Local organizations receive low ratings from charity watchdog
Since 2001, Charity Navigator has been a leading charity watchdog following the money -- reviewing the inner workings of hundreds of charities across the country to help you make smarter choices.
But the Navigator ruffled a few feathers with this year's Holiday Giving Guide - naming the highest and lowest-rated charities it evaluated.
Among the lowest-rated? Two charities in Washington state. Stronger Families, a marriage and family advocate group, got low marks for what Charity Navigator considers a lack of transparency in the way the charity is run.
And Operation Lookout, which is dedicated to finding missing, abducted and runaway children, got low ratings for spending most of its money -- more than 85 percent -- on fundraising.
Charity Navigator says in following the bucks. Nine out of 10 of the charities it evaluated spent at least 65 cents on the actual charity program or service, and 7 out of 10 did even better, spending at least 75 cents of every dollar on programs.
As far as charity navigator is concerned, any charity that takes your whole dollar but only gives less than 33 and a third cents to the actual charity, is not spending your money wisely.
But Operation Lookout told KOMO 4 News that Charity Navigator's rating are misleading because that organization has chosen to contract fundraisers that also take care of part of the program services.
Operation Lookout co-founder Melody Gibson addressed the issue in an email, when asked for a response to the Charity Navigator rating.
"Operation Lookout has chosen to contract fundraisers that will include an element of programmatic services for a cost effective method of national one-to-one outreach. The results are favorable to the mission however the reporting processes are not clear enough to demonstrate this value to OPERATION LOOKOUT, thus it 'appears' the fundraiser is 'pocketing' funds when much of the payment is paid for an element of our program," the email reads.
Stronger Families Executive Director Noel Meador says its low rating was caused by mistakes on the annual charity reporting form required by the IRS, called form 990. Meador had this email reply:
"The low rating is only due to a clerical error in the filing of the 990 under several policy items that were incorrectly marked. In fact those policies do exist within Stronger Families. An amended 990 has been sent to Battershell and Nichols CPA firm and will be resubmitted to Charity Navigator. It is worth noting that the percentage of program vs. administrative cost to Stronger Families is very good. The program expenses is 74.7% compared to only 5.6% administrative expenses."
Charity Navigator told KOMO 4 News it's evaluations and ratings are based on the form 990 information filed and reviewed by the charities themselves. and the bottom line for donors is to review all the information and when in doubt, ask questions.
Spokeswoman Sandra Miniutti says in signing form 990 and filing the report with the IRS every fiscal year, charities officers are acknowledging that the information contained in the report is accurate and has been reviewed.
Charity Navigator says it routinely updates it's ratings, and any corrections submitted by charities will be evaluated as soon as the updated 990 information is forwarded from the Internal Revenue Service.
The charity watchdog says the bottom line for donors- is to review all the information about a charity you can, and when in doubt - ask questions.
"Operation Lookout has chosen to contract fundraisers that will include an element of programmatic services for a cost effective method of national one-to-one outreach. The results are favorable to the mission however the reporting processes are not clear enough to demonstrate this value to OPERATION LOOKOUT, thus it 'appears' the fundraiser is 'pocketing' funds when much of the payment is paid for an element of our program,"
-----------------------
That's some of the worst doubletalk I've come across in a long time.  If they really want to be shown in a good light, they need to get rid of the doubletalk and remove the 'not clear enough to demonstrate this value'. Give KOMO more than just email - show them how this actually works....
Â
IF they don't, well, buyer beware.
It is a shame this article was printed now during the giving season. Why, because even though KOMO was told the rating for Stronger Families was a clerical error, they chose to air the inaccurate information anyway. Stronger Families does great work with military families and first responder families. They are in high demand on military bases. Hope this does not hurt their receiving gifts from a supportive community. Poor reporting KOMO.
@johnrf -- People can barf out anything they want. Doesn't mean that what they say is true. Until they actually deliver the updated forms, what they said is nothing more than wishful thinking.
Â
In this case, Stronger Families can correct thier error. Until then, the FACTS reported remain true.
Â
I'd bet that KOMO would update the story with the corrected information if Stronger Families would provide a copy of the proper forms directly to KOMO.
Â
So, no, not 'bad KOMO'. Bad (and stupid) person at the charity for not filling out the forms (or god forbid for actually being as bad as the data makes them look).Â
 @FormerMarineSgt  @johnrf To provide the news is to find out the truth before the story airs. All of the proper documents are open to the public and to KOMO. They did not choose to look at those before reporting. I have worked with nonprofits for over 30 years. It is a shame you choose to believe in FACTS just because the media tells you they are facts. Who is the uniformed person?  MEdia has a responsibility to the nonprofit community to tell the truth, not just a sensational story.  You can choose to believe perceptions, but finding the truth takes more work.Â
@FormerMarineSgt so you take everything the media says as truth? Hmmm.....
@johnrf - 'is correcting it' means that it's not been corrected yet.
Â
Until it is corrected, it's nothing more than slick talk.
Â
I'm not saying that the charity isn't telling the truth. What I'm saying is that KOMO has no way of knowing IF they are telling the truth or not. Â
Â
Reporting the known facts ANDÂ reporting the conversations they have with the charity is valid reporting whether you like what's being reported or not.
Â
If the charity in question hadn't screwed up thier paperwork AND would provide the corrected paperwork to KOMO, I'd bet that KOMO would print a correction - but the charity hasn't done that yet. Â
Â
I could promise to give you a million dollars right now, but that doesn't mean I'm telling the truth. Would you count on my statement to be absolutely true before you actually recieved the money? You'd be a fool to do so.  The person who wrote this story understands the difference between 'fancy wishful talk' and actual facts is and that's why it was written this way.
Â
They did find the truth. if you don't like the truth, it's not KOMO's problem.
Â
Â
 @FormerMarineSgt And to correct your interpretation of the "facts".  The organizations leader took full responsibility for the clerical error, and is correcting it. This is a non story as the policies are already in place and the organization offers full disclosure. But because "perceptions" of people like you, the Christmas giving could go down, thereby hurting the many military families that are getting great help from Stronger Families.