# WWP (and veteran-oriented charities)



## Blizzard (Jan 27, 2016)

Anyone else see/read this article on Wounded Warrior Project?
Former employee and disabled vet: Wounded Warrior Project conduct "makes me sick" - CBS News

While I have some issues with the CBS article, in general, it touches on some long-standing and increasing criticisms of WWP.

But are people being overly critical of WWP? Do these shortcomings make WWP “bad”? After all, WWP is just one charity, albeit a very large, highly visible one; it can’t be all things to all people.  Nor can it/should it be viewed as a replacement program for gov't/VA care.  It’d be hard to argue that another organization has done more than WWP to raise broad general public support and awareness for wounded veterans.  So, for that they deserve some credit.

That said, it does seem WWP has lost it’s way a bit over the years.  An increasingly greater percentage of money raised reportedly goes to administrative costs as opposed to programs (Note:  charitynavigator.org currently rates it 3 of 4 stars, charitywatch.org rates it a ‘C’).  Not to mention the aggressive (over-reaching?) approach in defending their logo/brand. These types of issues are not unique to WWP and are seemingly symptomatic of many large charity organizations at some point.  Can they fix it? Probably. More importantly, will they fix it?

This also got me thinking more broadly about veterans/military-support charities.  I’ve never made a direct contribution to WWP.  Not because I don’t believe in their cause but rather because I’ve elected to support a couple significantly smaller veteran charities to which I have closer/direct connections.  I’m guessing a lot of people here probably take a similar approach.  When we give to a charity, we want to know that our contribution makes a difference.  These smaller charities allow me to more directly see the results and I know that nearly 100% is directed to programs. They have a niche.  But, the concern with smaller orgs will always be their longevity and effectiveness due to their relative size and obscurity. In addition, there are so many of these smaller veterans’ charities with similar objectives (sometimes there are so many that knowing what’s legit can be a concern) they sometimes get diluted/lost in the mix. It seems some would benefit from the synergies of partnership/consolidation.


----------



## Ranger Psych (Jan 27, 2016)

WWP is shit. Pure and simple. The amount of actual things they do for veterans they're so called supporting is abysmal.


----------



## Brill (Jan 27, 2016)

WWP vs SOWF

Scroll down about half-way to look at expenses vs program funds.

Bottom line, WWP is like a HOA: there to make money for the admin while delivery as little service as possible to just be legal.


----------



## Grunt (Jan 27, 2016)

I quit contributing to them a long time ago. There is a lot of their "administrative" money that could truly help a lot of Wounded Warriors!


----------



## Gunz (Jan 27, 2016)

I've been hearing bad things about WWP for the last four years. I have a  friend who helps organize scuba dives down in the Carib for wounded vets...and he says WWP always shows up but doesn't contribute a dime to these activities; airfare, dinners, lodging, dive lessons and supervision, cell phones, computers, all privately donated to these vets. Here's another take on the OP.

Wounded Warrior Project reportedly accused of wasting donor money | Fox News


----------



## RackMaster (Jan 27, 2016)

I think a key thing in all this is that there's a lot of really good Veterans being used as volunteers in their programs.  These men and women believe in the cause and see the benefits first hand.  But how much does it blind them to the corruption at the top?


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Jan 28, 2016)

They were very involved while I was at a WTU. However, if you look at the money, and where it's going, and it's pretty easy to see they are not focused on the veteran community. It's sad, and I honestly think they should be fully investigated, with a public report of funds...


----------



## Gunz (Jan 28, 2016)

And the legion of WWP copy-cat charities that somehow get a license. They know a good thing when they see it. I come across these dudes all the time...some dweeb in surplus BDUs, 200 pounds of shit in a 100 pound bag. Ever question any of these guys? I have. No sir, I never served...then why are you wearing a fucking uniform??


----------



## AWP (Jan 28, 2016)

WWP is a corporate brand using an emotional subject.

We have a member who has benefited greatly form WWP. We have at least two who barely received a drive by visit in the hospital. I think only one them received a t-shirt. To be fair they do great things, but proportionate to the dollars donated or when compared to similar charities? Not bloody likely.  

They've become a brand you can find everywhere and their logo is genius. What's more heroic than carrying a wounded comrade out of danger? They've partnered with Heinz, Under Armor, and half of the planet. You can't escape them and why should you? They help our wounded and in this post-9/11 pseudo "we love the military" US what's more noble than throwing a few dollars at wounded warriors? If you don't then you clearly don't love 'Merica, right?

I think Steven Nardizzi's position is quite clear.

Our Mission - Charity Defense Council



> Our goal is singular and bold: to change the way people think about changing the world. To let them know that low overhead is not the way the world gets changed. That poor executive compensation is not a strategic plan for ending hunger or poverty or curing disease. That inadequate, donated resources are not the path to global transformation.



He sits on their advisory board. An organization whose explicit goal is to fight for higher salaries for the CEO's who run charitable organizations. WWP's founder wants more money and is willing to fight you for it. For your money. For him.

They are a corporate brand out to make money and they hide behind your emotional attachment to the subject matter. They are the new Scientology.


----------



## policemedic (Jan 28, 2016)

Ocoka One said:


> I've been hearing bad things about WWP for the last four years. I have a  friend who helps organize scuba dives down in the Carib for wounded vets...and he says WWP always shows up but doesn't contribute a dime to these activities; airfare, dinners, lodging, dive lessons and supervision, cell phones, computers, all privately donated to these vets. Here's another take on the OP.
> 
> Wounded Warrior Project reportedly accused of wasting donor money | Fox News


 
Is he the SUDS guy?


----------



## Gunz (Jan 29, 2016)

policemedic said:


> Is he the SUDS guy?



Negative, his is HSA, Handicapped Scuba Association. He's my Nam buddy in Philly who dives in Bonaire every year. He's former Marine NCO, combat wounded, has a son who's a Marine Captain, another who's an FBI SA. He and his group do wonderful things for OIF/OEF guys.


----------



## Gunz (Jan 29, 2016)

Freefalling said:


> ...I think Steven Nardizzi's position is quite clear.
> 
> Our Mission - Charity Defense Council
> 
> ...



At least he 's an honest thieving bastard. :whatever:


----------



## TLDR20 (Jan 30, 2016)

Non profit CEO's salaries need to be high to attract the talent necessary to expand the brand. If you pay a CEO 60K a year, you are going to get a 60K a year worker.


----------



## Marauder06 (Jan 30, 2016)

TLDR20 said:


> Non profit CEO's salaries need to be high to attract the talent necessary to expand the brand. If you pay a CEO 60K a year, you are going to get a 60K a year worker.



I had this exact conversation with one of my classes on Friday.  WWP manages what... $250, $300 million, and several thousand employees?  Something that big, you're going to need to shell out some $$$ to get the management team you need to optimize that organization.  Otherwise, people with that much talent are going to go over to the private sector.  It would be great if people with that much talent would do jobs like that for free, but self-interest is a legitimate motivator, and altruism only takes us so far.  I love the Army and our nation, but I wouldn't still be in uniform if I wasn't getting paid pretty well to do what I do.


----------



## Il Duce (Jan 30, 2016)

I heard a TED talk from Dan Pallotta that made much the same point.  Before listening I would definitely have said low overhead, low salaries for employees/CEOs was the way to go with a charity - the only way to represent the values of your organization.  However, after listening to the TED talk I'm not so sure.  Certainly an area I would need to know much more about before forming a strong opinion.

On a similar vein I've listened to several TED talks and read some interesting articles about how the most effective 'charity' is in fact a for-profit model - the Gameen bank, micro-finance, and a number of other initiatives have made significant advances in the 3rd world building a business model where self-interest drives their altruistic goals.

TED talk here: Dan Pallotta: The way we think about charity is dead wrong | TED Talk | TED.com


----------



## policemedic (Jan 30, 2016)

Marauder06 said:


> I had this exact conversation with one of my classes on Friday.  WWP manages what... $250, $300 million, and several thousand employees?  Something that big, you're going to need to shell out some $$$ to get the management team you need to optimize that organization.  Otherwise, people with that much talent are going to go over to the private sector.  It would be great if people with that much talent would do jobs like that for free, but self-interest is a legitimate motivator, and altruism only takes us so far.  I love the Army and our nation, but I wouldn't still be in uniform if I wasn't getting paid pretty well to do what I do.



I don't disagree with that.  I think if you want to succeed, you need talented leadership and that usually doesn't come cheap.  You also have to pay your employees a competitive salary, or you won't have very good employees.  The talent will go where they feel they are appreciated.

My biggest issue is the spending on lavish retreats and such.  That seems wasteful.


----------



## AWP (Jan 31, 2016)

More from CBS:

Wounded Warrior Project on Charity Navigator's watch list



> In another response to the on-going CBS News investigation of Wounded Warrior Project, Charity Navigator, a national evaluator of charities, put the country's most prominent veterans charity on its watch list.



Even though it is on their watchlist, it ranks 3 out of 4 stars or whatever.

Charity Navigator - CN Watchlist

Charity Navigator Rating - Wounded Warrior Project

I find it interesting the HQ and the mailing address for donations aren't even in the same state.


----------



## Gunz (Feb 1, 2016)

Marauder06 said:


> I had this exact conversation with one of my classes on Friday.  WWP manages what... $250, $300 million, and several thousand employees?  Something that big, you're going to need to shell out some $$$ to get the management team you need to optimize that organization.  Otherwise, people with that much talent are going to go over to the private sector.  It would be great if people with that much talent would do jobs like that for free, but self-interest is a legitimate motivator, and altruism only takes us so far.  I love the Army and our nation, but I wouldn't still be in uniform if I wasn't getting paid pretty well to do what I do.




It's a valid argument, sir, the problem is, the public isn't going to buy it.

Donations are fueled by publicity that creates sympathy. There aren't many people who are going to feel all that sympathetic to a charity CEO who goes around lobbying for higher salaries for charity CEOs. No matter what the logic is. Their gonna hate him. The last thing you want to do as a charity CEO is generate hate. He makes a half-million a year, a fortune to most Americans. Not anywhere near the stratosphere of private sector CEO salaries, granted, but public perception is, IMV, everything.


----------



## TLDR20 (Feb 1, 2016)

Ocoka One said:


> It's a valid argument, sir, the problem is, the public isn't going to buy it.
> 
> Donations are fueled by publicity that creates sympathy. There aren't many people who are going to feel all that sympathetic to a charity CEO who goes around lobbying for higher salaries for charity CEOs. No matter what the logic is. It's going to be a real hard sell for Mr. Nardizzi, even harder if not impossible given the negative publicity WWP is now getting. Nardizzi makes a half-million dollars a year, a fortune to most people. Not anywhere near the stratosphere of private sector CEO salaries, granted, but public perception is everything .



Well the public is full of idiots who don't understand economics.


----------



## Gunz (Feb 1, 2016)

TLDR20 said:


> Well the public is full of idiots who don't understand economics.



Yes sir, absolutely agree, but those idiots are the ones you're asking for money.


----------



## compforce (Feb 1, 2016)

Marauder06 said:


> I had this exact conversation with one of my classes on Friday.  WWP manages what... $250, $300 million, and several thousand employees?  Something that big, you're going to need to shell out some $$$ to get the management team you need to optimize that organization.  Otherwise, people with that much talent are going to go over to the private sector.



I would say there's a compromise somewhere in the middle.  I agree that compensation has to be in line with the responsibility to get the big gun CEOs that can manage and grow the brand.  That said, the president of United Way Worldwide, one of the consistently highest performing charity organizations, with 1800 locations in 45 countries is only slightly higher.  He manages not only the locations, but has ultimate responsibility for the employees and the activities of their 2.9M volunteers.  Oh, and manages a paltry $5.18B in donations.  (Financial Information | United Way Worldwide )

Now why would WWP pay a guy nearly the same salary that has such a small fraction of the responsibility?  ($473k, Charity Navigator Rating - Wounded Warrior Project)  No report of deferred compensation that I could find, but I'm sure it's been taken.

His resume certainly doesn't appear to justify it:  Steven Nardizzi | Wounded Warrior Project

Here's Brian Gallagher's for comparison:  President and Chief Executive Officer, United Way Worldwide | United Way Worldwide  Note that he was an employee for 21 years before becoming CEO for the last 14.



> What is the salary of president and CEO Brian A. Gallagher?
> 
> Brian Gallagher’s salary in 2014 was $532,552. Based on Mr. Gallagher’s successful performance of specific objectives in 2014, the Executive Compensation Committee and Board of Trustees provided him with incentive pay of $157,500.
> ...


----------



## AWP (Feb 1, 2016)

No one would blink an eye about the CEO's pay if the organization did a better job with its money.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Feb 2, 2016)

Freefalling said:


> No one would blink an eye about the CEO's pay if the organization did a better job with its money.



Idk, I think they over shot there situation. Bottom line, why should anyone who gives a fuck draw a salary over $100k?


----------



## TLDR20 (Feb 2, 2016)

Diamondback 2/2 said:


> Idk, I think they over shot there situation. Bottom line, why should anyone who gives a fuck draw a salary over $100k?



Because these people are worth that much money. He could probably make at more in the for profit sector.

For a bunch of conservatives a lot of you get awfully socialist sounding when it comes to high compensation.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Feb 2, 2016)

TLDR20 said:


> Because these people are worth that much money. He could probably make at more in the for profit sector.
> 
> For a bunch of conservatives a lot of you get awfully socialist sounding when it comes to high compensation.



I'm not a conservative, but even if I was, I don't think anyone working a non-profit should make that kinda money, with those types of benefits.


----------



## CDG (Feb 2, 2016)

Diamondback 2/2 said:


> Idk, I think they over shot there situation. Bottom line, why should anyone who gives a fuck draw a salary over $100k?



I think it's a pretty unfair statement to say that anyone who gives a fuck would take less money just for the hell of it.  If a veterans organization came to me and said, "Hey man, we want to pay you X to do Y.", I'm not going to turn around and force them to pay me less for some arbitrary reason.  They help veterans.  Outside of their official donations, how much more awareness has that brand raised?  How many people do you think have had their eyes opened to veterans charity organizations through the WWP brand and gone on to research other ways to give back or other charities to donate to?  I get it, WWP can tighten their shot group.  I certainly don't think their CEO deserves 100K as a salary cap though.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Feb 5, 2016)

I heard a lot of horror stories over the years.  But I've also seen a friend of mine and his family put up in some crazy hotels for retreats and concerts over weekends.  They organize and pay for some expensive hunts that I've seen the product of.  What I do know is they don't just give you a check when you're struggling to make a mortgage payment and some folks who seek that aid hold it against them.  Their admin costs are really high though.  But this is much less than the Susan Komen foundation.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Feb 5, 2016)

Wounded Warrior Project Sues Two Disabled Vets


----------



## pardus (Feb 5, 2016)

Diamondback 2/2 said:


> Wounded Warrior Project Sues Two Disabled Vets



That says it all.

I don't give two shits if I sound like a conservative or a hypocrite or whatever,  WWP can go fuck itself.
I make an effort to tell everyone when the subject comes up, what a bunch of cunts I think they are.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Feb 5, 2016)

pardus said:


> That says it all.
> 
> I don't give two shits if I sound like a conservative or a hypocrite or whatever,  WWP can go fuck itself.
> I make an effort to tell everyone when the subject comes up, what a bunch of cunts I think they are.



Yeah I defended them several years ago, but this was before I understood what they are doing. 

I think their bullshit needs to be brought out in the open...


----------



## pardus (Feb 5, 2016)

Diamondback 2/2 said:


> Yeah I defended them several years ago, but this was before I understood what they are doing.
> 
> *I think their bullshit needs to be brought out in the open...*



Absolutely!


----------



## AWP (Mar 4, 2016)

WWP's largest fundraisers/ donors: We can has audit?

WWP: Lulz

Top Wounded Warrior donor calls for CEO's resignation

Bonus points: the board of directors have retained independent counsel.


----------



## Red Flag 1 (Mar 4, 2016)

Diamondback 2/2 said:


> Yeah I defended them several years ago, but this was before I understood what they are doing.
> 
> I think their bullshit needs to be brought out in the open...



The rumor mill about WWP and spending on it's self has been out there for over a year. Folks that asked me were to donate usually I would steer them to the GBF, because I have seen the backing for our wounded.

I am really happy the Kane's stepped up to the plate, not only with $$, but with open, watchful eyes.


----------



## Red Flag 1 (Mar 4, 2016)

Freefalling said:


> WWP's largest fundraisers/ donors: We can has audit?
> 
> WWP: Lulz
> 
> ...



I wonder where the funding for said counsel is coming from? Their  history suggests that it will come from donations for the wounded.


----------



## AWP (Mar 4, 2016)

Red Flag 1 said:


> The rumor mill about WWP and spending on it's self has been out there for over a year.



Some of us have followed this for years now. The early complaints were stifled or ignored, in part because the mainstream and mainstream news organizations wouldn't cover WWP's finances. Even now with CBS looking at them you won't see much but a blip on the radar. They prey upon society's emotions and are low hanging fruit for donations to support our troops. Better organizations out there aren't mentioned, but WWP has become a brand with a strong marketing presence.


----------



## Red Flag 1 (Mar 4, 2016)

Freefalling said:


> Some of us have followed this for years now. The early complaints were stifled or ignored, in part because the mainstream and mainstream news organizations wouldn't cover WWP's finances. Even now with CBS looking at them you won't see much but a blip on the radar. They prey upon society's emotions and are low hanging fruit for donations to support our troops. Better organizations out there aren't mentioned, but WWP has become a brand with a strong marketing presence.



The media help this along quite a bit, IMHO. So many in the media, I think Bill O'Riley included, backed WWP donations over any other charities for our wounded. The power of the media is so strong, and all you have to do is to groom one, or two high profile talking heads, and you are up and running.


----------



## DocIllinois (Mar 4, 2016)

Red Flag 1 said:


> The media help this along quite a bit, IMHO. So many in the media, I think Bill O'Riley included, backed WWP donations over any other charities for our wounded. The power of the media is so strong, and all you have to do is to groom one, or two high profile talking heads, and you are up and running.



I concur.

And, similar to talking head "opinions" given on scientific subjects, truthiness can often be very trendy and subjective.


Some military assistance charities can also be objectively more effective and efficient than others.

*Military assistance charity ratings*


----------



## Red Flag 1 (Mar 4, 2016)

DocIllinois said:


> I concur.
> 
> And, similar to talking head "opinions" given on scientific subjects, truthiness can often be very trendy and subjective.
> 
> ...




Thanks for the links. They have probably been mentioned, sort of peppered throughout our threads. Seeing this list here, is convenient and timely.


----------



## Gunz (Mar 7, 2016)

Freefalling said:


> WWP's largest fundraisers/ donors: We can has audit?
> 
> WWP: Lulz
> 
> ...




Fuck these greedy bastards. I don't give to charities, I don't have a lot of spare cash. But I've given about $300 to these assholes over the years because it touched a personal nerve with me. We didn't have these kinds of organizations when I got wounded. I felt good about it, felt I was helping my young bros, in my own small way, to maybe make things a little easier than it was for us  back then. These are the worst kind of hypocritical cunts, making money exploiting our wounded. After this last story, I've fuckin had it. No quarter for these motherfuckers, I hope some of them land in jail. Personally, I'd like to show up at one of their gala events with about a dozen combat vets and tear their fuckin house down to the ground.


----------



## compforce (Mar 10, 2016)

and the hammer drops...

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


----------



## Red Flag 1 (Mar 10, 2016)

compforce said:


> and the hammer drops...
> 
> Wounded Warrior Project's top execs reportedly fired amid lavish spending scandal | Fox News



Too bad Bill and Hilary were not part of the Executive staff. With their clout, and business dealings WWP would have been untouchable.

On the serious side, I was glad to hear about the changes at the top. The real question is will WWP survive this? I am sure their funding is down now. To stay in the game, it will take some serious money to PR/Ad companies paint a picture that donors will believe, and buy into. With the pinch felt from the donors, WWP goes upside down, and may be forced to borrow to stay viable. It would also be interesting to see is the Kane family are stcking by WWP, or gone elsewhere with their donations?


----------



## Frank S. (Mar 10, 2016)

Diamondback 2/2 said:


> why should anyone who gives a fuck draw a salary over $100k?



Veyron. Vuitton. Volnay. Van Cleef & Arpels. And... Vacation,vacation, vacation, vacation...


----------



## Gunz (Mar 11, 2016)

Recovering wounded vets will not suffer if WWP disappears. They have the VA, Vet Centers and other alternatives.

Dig a ditch and bury the bitch.


----------

