4 ms·
A tangential curiosity, perhaps you can give some insight on a very naive question I've had regarding nonprofits: You mention re: avalanch of regulatory activi
by existencebox 9y ago
A tangential curiosity, perhaps you can give some insight on a very naive question I've had regarding nonprofits:
You mention re: avalanch of regulatory activity if you try to make money; where does the line get drawn between providing competitive salaries and "making money"? I've always been somewhat curious of the band Non Profits have to operate in to maintain that status vs. what pragmatic benefits it gives. (I realize this is a very broad question, so any "sparknotes" breadcrumb you have would also be welcome)
- kevmo 9y agoThe avalanche I'm referring to there has to do with whether the company itself is for-profit or non-profit, and the legal, institutional, and PR ramifications thereof. The non-profit competitive salary question is one which people endlessly debate. Some people think it is ridiculous that the head of the Southern Poverty Law Center makes a $300k salary despite SPLC's tremendous success and the fact that he could clearly command much more in the private sector.
- existencebox 9y agoThanks for the response, To be more precise to the second part of my question: I was more wondering how the 300k would be decided; e.g. why not 400k or 200k? (Personally that seems like a very acceptable salary, but if non-executives are scaled down to something commensurate as opposed to squeezing the distribution, that becomes harder to sell.)
- kevmo 9y agoHaha, as I said - The non-profit competitive salary question is one which people endlessly debate!