My Nonprofit Reviews

Kadybelle95 - charity reviews, charity ratings, best charities, best nonprofits, search nonprofits


278 profile views
1 reviews

Review for Opkit Kitty Sponsorship Program Inc, Chiefland, FL, USA

Rating: 1 stars  

These reviews are a perfect example of how Opkit engages in personal attacks, name calling and slander against anyone who comments negatively. The reviewer Danger 1 has violated the community rules of this site by publishing my first and last name. This speaks to their integrity. By publishing my name, I have already been contacted by people who want to know the other side of the story apart from these positive reviews on a site that the founder herself told me is owned by an Opkit member. I will provide that document or publish it on Facebook to anyone who cares to review it or if this review is removed. For your information Danger1 and pg 331, I AM a volunteer for multiple animal welfare groups and a donor to those groups giving my time and funds. How do you think I came to foster Jack for Opkit, the cat at the source of all this, if I wasn't volunteering?? Since you've never spoken to me personally, and know nothing about me or my personal life and how I spend my time and money, please refrain from making statements without regard to facts. There are two sides to every story other than what you hear from your founder. To the reviewer called Anonymous who claims they know my "back story ", and accuses me of being dishonest, we have never spoken and you are only repeating what you have been told to say. A fair and true review would contain an examination of both sides of the story. I stand by every word of my previous review. I can provide documentation to the conversations between myself and the founder asking legitimate questions about what happened to the donations for Jack and why they were collected when I paid for his veterinary care as per my donated pledge, and legally adopted him to foster him for Opkit. When I decided to honor the adoption, the founder insisted it "wasn't my call" to make. Instead of being happy he wouldn't be uprooted again and would have a home, her attitude was to challenge my decision because I hadn't asked her first. I felt adopting him, paying all his numerous medical bills, and nursing him back to health, afforded me some rights. I wasn't aware I needed to ask the founders permission to keep my own cat. She made the issue about her instead of his welfare. Right from day one, when I pulled him from the shelter, the founder argued the decision by the veterinarian, to hospitalize him initially because he was critically ill. She has engaged in name calling and ridiculing me because I didn't follow her lead. I am not affiliated with any other group or individual who has criticized Opkit, as these reviews accuse me of. I only speak for myself and my own experience with the founder. I have no doubt that the membership are well intentioned individuals who only want to save cats, as do I. However, the founder seems to attract discontent and ill will toward herself to the detriment of the organization. Why are so many individuals criticizing her and her methods continually over time? It is a legitimate question given the amount of controversy she generates. I personally found her to be controlling and abrasive. That was my experience with her. There may be transparency among the members, but not with the general public. You can't have a "secret membership list" and a closed group and call yourself transparent. You can't have it both ways. I find the things I have read about the founder to be credible as I have been treated the same way once I decided to keep Jack. Namely, anyone who questions her methods are immediately blocked from the group and their comments deleted. The founder added myself as a member until I went against her wishes to keep Jack and immediately kicked me out of the group. That is her right as she controls the group and its membership. However, prematurely removing someone over a personal dispute that challenged her control of the situation, was short sighted and financially unwise because of the loss of resources that individual could have contributed. Since my name has been published, anyone who wishes to have a civil discussion of this matter, may PM me. I will not tolerate harassment or abuse so I respectfully ask that you govern yourself accordingly. If this post or my original post is removed, it will all be published to preserve my good name and reputation and not for any spiteful reasons as some of these reviews have alleged.

Role:  Volunteer