League, Nonprofit organization, Walter Payton, Russell Wilson, Walter Payton NFL Man of the Year Award, United States

• • •

1304 clicks; posted to Sports » on 09 Feb 2023 at 8:20 AM (5 weeks ago) | Favorite | share:

42 Comments (+0 »)

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

LordBeavis

2023-02-09 3:57:52 AM

Another "investigative" hit job by those partisan hacks at USA Today. Look! The Wilson's are giving so much to charity that the Mrs. can't even afford a T-shirt or straps for her bra. It's all going to the kids!

vudukungfu

2023-02-09 5:31:00 AM

I shall get the lights

August11

2023-02-09 5:49:37 AM

"The story, which sought out to investigate past Walter Payton NFL Man of the Year award winners' nonprofits' ended up keying in on the Denver Broncos quarterback."

This sentence is 34,000 AU from the nearest Pulitzer.

HeathenHealer

2023-02-09 8:17:53 AM

Let Russ cook (the books).

JAGChem82

2023-02-09 8:29:46 AM

Broncos country, let's ride (Russ out of Denver)!

HotWingConspiracy

2023-02-09 9:01:10 AM

Mylar tuxedos don't come cheap

Captain Steroid

2023-02-09 9:22:20 AM

Ethertap

2023-02-09 9:23:59 AM

George Santos strikes again!

tnpir

2023-02-09 9:25:03 AM

Goddammit, it's one thing after another with this clown, isn't it?

George Paton needs to EABOD for this trade and this contract.

kdawg7736

2023-02-09 9:35:47 AM

So how is that trade working for you, Denver?

WrongTrousers

2023-02-09 9:50:20 AM

Too bad you're not in the relative obscurity of the NW anymore, eh, Russ?

FLMountainMan

2023-02-09 9:56:26 AM

This doesn't excuse it, but there are a shiatload of high-profile nonprofits with similar percentages.

phimuskapsi

2023-02-09 9:59:19 AM

Sounds like Russ is cooking up charity fraud.

Farkenhostile

2023-02-09 10:03:13 AM

Seattle fans

meanmutton

2023-02-09 10:14:45 AM

FLMountainMan: This doesn't excuse it, but there are a shiatload of high-profile nonprofits with similar percentages.

What, specific, "high-profile nonprofit" spends 50% of its income on executive salaries?

The_Sponge

2023-02-09 10:20:28 AM

Speaking as a Seahawks fan:

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

/Glad I never bought a Wilson jersey.
//Good riddance.

FLMountainMan

2023-02-09 10:22:19 AM

meanmutton: FLMountainMan: This doesn't excuse it, but there are a shiatload of high-profile nonprofits with similar percentages.

What, specific, "high-profile nonprofit" spends 50% of its income on executive salaries?

Sorry, I forgot I'm one of the privileged few that has access to internet search engines. Kids Wish Foundation, Wounded Warrior, Project Cure, are a few examples. Red Cross is kinda high up there too.

Super Chronic

2023-02-09 10:23:32 AM

Around 10-20 years ago, sites like Guidestar and Charity Navigator were recommending that people look into program expense ratios to measure charities' efficacy. "Look for something that spends more than 90% directly on program-related expenses," they said. The world has backed off that view because good charities need administrative services like management and auditing, particularly as they scale, and those activities help the organizations in their missions. Not to mention things like ordering pizzas for the volunteers, which I understand anecdotally that they were refraining from doing because of the expense reporting.

But less than half, man, that's bad.

mattgsx

2023-02-09 10:23:36 AM

I'm not going to defend a troll, but I'm going to hazard a guess this isn't entirely uncommon for charities that don't have massive volunteer based fundraising arms.

One of the challenges with any charitable organization is that you still need component leadership, and in some cases, influential people within specific communities in order to open the doors to get donations.

I'm not excusing this charity - it does sound a bit fishy, but the % of dollars donated that go to overhead can be a bit of a red herring, especially if that money likely would never have gone to the impacted community that charity is trying to serve if not for the charity in the first place. It does, in fact, take money to "make" money.

FLMountainMan

2023-02-09 10:28:24 AM

mattgsx: meanmutton: FLMountainMan: This doesn't excuse it, but there are a shiatload of high-profile nonprofits with similar percentages.

What, specific, "high-profile nonprofit" spends 50% of its income on executive salaries?

I'm not going to defend a troll, but I'm going to hazard a guess this isn't entirely uncommon for charities that don't have massive volunteer based fundraising arms.

One of the challenges with any charitable organization is that you still need component leadership, and in some cases, influential people within specific communities in order to open the doors to get donations.

I'm not excusing this charity - it does sound a bit fishy, but the % of dollars donated that go to overhead can be a bit of a red herring, especially if that money likely would never have gone to the impacted community that charity is trying to serve if not for the charity in the first place. It does, in fact, take money to "make" money.

Yep, all this. And smaller nonprofits are more likely to have higher administrative cost percentages, because there are certain fixed costs involved in running a charity.

Catsaregreen

2023-02-09 10:29:59 AM

Doesn't every high-profile player in any sport have these to cut down on millionaire taxes?

FLMountainMan

2023-02-09 10:31:06 AM

Super Chronic: Around 10-20 years ago, sites like Guidestar and Charity Navigator were recommending that people look into program expense ratios to measure charities' efficacy. "Look for something that spends more than 90% directly on program-related expenses," they said. The world has backed off that view because good charities need administrative services like management and auditing, particularly as they scale, and those activities help the organizations in their missions. Not to mention things like ordering pizzas for the volunteers, which I understand anecdotally that they were refraining from doing because of the expense reporting.

But less than half, man, that's bad.

It's still very useful to go to Guidestar (or directly to the IRS, they've rolled out a really good 990 database) and pull the 990 (sort of a tax return) of any charity that you're leery of. They detail executive compensation pretty well. Board Member compensation is, in my opinion, a red flag. If you're paying board members, there better be a good reason.

abhorrent1

2023-02-09 10:43:50 AM

FLMountainMan: This doesn't excuse it, but there are a shiatload of high-profile nonprofits with similar percentages.

Sounds like it my just be poorly run.
It's a charity owned by two pretty famous people. Why are they spending so much on fundraising? I'm not even suggesting they use their own money, just use your fame/brand.

Maybe won't work so much for Russ anymore because I think just about everyone thinks he's a douche now, but it wasn't always that way. Call in to some radio shows or go on tv and plug your charity. No one is gonna turn them down if they say they want to come on their radio or tv show for 10 minutes.

Do some influencer stuff on social media. Some of these people get tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars for a stupid tweet or instagram post. I'm sure they get approached by brands constantly. Tell them you'll post about their product if they donate to your charity. Ask your famous friends to tweet or instagram about it to their millions of followers.

There are so many ways they could raise money for little or no cost and just a few minutes of their time.
To have only raised $7M in 8 years is pretty lame for people with such a big platform.

phimuskapsi

2023-02-09 10:46:39 AM

25% is far outside the norm.

Troy Aikman's Giant Thumbs

2023-02-09 11:25:31 AM

FLMountainMan: meanmutton: FLMountainMan: This doesn't excuse it, but there are a shiatload of high-profile nonprofits with similar percentages.

What, specific, "high-profile nonprofit" spends 50% of its income on executive salaries?

Sorry, I forgot I'm one of the privileged few that has access to internet search engines. Kids Wish Foundation, Wounded Warrior, Project Cure, are a few examples. Red Cross is kinda high up there too.

Is it one of those internet search engines that cause you to lie?

Kids Wish Foundation is a scam that tries to capitalize off the Make A Wish Foundation.

Wounded Warrior
Administrative Expense Ratio - 5.40%
Fundraising Expense Ratio - 22.90%
Program Expense Ratio - 71.50%
Executive Salaries - 0.41%

Project Cure
Administrative Expense Ratio - 0.50%
Fundraising Expense Ratio - 2.50%
Program Expense Ratio - 96.80%
Executive Salaries - 0.33%

I guess your privilege extends to spreading false information.

FLMountainMan

2023-02-09 11:42:29 AM

Troy Aikman's Giant Thumbs: FLMountainMan: meanmutton: FLMountainMan: This doesn't excuse it, but there are a shiatload of high-profile nonprofits with similar percentages.

What, specific, "high-profile nonprofit" spends 50% of its income on executive salaries?

Sorry, I forgot I'm one of the privileged few that has access to internet search engines. Kids Wish Foundation, Wounded Warrior, Project Cure, are a few examples. Red Cross is kinda high up there too.

Is it one of those internet search engines that cause you to lie?

Kids Wish Foundation is a scam that tries to capitalize off the Make A Wish Foundation.

Wounded Warrior
Administrative Expense Ratio - 5.40%
Fundraising Expense Ratio - 22.90%
Program Expense Ratio - 71.50%
Executive Salaries - 0.41%

Project Cure
Administrative Expense Ratio - 0.50%
Fundraising Expense Ratio - 2.50%
Program Expense Ratio - 96.80%
Executive Salaries - 0.33%

I guess your privilege extends to spreading false information.

Just passing it along, sure.

Wounded Warrior Project's top execs fired amid lavish spending scandal | Fox News

CBS News investigates Wounded Warrior Project - CBS News

Be Wary of Project Cure | Quackwatch

Is this non-profit charity group a scam? (cpapracticeadvisor.com)

America's 50 worst charities rake in nearly $1 billion for corporate fundraisers (tampabay.com)

If they've cleaned up their act, my apologies to their character. But I'm not just making shiat up.

mattgsx

2023-02-09 11:49:13 AM

FLMountainMan: Troy Aikman's Giant Thumbs: FLMountainMan: meanmutton: FLMountainMan: This doesn't excuse it, but there are a shiatload of high-profile nonprofits with similar percentages.

What, specific, "high-profile nonprofit" spends 50% of its income on executive salaries?

Sorry, I forgot I'm one of the privileged few that has access to internet search engines. Kids Wish Foundation, Wounded Warrior, Project Cure, are a few examples. Red Cross is kinda high up there too.

Is it one of those internet search engines that cause you to lie?

Kids Wish Foundation is a scam that tries to capitalize off the Make A Wish Foundation.

Wounded Warrior
Administrative Expense Ratio - 5.40%
Fundraising Expense Ratio - 22.90%
Program Expense Ratio - 71.50%
Executive Salaries - 0.41%

Project Cure
Administrative Expense Ratio - 0.50%
Fundraising Expense Ratio - 2.50%
Program Expense Ratio - 96.80%
Executive Salaries - 0.33%

I guess your privilege extends to spreading false information.

Just passing it along, sure.

Wounded Warrior Project's top execs fired amid lavish spending scandal | Fox News

CBS News investigates Wounded Warrior Project - CBS News

Be Wary of Project Cure | Quackwatch

Is this non-profit charity group a scam? (cpapracticeadvisor.com)

America's 50 worst charities rake in nearly $1 billion for corporate fundraisers (tampabay.com)

If they've cleaned up their act, my apologies to their character. But I'm not just making shiat up.

There were several organizations in the ad specialty space that pulled their partnerships (donations for every item purchased as give back programs) with WWP for years, and only recently reestablished them. I was not aware of the reason why. I now feel more enlightened.

fragMasterFlash

2023-02-09 11:51:30 AM

Ask who donates to pro-sports player charities. From what I gather its mostly the same companies who hire those players to promote their products and also other players. It's a tax dodge with the added bonus of generating a positive public image and friendly media coverage. Maybe some kids get a once in a lifetime free backpack filled with school supplies but usually only if they are photogenic enough to please the media.

Troy Aikman's Giant Thumbs

2023-02-09 12:03:57 PM

No, but you are passing along misleading information, unwittingly or not. The claim was for "high-profile nonprofit". The Project Cure you mention is not the high-profile and well respected Project CURE, but a scam trying to capitalize on the name. It's like complaining about the Sorny PayStation in thread talking about gaming consolse

Same with Kids Wish. 99% of people have heard of Make a WIsh, hardly anyone had heard about Kids Wish. Anither scam attempt to fleece people over name confusion. They were even sued by Make a Wish.

Even your Wounded Warrior claims miss the mark. Your own links show the money wasn't going to executive salaries. It was poorly spent but in now way did executive salaries approach 50%.

At a certain point, reckless disregard for accuracy is equivalent to intentional dishonesty.

/As pennance you should donate to my charity, Winded Warriors, for asthmatic children who have PTSD from gym class

FLMountainMan

2023-02-09 12:06:19 PM

Troy Aikman's Giant Thumbs: Even your Wounded Warrior claims miss the mark. Your own links show the money wasn't going to executive salaries. It was poorly spent but in now way did executive salaries approach 50%.

At a certain point, reckless disregard for accuracy is equivalent to intentional dishonesty.

/As pennance you should donate to my charity, Winded Warriors, for asthmatic children who have PTSD from gym class

Fair enough. I'm glad to make that donation. I'll just need your bank account information to effect the transfer.

/honestly though, good points all around

Rent Party

2023-02-09 12:52:57 PM

The_Sponge: Speaking as a Seahawks fan:

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

/Glad I never bought a Wilson jersey.
//Good riddance.

Football life in the PNW these days...

MizzouGuy

2023-02-09 1:20:30 PM

2 QB's I had respect and admiration for in 2015 - Russell Wilson and Aaron Rodgers.

2 QB's I can't stand in 2023 - Russell Wilson and Aaron Rodgers.

mattgsx

2023-02-09 1:31:24 PM

phimuskapsi: mattgsx: meanmutton: FLMountainMan: This doesn't excuse it, but there are a shiatload of high-profile nonprofits with similar percentages.

What, specific, "high-profile nonprofit" spends 50% of its income on executive salaries?

I'm not going to defend a troll, but I'm going to hazard a guess this isn't entirely uncommon for charities that don't have massive volunteer based fundraising arms.

One of the challenges with any charitable organization is that you still need component leadership, and in some cases, influential people within specific communities in order to open the doors to get donations.

I'm not excusing this charity - it does sound a bit fishy, but the % of dollars donated that go to overhead can be a bit of a red herring, especially if that money likely would never have gone to the impacted community that charity is trying to serve if not for the charity in the first place. It does, in fact, take money to "make" money.

25% is far outside the norm.

I totally agree, and again, in this case it seems fishy. To elaborate based on my understanding of this org:

Their organization exists to give grants to other non profits and their reasoning for the discrepancy is that they are using resources to fundraise directly on behalf of the organizations they empower, which would not show up as revenue.

Which is... true, I guess, but doesn't explain why they would need to fund raise and have multiple FTEs to amplify the messaging of other organizations when the celebrities behind the non profit could just directly use their own existing platforms and influence to amplify those orgs.

In this case, it sounds to me like Russ is fundraising to pay himself speaker fees and pay his travel expenses to go fundraise for other non profits, while giving his and his wife's personal assistant, and some other friends, cushy no show jobs.

Moopy Mac

2023-02-09 2:48:39 PM

FLMountainMan: meanmutton: FLMountainMan: This doesn't excuse it, but there are a shiatload of high-profile nonprofits with similar percentages.

What, specific, "high-profile nonprofit" spends 50% of its income on executive salaries?

Sorry, I forgot I'm one of the privileged few that has access to internet search engines. Kids Wish Foundation, Wounded Warrior, Project Cure, are a few examples. Red Cross is kinda high up there too.

Kids Wish Foundation [sic] - 0 Star Charity Navigator (15% to Program Expenses)
Wounded Warrior - 3 Star Charity Navigator (72% to Program Expenses)
Project Cure - 4 Star Charity Navigator (76% to Program Expenses)
Red Cross - 4 Star Charity Navigator (90% to Program Expenses)

Moopy Mac

2023-02-09 2:50:48 PM

Goalposts.

abhorrent1

2023-02-09 2:55:15 PM

mattgsx: phimuskapsi: mattgsx: meanmutton: FLMountainMan: This doesn't excuse it, but there are a shiatload of high-profile nonprofits with similar percentages.

What, specific, "high-profile nonprofit" spends 50% of its income on executive salaries?

I'm not going to defend a troll, but I'm going to hazard a guess this isn't entirely uncommon for charities that don't have massive volunteer based fundraising arms.

One of the challenges with any charitable organization is that you still need component leadership, and in some cases, influential people within specific communities in order to open the doors to get donations.

I'm not excusing this charity - it does sound a bit fishy, but the % of dollars donated that go to overhead can be a bit of a red herring, especially if that money likely would never have gone to the impacted community that charity is trying to serve if not for the charity in the first place. It does, in fact, take money to "make" money.

25% is far outside the norm.

I totally agree, and again, in this case it seems fishy. To elaborate based on my understanding of this org:

Their organization exists to give grants to other non profits and their reasoning for the discrepancy is that they are using resources to fundraise directly on behalf of the organizations they empower, which would not show up as revenue.

Which is... true, I guess, but doesn't explain why they would need to fund raise and have multiple FTEs to amplify the messaging of other organizations when the celebrities behind the non profit could just directly use their own existing platforms and influence to amplify those orgs.

In this case, it sounds to me like Russ is fundraising to pay himself speaker fees and pay his travel expenses to go fundraise for other non profits, while giving his and his wife's personal assistant, and some other friends, cushy no show jobs.

Admittedly I know nothing about running a non-profit or fund raising but they've raised $7.5M in 8 years and that cost them $4.2M to raise? So if my math is right, for every dollar spent fund raising they raise about $1.80?

Again I don't know but that seems like a low return to me but maybe it's normal? Maybe the extravagant fund raising parties and private jets to get to them are eating up their revenue.

phimuskapsi

2023-02-09 3:07:52 PM

abhorrent1: Admittedly I know nothing about running a non-profit or fund raising but they've raised $7.5M in 8 years and that cost them $4.2M to raise? So if my math is right, for every dollar spent fund raising they raise about $1.80?

Again I don't know but that seems like a low return to me but maybe it's normal? Maybe the extravagant fund raising parties and private jets to get to them are eating up their revenue.

They reported $7.5M in revenue and $7M in expenses:
$2.8M went to charity.
$4.2 million went to fundraising, administration expenses and salaries to raise that $2.8M.

mattgsx

2023-02-09 3:41:05 PM

phimuskapsi: abhorrent1: Admittedly I know nothing about running a non-profit or fund raising but they've raised $7.5M in 8 years and that cost them $4.2M to raise? So if my math is right, for every dollar spent fund raising they raise about $1.80?

Again I don't know but that seems like a low return to me but maybe it's normal? Maybe the extravagant fund raising parties and private jets to get to them are eating up their revenue.

They reported $7.5M in revenue and $7M in expenses:
$2.8M went to charity.
$4.2 million went to fundraising, administration expenses and salaries to raise that $2.8M.

I'd be real curious what those fundraising and administrative fees are. It would not surprise me in the least if this if most of it is being paid to Russ in speaking fees or for "outside publicity" which consists of him talking about the charity on Twitter.

ex_dilbert

2023-02-09 4:59:36 PM

It seems like the larger issue is that it looks to be a way of compensating "employees" of Russell and Ciara off the books and as a tax shelter.

It would be bad enough if it was simply poorly run, but those that run the charity also work for the couple.

The_Sponge

2023-02-09 6:09:00 PM

ex_dilbert: It seems like the larger issue is that it looks to be a way of compensating "employees" of Russell and Ciara off the books and as a tax shelter.

It would be bad enough if it was simply poorly run, but those that run the charity also work for the couple.

Russ has always seemed to be somewhat of a phony, but holy shiat he seemed better before he met her.

ThePea

2023-02-09 10:11:23 PM

He's like if Sammy Sosa was uglier.

farkingbubbler

2023-02-10 8:25:00 AM

Komen for the Cure comes immediately to mind...

/F cancer

Displayed 42 of 42 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Redisplay/refresh comments

This thread is closed to new comments.

Want the rest of the Farking story? Try

More threads. More community. More Farking.

learn more | sign up

Report

Support Fark

learn more

Headlines of the Month
Fark NotNewsletter

Report

Like Fark!

Follow @Fark On Twitter

Report

Fark.com

Top Commented

Top Commented ▼

Top Commented
Top Clicked
Top Voted
My Recent Commented
Recent Mentions

Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.

Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.