Just read a really disturbing exchange In regards to the Wounded Warrior Project.
To those that are not familiar with the project, they provides programs and services to severely injured service members during the time between active duty and transition to civilian life.

And they are apparently ANTI GUN

=======================================================


Wounded Warrior Project Email Exchange

by Gun Talk on Tuesday, November 13, 2012 at 10:56am ·

After Sunday's show, we've gotten many emails about Tom's remarks after WWP declined an interview request on Gun Talk Radio because it's a firearms-related show. We've also seen the forums that are suggesting many things that are not true. So, I'm going to lay it all out right here.

We thought it would be great to book the WWP on the Veteran's Day show to promote the organization, so I contacted them. I was flabbergasted when their PR contact, Leslie, sent me an email saying they could not participate because our show dealt with firearms. Knowing that WWP has a booth at SHOT show and various gun shows across the US, takes wounded warriors on hunts and range days, raffles guns and accessories as fundraisers, etc., their policy didn't make much sense. I forwarded the email on to Tom to get his take.

-Sarah

The following is the complete email exchange:
====================
Hello, Leslie:
Sarah forwarded me your email after I asked her to invite the Wounded Warriors Project to join me on "Tom Gresham's Gun Talk" radio show.
I'm stunned at your email saying that the WWP doesn't participate in an interview or activity related to firearms. Inasmuch as there are 90 million gun owners and most of them support wounded veterans, I think they would be shocked to hear that they are, by way of their hobbies, somehow not worthy of helping with the Wounded Warriors Project.
Does your policy apply also to police agencies and the military, since they are "related to firearms?"
I'm hoping that we have misunderstood your email. Can you confirm that it is, in fact, an official policy of the Wounded Warriors Project to not do interviews with or participate in any activity related to firearms?
Thank you.
Tom Gresham

============
Good afternoon -
While we appreciate your interest in Wounded Warrior Project® (WWP) you are correct that we decline the media opportunity.

Please note the following notice that appears on our website which also applies to WWP public awareness policy and inquiries from media outlets:
www.woundedwarriorproj...ities.aspx
WWP does not co-brand, create cause marketing campaigns or receive a percentage or a portion of proceeds from companies in which the product or message is sexual, political or religious in nature, or from alcohol or firearms companies.
Thank you for your inquiry.
LESLIE A. COLEMAN
public relations director
O: 904.405.1433
M: 904.654.8138
F: 904.296.7347

Wounded Warrior Project
4899 Belfort Road, Suite 300
Jacksonville, Florida 32256

====================
Thanks for confirming that, Leslie. It was a simple opportunity to promote the WWP on a national program in an effort to send donations your way.
I'll pass along the info that you don't want or need the help of America's gun owners.
Best regards,
Tom Gresham
=====================
Good morning --
This policy is not a judgment on those who own and use firearms – clearly every member of our armed forces has been trained in the use of firearms and then called on to use them in the course of their service to this country.
Our position regarding firearms and alcohol is in response to the struggles that many injured service members face with substance abuse and suicide and the roles those items often play in those issues.
Thank you.
LESLIE A. COLEMAN
public relations director
=============================
Hello, Leslie:
Thank you for that explanation.
I do think -- and I'm being as kind as possible -- that it's the nuttiest thing I've heard in years. Suicides are not linked to firearms. Japan has a much higher rate of suicide than does the U.S., and they have essentially no firearms. Suicide is a serious issue irrespective of the methodology used.
This explanation doesn't pass even the most simple "does this make sense" test.
Your policy does, in fact, brand firearms and the companies which make them as undesirables, and by association, you are saying that those who own and use firearms for recreation, hunting, self protection, and other safe and legal uses are to be avoided.
It's certainly your option to ostracize the firearms industry, the 90 million gun owners in America, and the media which support firearms safety training.
At this point, I feel an obligation to make sure the millions who listen to my radio show and watch my two national television series know about your policy.
I cannot fully express how much I feel you are doing a disservice to our wounded veterans, and how disappointed I am to discover this bias at the Wounded Warriors Project.
Sincerely,
Tom Gresham

I also do a quick follow up on this project.
I found out that the Director and executive fees for the project are actually higher than Australian Prime Minister's salary!!
www.bbb.org/charity-re...-and-staff

ALARM bells here..

Apparently they changed their views. www.examiner.com/node/55389381

Those organisation that have such policy in the first place will simply revert to their old rule once the media wave passed through.
They need to be accountable for majority gun owners are the supporters of these kind of causes.

Putting an anti in charge of the funds might jeopardize the recipient of the funds.
If say Veteran A is a gun owner and Veteran B is not, chances are Veteran B may get more funds because the ANTI's preferences.

thank goodness that this has been revealed, that sure is a nutty policy.

After some searching around on this charity I found some interesting things about this group that is not good. The wife and I donated to this group back in 2010 and makes me wonder now. Check out the 2 links below and especially read the comments on the first link, makes a person wonder.

www.military-money-mat...z2CFIbWZ26

www.charitynavigator.o...rgid=12842

And all those glossy TV ads have to cost something. I hate tear jerker ads anyway.

gelandangan wrote:

ALARM bells here..

Not too bad 83% of their donations are going to program expenses compared to the rest of the Veteran charities.

Take for example the SPCA International, they won't even report anything to the BBB. While American SPCA lists 74%.

• AARP is at 89%,
• ACLU is at 88%,
• Alzheimer's Association 70%.
• American Bible Society 74%.
• American Veterans Network (aka Shiloh International Ministries) 3%.
• Anti-Defamation League 73%
• Armed Forces Foundation 92%
• Armed Services YMCA Of The USA 91%
• Army Emergency Relief Wont disclose anything.
• Boy Scouts Of America 89%
• Boys & Girls Clubs Of America 74%
• ChildFund International 81%
• Children's Miracle Network 91%
• Disabled American Veterans 76%
• Disabled Veterans National Foundation Wont disclose anything
• Disabled Veterans Services Wont disclose anything
• Disabled Veterans' LIFE Memorial Foundation Wont disclose anything
• Girl Scouts Of The USA 91%
• Guide Dogs Of America 68%
• Habitat For Humanity International 84%
• HOPE International 79%
• Humane Society International 82%
• Human Rights Watch 76%
• Lance Armstrong Foundation 81%
• Make-A-Wish Foundation Of America 75%
• Mothers Against Drunk Driving 79%
• National Veterans Foundation 67%
• National Veterans Services Fund Wont say anything.
• National Vietnam Veterans Foundation Wont say anything.
• Operation Never Forgotten Wont give their Financials
• Our Military Kids 97%
• People For The Ethical Treatment Of Animals 81% - then again we all know they fund eco-terrorist with that money too.
• Planned Parenthood Federation Of America 76%
• Safari Club International Foundation 73%
• Salvation Army (National Corporation) 84% (mind you they count things like their HQ building as Administration and not program expenses like many do)
• Sierra Club Foundation 90%
• Soldiers Angels 78%
• Special Operations Warrior Foundation 83%
• United States Fund For UNICEF 90%
• United Way Worldwide 89% (assuming there are not any more teenage girls on their payroll)
• Veteran Tickets Foundation 94% (aka they give out a little more in tickets then the free tickets they get, but most of the cash is straight into their pockets)
• Veterans For America Didn't say anything.
• Veterans For Peace 57%
• Veterans Fund Didn't say anything.
• Veterans Of Foreign Wars National Home For Children 66%
• Veterans Of Foreign Wars Of The United States Did not disclose
• VFW Foundation 83%
• Veterans' Families United Foundation 78%
• VetsFirst (aka United Spinal Association) 70%
• National Veterans Services Fund Did not disclose anything
• Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund 75%
• Vietnam Veterans Of America Did not disclose anything
• Veterans For America Did not disclose anything
• World Trade Center Memorial Foundation (aka National September 11 Memorial And Museum) 59%
• World Vision 88%
• Wounded Warrior Project 83%
• YMCA 89%
• Young Marines Of The Marine Corps League Did not disclose

Bolded ones are military related, as you can see, with so many not even willing to put their finances in the air for the public, its hard to be critical at WWP verses the majority of Charities that pray on people's patriotism and good will towards Veterans.

Added others as they are commonly heard from and seen just as a comparison.

Dimitri

83% of their money goes to "Program Expenses" that include their fund raising expenses that they only get a return of 30%.... Really?
The two non profits that my wife and I ran returned 100% of income to the program and the fund raisers didn't cost the program a cent!
Take away the salaries and the net-loss "fund raisers" and there could be a lot more money for the soldiers.
Non-profits should never have to pay salaries - it should be all volunteer.

Paul, they spend 13% for fundraising of their income, and another 4% for administration fees.

83% more or less is actually doing things to help beyond their personal incomes and fundraising.

Dimitri

Wounded Warrior Project (WWP) meets the 20 Standards for Charity Accountability.


For the fiscal year ended September 30, 2011, WWP's program expenses were:


Alumni association 19,367,642
Soldier ride 14,707,505
Combat stress recovery 13,770,349
Family support services 8,676,894
Physical health and rehabilitation 6,743,782
Benefits service 6,016,023
TRACK 4,447,842
Warriors to work 4,180,581
WWP packs 2,871,334
International support 2,761,447
Warriors speak 1,853,265
Transition training academy 1,780,277
Peer mentoring 1,233,197
Campus services 1,056,198
Total Program Expenses: $89,466,336
Compensation*: $340,810
*2010 compensation includes annual salary and, if applicable, benefit plans, expense accounts, and other allowances.


Method(s) Used:
Direct mail, special events, television, grant proposals, Internet appeals, planned giving, and cause-related marketing.



WWP incurred joint costs of $12,282,672 for informational materials and activities that included fund raising materials. Of those costs $7,422,046 was allocated to program expenses and $4,860,626 was allocated to fund raising expenses.

Fundraising costs were 11% of $123,047,070 or $13,535,177.70
Or to use their numbers they spent $12,282,672 (which is less than 10%) and wrote off $7,422,046 to "program expenses" and assigned $4,860,626 for fund raising. They don't state here how much money the fund raising brought in.

From www.charitynavigator.o...rgid=12842
is this information:
www.charitynavigator.o...rgid=12842
Financial Performance Metrics
Program Expenses
55.0%
Administrative Expenses
8.0%
Fundraising Expenses
36.8%
Fundraising Efficiency
$0.30
Primary Revenue Growth
49.0%
Program Expenses Growth
43.1%
Working Capital Ratio (years)
0.50

Now, you can argue with that if you like but the figures state clearly that they only make 30% on their fund raising investment.