RW's Foundation raises millions. Less than half goes to charity

WarHawks

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
1,915
Reaction score
1,471
Lol at all the folks here quick to shame Wilson for this when the facts are this is very common place among charities. Not to mention Wilson doesn't handle the money, he's just the face of the charity. Try doing a little research before you drag the mans name through the mud. 🙄
It's his charity. If he wanted more $ to go to the kids and not himself, he could. But he isn't doing that. You don't need a foundation or employees to give away your money. It just really rubs me the wrong way.
 

RiverDog

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 8, 2013
Messages
5,474
Reaction score
3,126
Location
Kennewick, WA
It's his charity. If he wanted more $ to go to the kids and not himself, he could. But he isn't doing that. You don't need a foundation or employees to give away your money. It just really rubs me the wrong way.
If it hadn't been for the fact that Russell came out with his nonsensical response where all he did was to parrot the flawed reasoning that his director used in her initial response, ie trying to claim donations made through Albertson/Safeway's fund that included donations 5 years before they teamed up with Why Not You and with no evidence that their partnership helped increase donations, in order to inflate Why Not You's total and thus justify the outrageous salaries they're paying their directors, I would have been A LOT more sympathetic.

Russell seems to be a nice guy and he used to be one of my ATF Seahawks, but over the past few years, he's changed. He has a hard time admitting to his very human flaws. All he had to say was that they've made some mistakes but that they're going to do what it takes to make things right. It was very disappointing.

For anyone that questions my sanity in that I'll never buy a jersey with a player's name/number on it, they can take a look at the way Russell's changed and understand part of my reasoning.
 

SantaClaraHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 18, 2015
Messages
15,007
Reaction score
3,088
it’s hilarious that mr unlimited claims it’s all about him not getting credit when thats The only reason he does things.
 

NoGain

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 28, 2022
Messages
2,229
Reaction score
2,323
The "Mitch Unfiltered" podcast this week had a woman on from an organization that does nothing but analyze and grade different charities and foundations for their financial effectiveness in serving their causes. It was a good interview. She was very informative, and had no ax to grind with RW whatsoever.

Basically speaking, she left little doubt that RW's foundation was very poorly run on almost every level of financial effectiveness and forthrightness. She went into all the different reasons and categories for justifying her analysis.

A decent 15 minute listen or so if you wish.
 

Sgt. Largent

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
25,560
Reaction score
7,612
The "Mitch Unfiltered" podcast this week had a woman on from an organization that does nothing but analyze and grade different charities and foundations for their financial effectiveness in serving their causes. It was a good interview. She was very informative, and had no ax to grind with RW whatsoever.

Basically speaking, she left little doubt that RW's foundation was very poorly run on almost every level of financial effectiveness and forthrightness. She went into all the different reasons and categories for justifying her analysis.

A decent 15 minute listen or so if you wish.


I heard this too, good stuff.

My company sits on the board of a couple big charities in the Puget Sound region, and I'm not defending Russell's charities cause I have no idea what's going on there.

But I can tell you it's very normal for a significant portion of any large charity or charitable foundation to go towards administrative and operating costs. The good ones are streamlined and can minimize these costs, the bad ones like Russell's don't.
 

SantaClaraHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 18, 2015
Messages
15,007
Reaction score
3,088
The "Mitch Unfiltered" podcast this week had a woman on from an organization that does nothing but analyze and grade different charities and foundations for their financial effectiveness in serving their causes. It was a good interview. She was very informative, and had no ax to grind with RW whatsoever.

Basically speaking, she left little doubt that RW's foundation was very poorly run on almost every level of financial effectiveness and forthrightness. She went into all the different reasons and categories for justifying her analysis.

A decent 15 minute listen or so if you wish.

link here https://mitchunfiltered.com/
 

Jville

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
13,272
Reaction score
1,657
The "Mitch Unfiltered" podcast this week had a woman on from an organization that does nothing but analyze and grade different charities and foundations for their financial effectiveness in serving their causes. It was a good interview. She was very informative, and had no ax to grind with RW whatsoever.

Basically speaking, she left little doubt that RW's foundation was very poorly run on almost every level of financial effectiveness and forthrightness. She went into all the different reasons and categories for justifying her analysis.

A decent 15 minute listen or so if you wish.

Charity Watch segment begins at 1 hour 6 minutes (01:06:06) into podcast >>> link >>> https://mitchunfiltered.com/episode/episode-227-chiefs-kingdom-in-philly-charity-watchdog-deep-dive/

For me, the term "Foundation" has long since become a red flag term. I've terminated all donations to charities and foundations headquartered at distant locations. Zero trust. No more world or national or celebrity solicitations for me.

My trust in giving and donating time and money has become strictly local.
 

SantaClaraHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 18, 2015
Messages
15,007
Reaction score
3,088
What irks me is Russ saying his foundation is responsible for these third party donations like the Safeway and Albertsons cancer fundraiser. They probably put in one of those options to donate after people swipe their card.

Every time I see this fool in a hospital from now on, I’ll assume that itll be one of his high priced lackeys who arranged that visit while not bossing around Ciara’s ladies and men in waiting and their children’s nannies.
 

hawker84

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 10, 2012
Messages
5,603
Reaction score
318
Location
Tri Cities, WA
It's his charity. If he wanted more $ to go to the kids and not himself, he could. But he isn't doing that. You don't need a foundation or employees to give away your money. It just really rubs me the wrong way.
Again the amount actually donated is common place...
 

keasley45

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 4, 2010
Messages
3,865
Reaction score
6,776
Location
Cockeysville, Md
Again the amount actually donated is common place...
If you're referring to the percentage of donated dollars reaching the target group, his ratio is flipped. Well run charities pass 75% through with 25% overhead. Average charities straddle 50% or better.

What Russ's group is doing might be commonplace, but only with the least impactful charities relative to %$.
 
Top