American Institute of Philanthropy (AIP) is now CharityWatch.
"It's the toughest of the bunch, rating
more than 500 charities on a scale of A+ down to F. Because it disregards
certain, potentially suspect, expenses and donations, it fails some
nonprofits that the other raters approve."
CharityWatch "is the pit bull of watchdogs.
Its staff members dig deeper than most other overseers, going to
state and federal records to get information that charities do not
volunteer, honing in on program efficiency and exposing abuses.
The New York
CharityWatch "rates fewer charities than
Charity Navigator but provides a far more detailed look at the finances
of those that it does rate.
Los Angeles Times
"The National Cancer Coalition...shows up as a
star performer on Charity Navigator, but gets an F at the more forensically
minded Charitywatch.org. Why? Philanthropic accounting is notoriously
slippery and error filled. Charitywatch.org reclassifies things
like telemarketing and direct mail costs that are frequently booked
by charities as 'program expenses,' simply because the fund-raisers
slipped in, say, an educational 'don't drink and drive' remark during
afraid to give charities a flunking grade if they spend too much
on fundraising or have accumulated eye-popping reserves.
unearthed accounting chicanery aimed at achieving a higher ranking.
For example, groups report lower fund-raising costs, and lower costs
per dollar raised, by reassigning fund-raising costs to program
expenses. This can be accomplished by including some sort of advocacy
message in fund-raising materials: A veterans group sending out
fund-raising letters might encourage the flying of American flags
in the same missive."
The Wall Street Journal
CharityWatch: "the nations preeminent charity watchdog
CharityWatch "rating standards are generally
considered the sector's most stringent.
General's Nonprofit Profiles 2006
Watchdog organizations, such as the American
Institute of Philanthropy [now CharityWatch], provide an important
public service as it is quite difficult to distinguish the money
pit from the effective organizations simply by analyzing the direct
mail sent by public interest organizations.
Voices and Echoes for
the Environment, Columbia University Press
As a watchdog [CharityWatch]
is like a dachshund small but with keen eyesight and a sharp
St. Louis Post-Dispatch
He [Daniel Borochoff, CharityWatch
President] is often referred to as the Ralph Nader of the philanthropic
Christian Science Monitor
here to read more about The CharityWatch Difference