10 Questions We Dare HSUS to Answer

The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS, not affiliated with your local humane society/pet shelter) has a lot to answer for. HSUS raises more than $130 million annually, so it’s in a position of public trust. Yet there’s plenty of evidence that HSUS is misleading the public in its fundraising appeals.

HSUS resorts to juvenile smear responses against its critics. We take them in stride, though it’s irresponsible of HSUS to take that attitude since it’s raising so much money from the public. To move the debate forward, we’re issuing this open challenge to HSUS: Answer the following questions in a direct manner and we’ll print your unedited responses.

We doubt HSUS will, so we’re offering this bounty: Any enterprising person who gets an HSUS official on the record fully answering these questions will get $100 (per question) donated to a pet shelter of their choice. (We would need audio or video for verification.)

When’s an HSUS representative going to be near you? Check out HSUS’s handy events page and its calendar for some ideas.

Questions:

1. According to recent polling 71 percent of Americans mistakenly think HSUS is a pet shelter umbrella group, and 93 percent of the shelter community believes that there is a lot of confusion among the public regarding HSUS and local shelters. What has HSUS explicitly done to disabuse Americans of the widespread mistaken notion that HSUS is a pet-shelter umbrella group that is affiliated with and funds local shelters and humane societies? Will you pledge to include a disclaimer in all of your future fundraising?

2. HSUS regularly claims that it has 11 million “members and constituents” in an effort to suggest that it speaks for many millions. Yet its tax returns state that HSUS’s All Animals magazine, which is included with the basic $25 membership, has a circulation of just 450,000. How many members does HSUS actually have?

3. On average, shelters believe that HSUS should give 36 percent of its budget to local groups that care for pets, according to national polling, and 59 percent of Americans think HSUS gives most of its money to pet shelters. How can HSUS’s spending—giving 1 percent to shelters—be justified in light of what the general public and sheltering community think?

4. Why does HSUS agree to contracts with professional fundraisers when it knows that it will receive very little of the money raised in the name of pets—and when donors are being told that, contrary to reality, HSUS is getting 40-50 percent of the money?

5. HSUS says that it’s “the nation's leading advocate for animal shelters.” How can HSUS reconcile this bold claim with the fact that, according to recent polling, 71 percent of shelters believe “HSUS misleads people into thinking it is associated with local animal shelters” and 80 percent of shelters are “frustrated that the Humane Society of the United States shares so little with local animal shelters.”

6. HSUS evaluations of shelter operations can cost $25,000. Humane Society University charges $1,050 for an undergraduate class and $1,350 for a graduate-level class. Even HSUS’s Animal Care Expo costs $250 for registration. What tangible support for shelters does HSUS offer at no cost?

7. A 1980 HSUS resolution pledged to “pursue on all fronts... the clear articulation and establishment of the rights of all animals.” And a later fundraising mailer explored giving animals access to the court system. Should animals be legally classified as property, as they are, or should they be given legal standing in court?

8. What can a donor do to earmark money given to HSUS to tangibly benefit pets in animal shelters?

9. HSUS states that it simply works to end the “worst abuses” in hunting. What are the humane forms of hunting?

10. If given a choice between someone eating humanely raised meat or eating vegan food, which is more humane?

Unpacking the HSUS Gravy Train (2011 Edition)

HSUS is a private organization, but thankfully its tax returns are required to be public. They give us a small glimpse into America’s most deceptive animal rights group. And we’ve just gotten a copy of HSUS’s latest tax return, covering 2010. (Past returns are in our Document Library.)

HSUS’s tax returns have served as a backbone for startling discoveries, such as that the organization gives less than one percent of its budget to pet shelters (the real humane societies); that HSUS puts more money into lobbying than it does pet-shelter grants; and that HSUS even contributes more to its pension plan than it gives to needy shelters.

So how did HSUS fare in 2010? Veteran readers won’t be surprised. Here are some low-lights:

• HSUS CEO Wayne Pacelle’s total compensation package was $287,786, up roughly 7 percent from the previous year.
• HSUS stuffed $2.6 million into its pension plan, bringing the total since Pacelle took over to about $14 million.
• HSUS spent $3.6 million on lobbying. (If you see an HSUS ad showing an abused and malnourished lobbyist, let us know.)
• HSUS had 636 employees, including 29 who earned more than $100,000.
• HSUS’s contribution/grant revenue increased by $34 million. This was boosted by a  $12-million increase in noncash contributions (e.g. free ads) and a $11.7 million grant from a single donor.
• HSUS’s “All Animals” magazine had a circulation of about 450,000. That’s a good estimate of HSUS’s true membership size (versus the 11 million they like to bandy about when they are on Capitol Hill), since the magazine is included with a $25 membership.
• HSUS’s “Kind News” magazine reached 644,000 kindergarten to 6^th grade students. (Targeting kids seems right out of PETA’s playbook.)
• HSUS spent a whopping $47 million on fundraising-related costs, or about 37 percent of HSUS budget.
• HSUS’s pet-shelter grants totaled just $528,676, or 0.418 percent of HSUS’s budget.

Read those last two bullet points again: The “Humane Society” of the United States spends almost 90 times more on fundraising than it spends on pet-shelter grants. If that doesn’t show you the real priorities of this “factory fundraising” operation, nothing will.

In 2009, four-fifths of one percent of HSUS’s budget went to pet-shelter grants; this year is about half of that. It’s even worse than 2008. It may even be the lowest percentage ever.

Has HSUS no shame?

For the sake of openness, we’ve posted a copy of our accounting of HSUS’s grants. Feel free to quibble with us, but we’re confident of our accuracy.

Helpfully, HSUS’s accountants listed the purpose of each grant. We counted grants that were labeled as “animal shelter aid” (or something similar). We included grants that HSUS made to shelters caring for rescued animals. And we also counted grants to care for horses, since there’s a huge horse welfare problem that HSUS helped create.

But despite the $528,676 of good that HSUS did, there’s a long way to go for HSUS to earn the “humane society” in its name. Memo to Wayne Pacelle: It’s time to stop feeding lobbyists and factory fundraising machines at the expense of needy pets.

Dial “S” for Scam

A few weeks back, we noticed something alarming: the South Carolina Secretary of State’s office announced that it had been awarded a whopping $115,000 judgment against a professional fundraiser called Share Group for violations of the state’s charitable solicitation laws.

Share Group and HSUS have done considerable business together. HSUS contracts with Share Group extend at least back to 1999. But looking at Share’s questionable track record—including fundraising campaigns for HSUS—we wonder why.

Share Group made headlines during the 2000 Democratic National Convention when the DNC and the Gore 2000 Presidential Campaign both dropped Share Group after a reporter pointed out that former owner Michael Ansara was still involved in the company. Ansara had been ordered to surrender control of Share Group after he pleaded guilty to a felony conspiracy charge related to a money-moving scheme for Ron Carey’s 1997 Teamsters Union presidential reelection campaign.

But that’s not the only bump in the road for Share Group. According to filings, Share has entered into nine settlements in multiple states following allegations that it violated charitable solicitation laws. Here’s a partial list of the complaints (we should note that, under the agreements, there were no findings of wrongdoing):

• 1998: Violation of registration requirements (Utah)
• 2000: Violation of filing requirements (Massachusetts)
• 2002: Violation of filing requirements (South Carolina)
• 2003: Violation of filing requirements (South Dakota)
• 2006: Violation of registration requirements (New York)

Share Group also reached a consent agreement with Pennsylvania in March and agreed to pay more than $6,000 related to failure to file campaign reports and failure to pay administrative fines.

HSUS’s business relationship with Share Group doesn’t inspire confidence, either.

Many states require professional fundraisers to report how much money from their campaigns actually goes to the charities. New York publishes these results in an annual “Pennies for Charity” report. Here’s how much money Share’s raised for HSUS over the years, and how much has actually gone to HSUS (where it at least has a chance of helping an animal):

Overall, just 7 percent of the money raised by Share went to HSUS. The fundraiser got the lion’s "share."

You might think that some donors could ask Share on the phone how much of the money raised goes to charity. Unfortunately, you won’t necessarily get a straight answer. According to a fundraising script for PDR II (a company that took over Share Group’s contracts earlier this year, and does business as “Share”), the professional solicitors are supposed to tell some inquiring donors that “a reasonable estimate” of the money that the fundraisers will receive is 48 percent.

Who are they kidding?

That 48 percent figure is based on an average return for all of PDR’s clients (i.e. Share Group’s clients—PDR appears to have been formed this year). Is this honest?—PDR (and HSUS) knows the historical percentages for the HSUS fundraising. But it chooses to muddle the issue. (Since the contract is fee-based but isn’t explicitly percentage-based—HSUS is simply guaranteed a minimum of 1 percent of revenues—it’s hypothetically possible that PDR/Share could just get 48 percent. But historically this seems to not be the case.)

Remember that HSUS agrees to this entire set-up. HSUS knows that the money being raised on its behalf largely goes into the pockets of a professional fundraiser and not towards the care of any animal. HSUS executives sign these contracts fully aware of the scam that’s going on with people’s doggie dollars, and the fact that animal lovers are getting milked (and bilked) for all they’re worth.

Why? The excuse generally offered for this type of arrangement is to build or strengthen mailing lists for future fundraising. We think it certainly would be odd for a charity to put such a priority on fundraising schemes as opposed to, say, the “immediate relief of suffering.”

Is HSUS really so cynical about building mailing lists and its “constituency”?

There’s even more, too—stay tuned.

They Got a “D” (Times Three)

HSUS, like any organization with good PR, loves to toot its own horn. So it was no surprise to see the animal rights group crowing recently about being ranked higher than other national animal rights/welfare groups in a Philanthropedia (now part of Guidestar) poll.

At first glance, this award is probably more legitimate than the “accreditation” that HSUS’s Duchess Sanctuary received last year—but that’s not saying much. In fact, we dug a little deeper into the Philanthropedia methodology, and it turns out it’s got some issues.

And, as we’ll discuss below, it doesn’t hold a candle to more objective measures of HSUS's operations.

Shameless

Have you seen the Humane Society of the United States’ latest fundraising appeal in its never-ending flood of “asks”? HSUS is begging for an “emergency gift” to help its animal rescue team “stay in the field.” HSUS CEO Wayne Pacelle lays it on thick, writing, “we don’t want to ever say ‘no’ because we do not have the resources.”

Right. That’s like Donald Trump begging for advertisers to help him keep Celebrity Apprentice on the air.

The Murky Sea of Cult Money

Remember “Supreme Master” Ching Hai? She’s the reputed Taiwanese cult leader we reported on last year. That’s when HSUS’s top (vegan) M.D., Michael Greger, got cozy enough with Ching Hai to appear on her “Supreme Master TV” network. Now we’ve learned that Ching Hai’s international empire recently gave HSUS a $50,000 donation. Is it any surprise that HSUS CEO Wayne Pacelle is now a big admirer?

For the unfamiliar, websites promote Ching Hai as God’s "Immediate" and "Direct" Contact. Hear any alarm bells yet?

Scam, Sham, or Flim-Flam?

There’s no shortage of allegations of charity scams these days, from the Central Asia Institute to Lady Gaga.  And this week the New York Attorney General filed a lawsuit against a nonprofit called the Coalition Against Breast Cancer, claiming the group solicited $9.1 million over the past five years and spent barely any of it on breast-cancer prevention or research programs:

Over the past five years, the organization spent less than four percent of all donations on any of its alleged charitable programs. In 2008, for example, CABC raised over $1.4 million but spent just $374 on mammograms. The group funded mammograms for 11 women over the last three years, despite having raised more than $4 million, the investigation found.

Two of the organization's three directors paid themselves more than $550,000 in combined salaries from 2005 to 2009, another $150,000 in retirement accounts and dental and medical benefits that totaled at least $9,000 per year.

Sound familiar? A similar complaint could be made against the Humane Society of the United States.