native wrote:
EDIT: Nice job, jonboy! Good on ya!
From the pdf file referenced by Jon:
"...Listed below are the amounts that Freedom Alliance spent for each of the past three years and the categories on which they were spent. The figures are taken from our Federal Form 990 which is filed with the Internal Revenue Service and posted on our web site and audited by an independent auditor using Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. This financial record not only meets, but exceeds standards of program efficiency set by most charity evaluators.
In 2008, Freedom Alliance spent a total of $6,745,717. Of that:
79 percent ($5,317,970) was spent on Program Activities•
14 percent ($945,950) was spent on Fundraising•
7 percent ($481,797) was spent on Management • ..."
The filing shows similar performance figures for 2007 and 2006.
Bend over, dawg, and take it like a man.
So I think I'm going with the blog on this one. She wasn't exactly right, but she's closer to the truth then the numbers the FreedomAlliance's response includes.
I looked at 2007 and 2008 990s and got these totals:
2007
Revenue - $12,459,317
Grants Paid - $895,347
Operations Expenses - $5,189,127
That indicates to me that 41.65% of revenue went to overhead related only to paying out money and 7.19% went to actual grants paid.
The Reponse to the blog indicates that $6,084,474 was spent on "Program Activities". That is true. However, included in those "Program Activities" is $5,189,127 in overhead associated with providing the $895,347 in grants paid out. Some things that stand out as questionable (on paper at least) to me are as follows:
- $626,632 in salaries and compensation related to providing the grants.
- $1.16 million in postage and shipping costs
- $911,287 in printing and publications expenses
- $470,896 in conferences, conventions and meeting expenses
- $298,757 in profession fees, which is undoubetedly related to the management of their $14 million investment account.
While it does certainly take some overhead to handle the small yet numerous types of grants they provide (small scholarships to a couple hundred students and very small cash contributions (most in the $1000 per vet range)), expenses of roughly 6 times the amount provided in grants is way over the top. Especially when you consider that this does not include the general overhead expenses of the foundation (e.g. salaries paid to officers and general admin costs) or the expenses related to actually raising funds.
The numbers for 2008 were a little worse.
2008
Revenue - $8,781,431
Grants Paid - $1,370,063
Operations Expenses - $3,947,907
That indicates to me that 44.96% of revenue went to overhead related only to paying out money and 15.6% went to actual grants paid.
All in all, its not a chairty that I would be willing to donate to. However, with that being said I do not believe anyone is directly personally gaining from this charity. I just think the type of support they provide is better handled on a local level and is not the type that lends itself well to a national organization. That's why the expenses are so high. Whatever Hannity's motive is (clearly profit driven) his personal gain from this charity isn't indicated on the 990's.
EDIT: Somehow my calculations got screwed up. They're fixed now, but the result doesn't change. The material change in the analysis is that 2008 was actually slightly worse than 2007, not better as originally indicated.
Check it out. 
Not Obama.