6 ms·
OK, look, the Twitter thread is gobbledygook. If people really care about non-profit governance, there's a website for that called Charity Navigator which actua
by KerrAvon 4y ago
OK, look, the Twitter thread is gobbledygook. If people really care about non-profit governance, there's a website for that called Charity Navigator which actually rates the charity according to essentially how much donations actually serve the mission. Wikimedia gets the top rating.
https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/200049703 https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/200049703
- StevePerkins 4y agoPretty much all Charity Navigator is good for is determining how much of a charity's funds get spend on fundraising. Everything that's not a fundraising expense is therefore a "program expense". You don't really HAVE to go to 3rd parties for this. To their credit, the Wikimedia Foundation publishes their own financials, as audited by KPMG: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/1/1e/Wikimedia_Foundation_FY2020-2021_Audit_Report.pdf https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/1/1e/Wikim... You can browse the breakdown of their expenses on page 5. It does seem like hosting their websites is only a tiny portion of their total expenditures. This is their own published financial statement, hosted on their own website.
- abstrakraft 4y agoThe issue is that many don't know they're donating to a charity, regardless of alignment. The popups make it sound like donations go to the running of Wikipedia as a web service, not to political activism.