As the year 2015 comes to a conclusion, TV broadcasting, email and regular postal mail is inundated with charity and donation requests. Animal lovers especially are targeted with the heartwrenching ASPCA television commercials pleading for regular monthly donations to save abused, neglected, and abandoned pets. The sad music plays in the background while a popular musician sings or an actor narrates as the images of seriously neglected, starved, woeful creatures look at the camera causing our eyes to well up in tears -- or many of us to look away from the TV screen -- as our heart breaks for animals that cannot help themselves.

"Don't Let Time Run Out! Donate Today to Receive a Last-Minute Tax Break" headlines the ASPCA website. A similar call to action is blaring from the Humane Society of the United States webpage and other solicitators as we edge closer to New Years Eve, the final day for our year-end tax break donations.

As a passionate, conscientious animal lover, but also a kind human being as well, I am angered and disgusted with animal abuse and neglect. I too am deeply affected by the advertisements, however, I simply do not sit down and write out a check or go online and make a donation. There are far too many charities or non-profit organizations seeking even a tiny percentage of each of our donations. Some of these are scandalously run with blatant inefficiencies that ONLY are revealed if a smart donor investigates FIRST before giving money. Otherwise, your hard-earned money is a contribution towards a charity administrator's mortgage on their house or a luxury vacation. Even worse, there are popular rescue organizations that have been shut down by law officials for both animal cruelty as well as embezzling money, despite having accreditation from newsmakers or celebrities. Look at this for example!

N.Y. State Shutters Pet Hospice Supported by Celebrities

New York State officials have closed an upstate shelter for ill and injured dogs and cats, accusing its owner of multimillion-dollar mismanagement, reports the Associated Press. The group had won televised kudos from Oprah Winfrey.

Attorney General Eric Schneiderman said Susan Marino, owner of the Angel's Gate animal hospice, steered $3.1 million raised from 2007 to 2012 into personal expenses and failed to file required financial reports.

Mr. Schneiderman's office filed suit in 2012 seeking to shut down the charity in rural Delhi, N.Y. A state Supreme Court judge ordered the dissolution last month and permanently barred Ms. Marino — who had been convicted of animal cruelty following investigations of the hospice by animal-rights groups — from taking in rescue pets.

Angel's Gate received a flood of contributions after being featured on Ms. Winfrey's show in 2008. The charity was also touted by TV hosts Rachael Ray and Martha Stewart and won an award from the ASPCA. Mr. Schneiderman said money remaining after the 98-acre Angel's Gate property is sold and creditors paid will go to another animal-welfare charity. Ms. Marino could not be reached for comment. October 15, 2015, The Chronicle of Philanthropy, https://philanthropy.com/article/NY-State-Shutters-Pet/233772

In short, I always investigate before I donate! And what's more, it is easy to do so. There are a number of charity watchdog groups that monitor non-profit organizations and actually assign them scores on how well these organization live up to their missions. This includes the giants such as the ASPCA, The Humane Society, and numerous others. One particular watchdog group I frequently visit is CharityNavigator.org. One can look up a charity organization or browse rated charities in categories. Their mission statement:

Charity Navigator works to guide intelligent giving. By guiding intelligent giving, we aim to advance a more efficient and responsive philanthropic marketplace, in which givers and the charities they support work in tandem to overcome our nation’s and the world’s most persistent challenges.

Charity Navigator is a 501 (c) (3) non-profit organization under the Internal Revenue Code and does not accept any contributions from any charities we evaluate.

So, for example, due to the extent of media advertising and continual requests for donations, I researched the ASPCA on Charity Navigator and found that they have been assigned a Program Expense percentage rating of 61.3% (the higher the percentage the better). The ASPCA Administrative Expenses score is 5.8% out of 10 (the lower number the better). What do these numbers mean?

Charity Navigator explains that Program Expenses are the percent of the charity’s total expenses spent on the programs and services it delivers (the higher the percentage the better) and Administrative Expenses as being the total functional expenses spent on management/general (the lower number the better). What is more Charity Navigator details:

Our data shows that 7 out of 10 charities we've evaluated spend at least 75% of their budget on the programs and services they exist to provide. And 9 out of 10 spend at least 65%. We believe that those spending less than a third of their budget on program expenses are simply not living up to their missions. Charities demonstrating such gross inefficiency receive a 0-star rating for their Financial Health. 

Hmm...so the ASPCA spends just 61.3% of their budget on Program Expenses, which is lower than the 7 out of 10 charities that spend more than 75% of their budget on programs and services. Also, the ASPCA administrative expenses are nearly 6%. Yet, there exists other animal charities that spend up to or slightly more than 90% of their budget on Program Expenses! Meaning, they spend 90% of every penny coming in on their programs and services. All the while, in 2013, the ASPCA raked in more than $142 million dollars from contributions, gifts and grants and had over $10 million in administration expenses. For me, this is an eye opener. As a comparison, the World Wildlife Fund who has similar annual contributions, gifts and grants of $165 million, but spends 75% on Program Expenses.

I decided several years ago that our regional and local philanthropic organizations and no-kill animal shelters would be the recipients of my contributions. Directly donating to these organizations, I can stipulate where my funds should be spent. I can visit the centers to observe the administration, view care and cleanliness and am comfortable knowing that my money is being spent as it should be. In short, it doesn't matter what charity you are considering -- the best practice is to investigate them first with watchdog groups and see where the money is actually going. You may be very surprised.