Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

actually i guarantee you that the Komen 3-Day walks for the cure will continue to be packed.

But for how long and how strong? I bet that this year and next year will see a significant decrease in the number of attendees, while the Avon Walk will see a significant increase. Depending on how they manage the next year or two, the trend may continue or they may be able to salvage this publicity debacle and plateau. But chances are they will be a much smaller force in the charitable world, since there are other charitable donations that have the same focus and will be less objectionable to some donors for the near future at least.

What the above shows is how shortsignted people are! SK screwed up here. Okay. When your college/university screws up (which I am confident it has in one way or another), do you stop giving to it. I doubt it. Show some loyalty. Kimon will get back on track. The VP has left, after all.

Absolutely. My alma mater pissed me off something fierce with some policy decisions it made about 7 years ago and hasn't received a dime from me since. And I used to give a lot, with matching gifts from my employer.

Thus, when you screw up at work, I presume you expect to be fired immediately, regardless of the severity of the screw up. Certainly, if Komen continues to screw up, I will cease my support. But, as with friends and family (and, hopefully, your employer), I will give Komen a pass this time. Nobody died. Nobody stole money or property here. Nobody commited a crime or even a civil violation. Komen simply made a bone headed decision, which it then reversed.

Some screw-ups at work are firing offenses the first time they happen. Others are firing offenses if they represent a pattern.

In Komen's case, one can decide to cease support under either scenario.

Scenario 1 is that the effort to cut off PP funding was so transparently bullshit and counter to its mission that it's a firing offense.

Scenario 2 is that Scenario 1 brought to light a pattern of conduct by SGK that is inconsistent with what I expect from an organization receiving my charitable dollars (cutting off funds for stem cell research, high salaries and overhead, suing other organizations for using the phrase "for the cure", slapping pink on HANDGUNS) that I'm permanently turned off.

They can rehab and come back to me in a couple of years, but I'm done. And with a clear conscience.

Thought this was interesting. I wonder how many sites SKF are monitoring? I bet they do better on site where they can post anonymously. Keep the gravy train rolling! SKF staff can monitor websites and charge it to "Educational Outreach".

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-the-people/post/komen-spends-lavishly-on-salaries-and-promotion/2012/02/06/gIQAVw4qtQ_blog.htm

In the comment section:

andreardr
2/6/2012 4:00 PM EST
This is Andrea Rader in the Communications department at Komen and I wanted to pass along a few facts. First -- Nancy worked without pay at Komen for 27 years and only began drawing a salary when she was named CEO in 2009. To Mr. Abruzzo's point, Nancy is not chairman and president...Dr. LeSalle Leffall is our board chairman.
Lori also didn't mention that we raised $472 million last year and that 83 cents of every dollar we spent went to research, community, global and advocacy programs. Hope that helps.
RecommendRecommended by 1 readerReplyReport

dotKamala
2/6/2012 4:15 PM EST
HI Andrea,
You raised $472 million last year, but only gave $72 million to research. Isn't your organization called Komen FOR A CURE? Last time I checked, research is the best way to find a cure. Oh, that's right, Nancy Brinker doesn't believe that "you can cure a disease in the laboratory alone." (starting at 10:50, specific quote at 11:35)
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/tavissmiley/interviews/sus...
RecommendRecommended by 3 readersReport

newagent99
2/6/2012 4:34 PM EST
it requires lots and lots of first class travel.
RecommendRecommended by 4 readersReport

newagent99
2/6/2012 4:35 PM EST
really andrea, you should be ashamed to prostitute yourself in this way.
RecommendRecommended by 5 readersReport

-dbG-
2/6/2012 7:55 PM EST
Andrea, I certainly can't speak for everyone, but having you comment here does not help the SGK cause. It feels desperate and intrusive and shows the same tone deafness as every justification from your board.

If you're gauging public reaction, I raised over $5k a few years back for SGK and all I have to say now is not one more dime, not one more mile.
RecommendRecommended by 3 readersReport

yellojkt
2/6/2012 8:40 PM EST
Nice to know that donations are being used to post messages on newspaper blogs to counter all the bad publicity they've inflicted on themselves.
RecommendRecommended by 2 readersReport

Progressiveinthesouth
2/6/2012 10:03 PM EST
Nancy Brinker lives in a glass bubble. How dare she mess with our women's organizations in Dallas. We have worked hard in Dallas to make charitable giving and women synonomous. We have women working hard for charities, and above all, avoiding ugliness and political battling along the way. Andrea in public relations, I hope you all are proud of yourselves because you suck!
RecommendReport

DCSucks
2/7/2012 9:33 AM EST
Andrea, if it's contrition and healing you want to promote for your employer, here's a start - FIRE Handel today!
RecommendReport

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

actually i guarantee you that the Komen 3-Day walks for the cure will continue to be packed.

But for how long and how strong? I bet that this year and next year will see a significant decrease in the number of attendees, while the Avon Walk will see a significant increase. Depending on how they manage the next year or two, the trend may continue or they may be able to salvage this publicity debacle and plateau. But chances are they will be a much smaller force in the charitable world, since there are other charitable donations that have the same focus and will be less objectionable to some donors for the near future at least.

What the above shows is how shortsignted people are! SK screwed up here. Okay. When your college/university screws up (which I am confident it has in one way or another), do you stop giving to it. I doubt it. Show some loyalty. Kimon will get back on track. The VP has left, after all.

Absolutely. My alma mater pissed me off something fierce with some policy decisions it made about 7 years ago and hasn't received a dime from me since. And I used to give a lot, with matching gifts from my employer.

Thus, when you screw up at work, I presume you expect to be fired immediately, regardless of the severity of the screw up. Certainly, if Komen continues to screw up, I will cease my support. But, as with friends and family (and, hopefully, your employer), I will give Komen a pass this time. Nobody died. Nobody stole money or property here. Nobody commited a crime or even a civil violation. Komen simply made a bone headed decision, which it then reversed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Half a million is an insane salary for working for a non-profit. She is independently wealthy and does not need this money. it is half a million that could be spent on finding a cure for cancer(tm) rather than paying for her extravagant lifestyle.

Anyone who raises money for this charity rather than one that actually prioritizes research is a fool.

This is a stupid comment. There are numerous CEOs of nonprofits that make as much as she does. Large nonprofits pay their CEOs less than CEOs of comparable size for profit businesses, which is fine. Look at local hospitals, colleges, universities, etc. All are charitable. The idea that SK does not prioritize research is silly. SK does. SK also provides grants to organizations that provide services to low income women (ie, PP). So, should SK not continue to fund PP. The PP funding was not for research. SK, in fact, has raised substantial sums of money for research. SK is a great organization, though SK clearly made a mistake here.

Bit your tongue (or finger tips as the case may be).

It's perfectly valid to question the salary of executives at tax-exempt non-profits and to call out those that start acting like for-profit entities. Many hospitals and colleges and universities shouldn't be paying THEIR top people that much either. I don't give to those either because it suggests too much of my contribution is going to line their pockets and not the mission.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

actually i guarantee you that the Komen 3-Day walks for the cure will continue to be packed.

But for how long and how strong? I bet that this year and next year will see a significant decrease in the number of attendees, while the Avon Walk will see a significant increase. Depending on how they manage the next year or two, the trend may continue or they may be able to salvage this publicity debacle and plateau. But chances are they will be a much smaller force in the charitable world, since there are other charitable donations that have the same focus and will be less objectionable to some donors for the near future at least.

What the above shows is how shortsignted people are! SK screwed up here. Okay. When your college/university screws up (which I am confident it has in one way or another), do you stop giving to it. I doubt it. Show some loyalty. Kimon will get back on track. The VP has left, after all.

Absolutely. My alma mater pissed me off something fierce with some policy decisions it made about 7 years ago and hasn't received a dime from me since. And I used to give a lot, with matching gifts from my employer.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

actually i guarantee you that the Komen 3-Day walks for the cure will continue to be packed.

But for how long and how strong? I bet that this year and next year will see a significant decrease in the number of attendees, while the Avon Walk will see a significant increase. Depending on how they manage the next year or two, the trend may continue or they may be able to salvage this publicity debacle and plateau. But chances are they will be a much smaller force in the charitable world, since there are other charitable donations that have the same focus and will be less objectionable to some donors for the near future at least.

What the above shows is how shortsignted people are! SK screwed up here. Okay. When your college/university screws up (which I am confident it has in one way or another), do you stop giving to it. I doubt it. Show some loyalty. Kimon will get back on track. The VP has left, after all.

Anonymous wrote:Half a million is an insane salary for working for a non-profit. She is independently wealthy and does not need this money. it is half a million that could be spent on finding a cure for cancer(tm) rather than paying for her extravagant lifestyle.

Anyone who raises money for this charity rather than one that actually prioritizes research is a fool.

This is a stupid comment. There are numerous CEOs of nonprofits that make as much as she does. Large nonprofits pay their CEOs less than CEOs of comparable size for profit businesses, which is fine. Look at local hospitals, colleges, universities, etc. All are charitable. The idea that SK does not prioritize research is silly. SK does. SK also provides grants to organizations that provide services to low income women (ie, PP). So, should SK not continue to fund PP. The PP funding was not for research. SK, in fact, has raised substantial sums of money for research. SK is a great organization, though SK clearly made a mistake here.

Anonymous wrote:The mission of SGK -- like most charities -- is to make more money for SGK.

I volunteered with a (different) cancer charity, providing direct service to patients.

I quit the day I was asked to relocate the survivors' support group to a much smaller, darker and hotter room so the fundraising staff could stuff goodie bags for the upcoming gala.

I stopped volunteering with another group the day I witnessed their ED go ballistic because her assistant booked her on a flight to Boston.... in coach.

Actually, one of the "stated" reasons why SK wanted to stop making grants to PP is that PP sometimes is simply a pass thru to the actual organization that provides services to women.

Anonymous wrote:

actually i guarantee you that the Komen 3-Day walks for the cure will continue to be packed.

But for how long and how strong? I bet that this year and next year will see a significant decrease in the number of attendees, while the Avon Walk will see a significant increase. Depending on how they manage the next year or two, the trend may continue or they may be able to salvage this publicity debacle and plateau. But chances are they will be a much smaller force in the charitable world, since there are other charitable donations that have the same focus and will be less objectionable to some donors for the near future at least.

Actually, it wouldn't surprise if the three-day walk was spun off into something else, but it will no longer be a Komen asset.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You start a charity and you run a charity, you are allowed to decide what to do with the money. Journalists and the court of public opinion does not get to decide how SGK spends their money.

Yes, but we do get to decide which charities deserve our money. And the "court of public opinion" has decided that she is not one of them anymore.

actually i guarantee you that the Komen 3-Day walks for the cure will continue to be packed.

I'd take that bet. They are done.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You start a charity and you run a charity, you are allowed to decide what to do with the money. Journalists and the court of public opinion does not get to decide how SGK spends their money.

Yes, but we do get to decide which charities deserve our money. And the "court of public opinion" has decided that she is not one of them anymore.

actually i guarantee you that the Komen 3-Day walks for the cure will continue to be packed.

Anonymous wrote:You start a charity and you run a charity, you are allowed to decide what to do with the money. Journalists and the court of public opinion does not get to decide how SGK spends their money.

Yes, but we do get to decide which charities deserve our money. And the "court of public opinion" has decided that she is not one of them anymore.

Damn, that horrible woman for trying to find a cure! If only she was a poor Democrat like Cecile Richards.....who works for a non-for profit making $400+k a year while receiveing grants, money from charities and the federal government.

Half a million is an insane salary for working for a non-profit. She is independently wealthy and does not need this money. it is half a million that could be spent on finding a cure for cancer(tm) rather than paying for her extravagant lifestyle.

Anyone who raises money for this charity rather than one that actually prioritizes research is a fool.