AARS spends $30K on research

[Brady Barrows]

The American Acne and Rosacea Society spent $30K on research in 2008. This non profit organization received in donations $325K. This means that for every dollar donated to the AARS 9 cents was spent on research. You can read all about this by clicking here.

[college_senior]

If I didn't have to pay hundreds of dollars every month on dermatology visits, prescriptions, topicals, creams, moisturizers...I would write them a check for 1,000 dollars.

I am sure each Rosacean could give AARS a few hundred dollars a year if it weren't for the thousands we are spending for treatment. Think about it, probably 10,000 people who give 100 of 200 bucks. (Looking at 250k alone)

With that being said, I hope they spent around 60k in 2009.

[DukeCity]

That's a lot of coffee and donuts.

[MasK]

Originally Posted by DukeCity

That's a lot of coffee and donuts.

Right

[Brady Barrows]

Originally Posted by college_senior

If I didn't have to pay hundreds of dollars every month on dermatology visits, prescriptions, topicals, creams, moisturizers...I would write them a check for 1,000 dollars.

I am sure each Rosacean could give AARS a few hundred dollars a year if it weren't for the thousands we are spending for treatment. Think about it, probably 10,000 people who give 100 of 200 bucks. (Looking at 250k alone)

With that being said, I hope they spent around 60k in 2009.

There is no evidence that rosaceans donate to the AARS. There is evidence that the $325,000 the AARS received in donations came from pharmaceutical corporate sponsors.

[Brady Barrows]

Originally Posted by DukeCity

That's a lot of coffee and donuts.

Actually, the AARS spent $161K on the following:

Grants $30K
Professional Fees - $29K
PPP&S - $1K
Other Expenses - $101K

If you want to know more details how they spent the money click here.

[Michael_V]

Originally Posted by college_senior

If I didn't have to pay hundreds of dollars every month on dermatology visits, prescriptions, topicals, creams, moisturizers...I would write them a check for 1,000 dollars.

I am sure each Rosacean could give AARS a few hundred dollars a year if it weren't for the thousands we are spending for treatment. Think about it, probably 10,000 people who give 100 of 200 bucks. (Looking at 250k alone)

With that being said, I hope they spent around 60k in 2009.

I'm not sure the intent of the original post was complimentary of the financial stewardship of AARS. I would think research warrants more than 9% of total donations. This is almost the inverse of a good charity: admin costs should be around 10% with the lion's share (90%) going to the cause in question...

[Michael_V]

Per statement 3, $71,000 was spent on "public relations." This is more than twice what they spent on actually finding a cure. I'm not sure I would give them a penny....

[college_senior]

Originally Posted by Brady Barrows

There is no evidence that rosaceans donate to the AARS. There is evidence that the $325,000 the AARS received in donations came from pharmaceutical corporate sponsors.

You're proving my point Brady haha...

[Brady Barrows]

Originally Posted by Michael_V

I'm not sure the intent of the original post was complimentary of the financial stewardship of AARS. I would think research warrants more than 9% of total donations. This is almost the inverse of a good charity: admin costs should be around 10% with the lion's share (90%) going to the cause in question...

I am simply stating the facts according to what the Form 990 says which is public knowledge for anyone to consider if one has the time and effort to check into how a non profit spends its donations. All non profits are required to file a Form 990 if they receive more than $25,000 in donations and are required to show how they spend the donations and the salaries of its directors and employees along with the names of contractors who receive substantial funds from the non profit organization.

Actually, since I have been involved with a non profit organization for rosacea since 2004 and have been reading Form 990s for some time now, I have discovered that most non profit organizations are run like the AARS. What the perception is among the public who hasn't a clue how non profits are run is as you wrote above that 'the lion's share (90%)' should be going to the cause, but the facts are otherwise. Most non profits spend a small percentage of the donations on the 'cause' and MOST is spent on administration despite what they claim on the organization's web site. The Form 990 actually shows where the money is spent. For example, the National Rosacea Society claims on its web site that only 9% is spent on 'administration,' but the Form 990 reveals that 60% of the donations were spent on one private contractor, Glendale Communications Group, Inc., and Park Mailing and Fulfillment, Inc., which is an affiliate of Glendale and both of these private contractors are owned by the head of the board of directors of the NRS. This same Form 990 also reveals that the salaries of the employees of Glendale received $227,163 in 2007. The NRS, however, spent $100K on rosacea research which is 12% of the total donations received in 2007. That means that for every dollar the NRS received in donations in 2007 that 12 cents was spent on rosacea research which is three cents more than what the AARS spent in 2008. The NRS hasn't yet released to the public its Form 990 for 2008.

I have compared several non profit organizations' Form 990 and have written an editorial about this subject. One of the best non profit organizations I have found that actually does a good job of spending its money on it 'cause' is the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute which spend 38% of its donations on its cause, which is very rare. I challenge anyone to find a better non profit organization who spends its funds on its cause and can prove it with a Form 990 report. Most non profits are run just like the AARS and the NRS which spend a small percentage of its donations on the 'cause.' These are simply the facts.