PDA

View Full Version : Rosacea Research Foundation Refunds -- $6,000 left


drnase
19th December 2005, 11:08 AM
Group,

One of the areas that has caused a tremendous amount of confusion this summer has been my role in the Rosacea Research Foundation -- before and after I resigned. Since there seems to be time sensitive information, it really should be released now while people have the chance to recover their donations.

I resigned primarily because the RRF was not a functional organization. There were people listed on the Board and the Medical Advisory Committee that were non existent. People had resigned, quit, left and taken permanent sabbaticals and yet their names were still up there for collection of your money.

Chuck Young was not active ever, Andrew Reid was not active the whole year, 3 Board Members quit, 2 MAC members quit, David Pascoe was not performing any of his duties as President and refused to make updates to meet with the Pharmaceutical Companies needs to donate and thus he relied primarily on the RS Yahoo Board Rosacea Sufferers for money. Artist Cloutier was the secretary, but had no other input other than keeping track of grants (0), donations and gossip.

I had asked Dr. Travis Hein, a Professor who was a Microvascular Physiologist if he would take over for me if I resigned and he said no way. He was going to quit. We had never seen anything like it. We did not expect it to be like one of our Scientific Foundations, but we certainly never envisioned that it would be unprofessional, fraudulent, and with no hope of funding one good grant.

What everyone did not know is that the entire MAC quit, and half the Board Members quit (there were three people left -- David, Chuck and Artist), but all 10 former members were listed illegally collecting thousands of dollars under "false advertising" and "false endorsements" as relayed through the Federal Trade Commission violations board.

I told David Pascoe I was resigning and he said "I dont accept your resignation". I told David Pascoe the next week and he said, "I refuse your resignation", then on the third final and forceful resignation he told me to "just stick around for 8 more weeks at least". I said no and left. But surely enough, my name, photo, description and endorsement was left up on the Board of Members and as the Medical Advisory Committee President. Collecting, collecting and collecting your money.

I called David, Chuck and Artist so many times absolutely dumbfounded and furious. This is when Dr. Soldo and David Pascoe joined together to form the Debunking Hate Site to discredit me and anything I would say.

Well, I kept at them to offer to refund anyone's donation who wanted it. It was the right thing to do, the moral thing to do and would have taken all the pressure off of David Pascoe who then received the brunt of about 100 emails asking for their money back. He would not give it back. Was it his money? Why not appease people if you failed? Even more confusing, he refunded some people's donations (friends mostly) and not others -- what kind of selection process was this?

Then the day they found out the Federal Trade Commision was going to start a formal investigation, they popped out the worst study anyone could think of the very next day -- then the Federal Trade Commission could not go after them.

Now, they have $6,000 of your money left over. The RRF has now closed but there is no mention of where the money is going. It should.... No, it must go back to the people. It may very well be gone tomorrow after this post hits, but that would be wrong on so many levels. I have taken a lot of heat from the debunkers because of this and because I was a voice of reason for Dr. Soldo's outrageous claims -- which everyone saw just one of the other day and witnessed perhaps the most unprofessional display where he attacked the poor women (whom I never had any communication with) and made her feel about an inch high.

Anyway, its finally time that David Pascoe, Chuck Young and Artist Cloutier do the moral thing -- give people their money back. They are not answering theiir emails and have taken down their contact info. So, here is their contact information -- they should have phone numbers listed anyway as a Non-profit. Get your money back if you want. The whole thing was about giving you an option. They failed us with their funded study, their partial refunds to friends, and their now secret $6,000. Were we suppose to forget about this.

I know that they will add another 28 pages of false information on the debunking site about me because of this, but I dont care -- I can sleep at night.

Everyone who emailed me (about 100 at least) -- call them and get your money back. This is the only avenue left as they closed down all other contact methods.

*Private Phone numbers removed by moderator*

RedHotCanuck
19th December 2005, 01:08 PM
From the RRF Homepage:

1st December 2005 The RRF is no longer accepting donations and is winding down with the aim of filing our disolution papers by December 31.

Why are they shutting down?

drnase
19th December 2005, 02:17 PM
From the RRF Homepage:

1st December 2005 The RRF is no longer accepting donations and is winding down with the aim of filing our disolution papers by December 31.

Why are they shutting down?


No one knows besides the three mentioned above.

Are the few MAC members that they tacked on really on the RRF? Or is this consistent with what I experienced while I was on the inside?

More importantly, no mention of the $6,000. They did not spend it -- do the right thing and give it back to the donators.

Brady Barrows
20th December 2005, 06:35 AM
Too late, Geoffrey. On December 10, 2005 the RRF made this announcment:

"The RRF has divested itself of all available funds by making a further contribution of $4265.32 towards the approved research grant that was announced on October 12."

source > http://rosacea-research.org/news.htm

So here is the rough accounting:

Total Funds Received: $18,211
Total Sent to the NRS: $16,065
Balance unaccounted for: $2,146

Assuming that the NRS will use the $4265 for research that means that 88% of the total funds received went to the NRS. The RRF has clearly given its support to the NRS.

It is worth noting that the thank you letter from Sam Huff, Director of the NRS, to the RRF said that owning Glendale Communications is not a conflict of interest and that 12% of funds are spent on 'administration and fundraising.' source >

http://rosacea-research.org/pdfs/NRSThankYou.pdf

However, the Form 990s over the past several years show otherwise and I have been writing about this for several years at this editorial >

http://www.rosaceans.com/html/nrs.html

There is still an alternative for rosaceans >

http://www.irosacea.org

Warren
20th December 2005, 08:40 AM
The RRF have just announced a financial update, and have had $17,481.43 in income and $17,481.43 in expenses with over 90% being spent directly on rosacea research.

http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/rosacea-research-foundation/message/18

This thread could have been avoided with a simple email to the RRF treasurer.

drnase
21st December 2005, 12:47 AM
Too late, Geoffrey. On December 10, 2005 the RRF made this announcment:

"The RRF has divested itself of all available funds by making a further contribution of $4265.32 towards the approved research grant that was announced on October 12."

source > http://rosacea-research.org/news.htm

So here is the rough accounting:

Total Funds Received: $18,211
Total Sent to the NRS: $16,065
Balance unaccounted for: $2,146

Assuming that the NRS will use the $4265 for research that means that 88% of the total funds received went to the NRS. The RRF has clearly given its support to the NRS.

It is worth noting that the thank you letter from Sam Huff, Director of the NRS, to the RRF said that owning Glendale Communications is not a conflict of interest and that 12% of funds are spent on 'administration and fundraising.' source >

http://rosacea-research.org/pdfs/NRSThankYou.pdf

However, the Form 990s over the past several years show otherwise and I have been writing about this for several years at this editorial >

http://www.rosaceans.com/html/nrs.html

There is still an alternative for rosaceans >

http://www.irosacea.org


Wow! They really cut off the reimbursement line to the donators instantaneously. All questions should now be answered by their actions.

fanta
21st December 2005, 04:27 PM
Finito!