My Nonprofit Reviews
timmountain
Review for World Vision International, New York, NY, USA
This organization misleads their donors about how much money goes to the end recipient. They say they only spend 15% on overhead, but that is only for the fundraising office. Each additional office takes additional monies. In some cases there are 5 additional offices taking cuts before the poor receive any benefit. I would estimated that only 10-20% of the original donated monies actually get to the programs helping the poor.
More Feedback
If I had to make changes to this organization, I would...
They are so large and have so many levels that the monies get used up in the many levels of management, facilities, salaries, and benefits for staff that there is little left for the poor. They need to drastically slim down their overall overhead (they will respond and say they only spend 15% but they won't admit that is 15% for each level).
Was your donation impactful?
Unlikely
How likely is it that you would recommend that a friend donate to this group?
No
How likely are you to donate to this group again?
No
When was your last experience with this nonprofit?
2012
Review for World Vision International, New York, NY, USA
Back in 1989, World Vision commissioned an internal study to see how much of each donor dollar was getting to the poor. The internal report showed less than 10% was received by the poor. How could this be?
World Vision is a large multi level organization. Each level takes a cut (1 - Fundraising office, 2 - International office, 3 - Regional office, 4 - Country office, 5 - Project office). After all of the salaries and administrative cuts at each level, there was not much of the dollar left for the poor.
This report caused terror in the organization and the findings were quickly suppressed. Senior staff realized there was a big problem and there was a multitude of meetings to try to cut expenses, but sadly it never happened.
More Feedback
If I had to make changes to this organization, I would...
This organization used to be a lot leaner, with less overhead. The staff at that time really cared about the poor and were very concerned about stewardship. It is my hope that World Vision returns to its roots.
How does this organization compare with others in the same sector?
Somewhat badly
How much of an impact do you think this organization has?
Some
Will you recommend this organization to others?
No
When was your last experience with this nonprofit?
2012
Tim, we have no record of such a report, and the statistics you cite are nothing like the economics of our current program. World Vision U.S. spends nearly 86 percent of donations on programs benefiting children and their families (http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=4768). As we're sure you're aware, providing cash directly to families has been proven ineffective. World Vision works with communities to ensure children and families have access to essential services such as water, education, healthcare and income potential. Included in program expenses are salaries for staff such as doctors and water experts who serve in their countries or regions to ensure programs are designed to improve the lives of children, project staff who regularly monitor sponsored children to see that they are benefiting, and accountants and auditors to monitor how our funds are spent. Rather than being "overhead," these staff fill an important role in running effective programs. Larry Probus, CFO of World Vision U.S., provides an explanation of how donor funds are used and leveraged to benefit the communities we serve: http://www.worldvision.org/content.nsf/about/why-donate?open We hope you will view his presentation, which provides a current look at World Vision's finances.
