This nonprofit falsely claims on their materials and collateral that 85% of their expenses go directly to program funding (showing a picture of a recent piece I received from today's mail package from them); however other resources, such as Charity Navigator, shows that less than 75% of expenses go to program funding. Charity Navigator pulls directly from 990s, which is a tax form completed by nonprofit organizations for the IRS. At 75%, that leaves more than $57 million going to other expenses (based on reported expenses from 990 displayed on Charity Navigator).
YES, nonprofits need to spend money on things like overhead, payroll, advertising, and advertising, including direct mail. But they're completely throwing money down the drain. I've been asking for MONTHS to be taken off their mailing list. I've never donated to them or provided them with my contact information, so they've purchased it from somewhere (most likely because I donate to other environmental nonprofits). Their mail packages are hefty, including things like cards, stickers, and things like vouchers for free umbrellas and clothing apparel. Way to spend donors' hard-earned money that they've trusted you with!
I've reported my dissatisfaction directly to the organization and to Charity Navigator, and hope that WWF is forced to report more truthful data and respect the public's requests to be left out of their wasteful mailings.
These bad reviews are ridiculous. Where are the claims of corruption etc coming from?
Here is another dishonest organization using lies to get money to supposedly help animals. If they lie to get the money then they are more then likely not using most if any of the money to help any animals.
They keep lying about global warming saying the polar bears habitat is shrinking when it has grown by 50% going along with the bankers and power companies who are making billions of dollars on these lies.
Never ever give any organization money who lies to get support.
I can't speak as an insider, but I live in Rwanda and since WWF has managed some of the parks here, the parks have increased revenue for badly needed tourism (it's hard to get people to travel hours to a forest if there is no infrastructure and without tourism, the dire poverty in the area causes people to poach from the forest and take out resources). For example, when I recently went to visit a habituated (understand that does not mean "tamed" or "in captivity") monkey troupe, the tracker was a local woman. There are managed honey gathering and candle making projects that use resources sustainably rather than using the burning-out method which did significant damage to the forest in the past.. I don't know who owns the lodge at the edge of the forest (Gisakura GH) but WWF staff were staying there in very modest quarters. I'll keep paying attention to issues people say about the compensation and the overkill on publicity, but I think they are doing important work in the field.
Hello, just saw a tv commercial regarding endangered tigers and decided to check out wwe.org. I was happy to see that a claimed 80+ cents of every dollar goes towards the conservation efforts, but appalled however at finding out what the CEO's yearly earnings are... If you're listening wwe.org, reduce that salary and you'll have my contribution... Yes, I am living what I preach. I've taken a 33% hit in my salary due to the down turn in the economy by starting over and taking an entry level position in public service, but can still live a comfortable life by cutting back on some unnecessary expenses... and as I ready to sign my name up to help a tiger out there, I find myself disgusted at the CEO's salary...
Review from CharityNavigator
Met the head of administration in Dar-Es-Salaam, Tanzania. When I challenged him about driving around the city in a fully kitted out Toyota Land Cruiser - his reply was that the vehicle reflected his status in the organization. He then when on to say that without such visible signs of power, the Africans wouldn't respect him. couple those remarks with some very interesting corporate policies, and almost 23% expenses, this 'charity' should be avoided
Review from CharityNavigator
According to the Wall Street Journal;
"This year, chief financial officers at companies with $500 million or more in sales are projected to earn between $257,500 and $370,500 in average annual base pay, according to a 2008 report from staffing firm Robert Half International Inc. "
In 2008 the WWF had a total revenue of $151M. Carter Roberts, President of the WWF, received $465,427 in base compensation. That's 25% more than the high end base salary of CEOs of companies with over 3 times the revenue.
"Helping the environment" is good business.
Review from Guidestar
WWF is a joke. They were formed by hunters and their lack of caring for animals shows. They actually support Sea World.....this is a corporation that makes it's millions by imprisioning marine mammals. Send you money to groups that actually care for animals, like Sea Shepherd, Center for Biological Diversity, etc.
WWF's commitment to conserving nature--protecting natural areas of plants and animals; promoting sustainable approaches to the use of renewable natural resources; and promoting more efficient use of resources and energy and the maximum reduction of pollution--is as critical to our future now as it was when they started over 45 years ago. I got to know them more over the last couple of years because of their leadership in raising awareness about earth hour, which has become a global phenomenon. This alone has inspired millions to stand up for our earth in more, bolder ways. I believe that they'll reach their 2020 goal to conserve 19 of the world's most important natural places and significantly change global markets to protect the future of nature. Beyond Earth hour, they continue to reach out to educate people about why action is needed and motivate us to come up with solutions that work for people and nature.
Review from Guidestar