Summary of Results of Charitable Solicitation Campaigns Conducted by Commercial Fundraisers in Calendar Year 2016

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Summary of Results of Charitable Solicitation Campaigns Conducted by Commercial Fundraisers in Calendar Year 2016 SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF CHARITABLE SOLICITATION CAMPAIGNS CONDUCTED BY COMMERCIAL FUNDRAISERS IN CALENDAR YEAR 2016 XAVIER BECERRA Attorney General State of California SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF CHARITABLE SOLICITATION BY COMMERCIAL FUNDRAISERS FOR YEAR ENDING 2016 (Government Code § 12599) TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGES SUMMARY 1 - 5 TABLE SUBJECT/TITLE 1 ALPHABETICAL LISTING BY CHARITABLE ORGANIZATION 2 LISTING BY PERCENT TO CHARITY IN DESCENDING ORDER 3 THRIFT STORE OPERATIONS – GOODS PURCHASED FROM CHARITY 4 THRIFT STORE OPERATIONS – MANAGEMENT FEE/COMMISSION 5 VEHICLE DONATIONS – ALPHABETICAL BY CHARITABLE ORGANIZATION 6 COMMERCIAL COVENTURERS – ALPHABETICAL BY CHARITABLE ORGANIZATION California Department of Justice November 2017 SUMMARY Every year Californians provide generous support to a wide array of charities, either directly or through commercial fundraisers that charities hire to solicit donations on their behalf. The term “commercial fundraiser” refers generally to a person or corporation that contracts with a charity, for compensation, to solicit funds. The commercial fundraiser charges either a flat fee or a percentage of the donations collected. By law, commercial fundraisers are required to register with the Attorney General’s Registry of Charitable Trusts and file a Notice of Intent before soliciting donations in California. For each solicitation campaign conducted, commercial fundraisers are then required to file annual financial disclosure reports that set forth total revenue and expenses incurred. This Summary Report is prepared from self-reported information contained in the annual financial disclosure reports filed by commercial fundraisers for 2016 and includes statistics for donations of both cash and used personal property (such as clothing and vehicles) for the benefit of charity. Only information from complete financial reports received before October 20, 2017 is included. Information from late, incomplete, or defective financial reports is not included in the Attorney General’s Summary. Tables 1 and 2 provide information from reports submitted by commercial fundraisers that solicit donations via direct mail, telemarketing, auctions, and entertainment events. Tables 3, 4, and 5 provide information from reports submitted for thrift store operations and vehicle donation programs. Table 6 provides information from reports submitted by commercial coventurers. It is important to note that most of the charities registered with the Attorney General’s Registry of Charitable Trusts do not use commercial fundraisers to raise funds. Historical figures show that a solicitation campaign conducted by a commercial fundraiser in general fundraising campaigns returns to the charity, on average, about 64 percent or less of the contributions received. The remainder is retained by the commercial fundraiser as fees and expense reimbursements. In thrift store campaigns or in vehicle donation campaigns, the amount paid to charity was significantly less. Comparison Figures for the Past Three Years of Reporting General Fundraising 2014 2015 2016 Total Revenue $687,719,087 $474,774,308 $581,378,753 Amount to Charity $371,900,722 $342,977,445 $402,668,343 Percent to Charity 54.08% 72.24% 69.26% 1 Thrift Stores (Cost of Goods) 2014 2015 2016 Total Revenue $125,286,485 $50,856,151 $53,249,164 Amount to Charity $11,899,809 $14,113,083 $16,369,869 Percent to Charity 9.5% 27.75% 30.74% Thrift Stores (Fee/Comm.) Total Revenue $4,267,853 $1,953,902 $1,426,722 Amount to Charity $156,445 $96,147 $114,000 Percent to Charity 3.67% 4.92% 7.99% Vehicle Donations Total Revenue $23,555,600 $64,152,1931 $70,177,096 Amount to Charity $8,244,157 $25,498.453 $31,550,574 Percent to Charity 35.00% 39.75% 44.96% Commercial Coventurers Total Revenue $50,754,424 $168,962,579 Amount to Charity $21,618,526 $6,489,902 Percent to Charity 42.59% 3.84% Registered Organizations Commercial Fundraisers 264 258 248 Filed Financial Rpts 138 153 151 Commercial Coventurers 32 53 55 Filed Financial Rpts 18 22 17 Some of the Worst Performers Based on a 3 Year Cumulative Percentage The table below reflects a summary of some of the worst performing commercial fundraisers. In some instances the charities ended up owing money on their solicitation campaign. The below information is based on an analysis of 3 year cumulative percentage and focusing on revenue in excess of $100,000: Smallest % of Distributions to Charities: 3-Year Revenue Amount to Charities % to Charities 1. PUBLIC OUTREACH FUNDRAISING, LLC $1,521,611 -$4,562,495 -299.85% 2. FACE TO FACE OUTREACH, INC. $358,404 -$519,638 -144.99% 3. NEW CANVASSING EXPERIENCE, INC. $3,491,249 -$3,819,431 -109.40% 1 Enforcement efforts have resulted in greater conformance to timely report submissions. This, in turn, resulted in greater accuracy for the reporting of revenue, which would otherwise not have been reported. 2 4. APPCO GROUP U.S., INC. $2,763,526 -$2,673,745 -96.75% 5. GRASSROOTS CAMPAIGNS, INC. $20,754,719 -$12,926,003 -62.28% 6. DONOR DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES LLC $252,993 -$146,195 -57.79% 7. INTEGRAL RESOURCES, INC. $1,245,057 -$312,935 -25.13% 8. KKA ENTERPRISES, INC. $7,380,658 $181,500 2.46% 9. RAMBRET INC. $1,118,549 $57,000 5.10% 10. ITSDONATED, LLC $734,797 $55,755 7.59% Description and Summary of Information in Tables 1 and 2 • Information was obtained from 783 completed financial reports, compared to 838 reports reviewed for the 2015 annual report. • Commercial fundraisers collected $581.4 million in charitable contributions in 2016, an increase of approximately $106.6 million over the amount reported in 2015. • The distribution to charity in 2016 was approximately $402.7 million, an increase of approximately $59.7 million over the amount reported in 2015. • The average distribution to charity from all campaigns conducted by commercial fundraisers in 2016 was 69.26%, a decrease from the 2015 average of 72.24%. Overview of Thrift Store Operations and Vehicle Donation Programs Thrift stores handle what is known under state law as “salvageable personal property”. They may be operated directly by a charity or by a for-profit vendor. For-profit vendors are defined as commercial fundraisers if they (1) receive a management fee or commission from a charity for which they operate a thrift store or (2) purchase a majority of the goods sold from charities or social welfare organizations at negotiated prices. (Government Code, § 12599.) Charities that operate their own thrift stores incur overhead and other expenses associated with the operation of a retail store. After those expenses are paid, the earnings are used for such things as management expenses and charitable program services. Vehicle donation programs have become more popular over the past several years. These programs are administered either directly by charities, or by commercial fundraisers that solicit donations and manage the program on a charity’s behalf, in exchange for compensation. 3 The process of donating a vehicle usually begins when a donor contacts a charity or commercial fundraiser in response to a solicitation campaign. In the initial phone conversation, the donor will be asked questions about the vehicle. Generally, the vehicle will be accepted unless the cost of towing the vehicle exceeds its value. Donors are responsible for notifying the Department of Motor Vehicles of the transfer of registration. Failure to transfer registration has subjected many donors to subsequent penalties and expenses incurred after donation, most often as a result of parking violations. The donated vehicle is then sold and the proceeds are divided between the commercial fundraiser and the charity. Because all costs associated with advertising, towing, storing, and selling the vehicle are deducted from the proceeds before any distribution to charity, charities usually only receive a marginal amount from the car’s sales proceeds. Description and Summary of Information in Tables 3, 4 and 5 Table 3: Thrift Store Operations – Goods Purchased from Charity: This table lists, in alphabetical order, each charitable organization that solicited donations of used clothing and merchandise (“salvageable personal property”) and sold the property to a for-profit thrift store operator. The name of the for-profit store operator is also listed. (25 completed reports) Table 4: Thrift Store Operations – Management/Fee Commission: This table lists, in alphabetical order, each charitable organization that solicited donations of used clothing and merchandise and paid a management fee or commission to a for-profit thrift store operator. The name of the for-profit thrift store operator is also listed. (2 completed reports) Table 5: Vehicle Donation Program: This table lists, in alphabetical order, each charitable organization that solicited vehicles and paid a management fee or commission to a for-profit reseller. (622 completed reports) The data contained in these tables can be summarized as follows: • For-profit thrift store operators that purchased goods from charities reported total revenue of approximately $53.25 million for the 2016 reporting period. Of this amount, approximately $16.4 million, or 30.7%, was paid to charitable organizations. Total revenue increased from 2015 by approximately $2.4 million, and the percent to charity slightly increased by 3%. • For-profit thrift store operators that were paid a fee or commission by charities reported total revenue of approximately $1.43 million for the 2016 reporting period, with approximately $114,000, or 7.99% paid to the charities.
Recommended publications
  • 8364 Licensed Charities As of 3/10/2020 MICS 24404 MICS 52720 T
    8364 Licensed Charities as of 3/10/2020 MICS 24404 MICS 52720 T. Rowe Price Program for Charitable Giving, Inc. The David Sheldrick Wildlife Trust USA, Inc. 100 E. Pratt St 25283 Cabot Road, Ste. 101 Baltimore MD 21202 Laguna Hills CA 92653 Phone: (410)345-3457 Phone: (949)305-3785 Expiration Date: 10/31/2020 Expiration Date: 10/31/2020 MICS 52752 MICS 60851 1 For 2 Education Foundation 1 Michigan for the Global Majority 4337 E. Grand River, Ste. 198 1920 Scotten St. Howell MI 48843 Detroit MI 48209 Phone: (425)299-4484 Phone: (313)338-9397 Expiration Date: 07/31/2020 Expiration Date: 07/31/2020 MICS 46501 MICS 60769 1 Voice Can Help 10 Thousand Windows, Inc. 3290 Palm Aire Drive 348 N Canyons Pkwy Rochester Hills MI 48309 Livermore CA 94551 Phone: (248)703-3088 Phone: (571)263-2035 Expiration Date: 07/31/2021 Expiration Date: 03/31/2020 MICS 56240 MICS 10978 10/40 Connections, Inc. 100 Black Men of Greater Detroit, Inc 2120 Northgate Park Lane Suite 400 Attn: Donald Ferguson Chattanooga TN 37415 1432 Oakmont Ct. Phone: (423)468-4871 Lake Orion MI 48362 Expiration Date: 07/31/2020 Phone: (313)874-4811 Expiration Date: 07/31/2020 MICS 25388 MICS 43928 100 Club of Saginaw County 100 Women Strong, Inc. 5195 Hampton Place 2807 S. State Street Saginaw MI 48604 Saint Joseph MI 49085 Phone: (989)790-3900 Phone: (888)982-1400 Expiration Date: 07/31/2020 Expiration Date: 07/31/2020 MICS 58897 MICS 60079 1888 Message Study Committee, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Animal People News
    European Commission votes to ban dog &cat fur B R U S S E L S ––The European Commis- sion on November 20 adopted a proposal to ban the import, export, and sale of cat and dog fur throughout the European Union. “The draft regulation will now be considered by the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers for adoption by the co- decision procedure,” explained the EC Asian dog. (Kim Bartlett) announcement. “There is evidence that cat and dog fur been found not just on clothing, but also on a is being placed on the European market, usually number of personal accessories, as well as chil- dren’s soft toys.” Asian rabbits. (Kim Bartlett) undeclared as such or disguised as synthetic and other types of fur,” the EC announcement sum- “Just the idea of young children playing marized. “The vast majority of the cat and dog with toys which have been made with dog and Olympics to showcase growing fur is believed to be imported from third coun- cat fur is really something we cannot accept,” tries, notably China.” European Consumer Protection Commissioner Fifteen of the 25 EU member nations Markos Kyprianou said. Chinese animal testing industry have already individually introduced legislation “Kyprianou stopped short of calling B E I J I N G ––The 2008 Olympic Glenn Rice, chief executive of Bridge against cat and dog fur. “The proposed regula- for every product containing fur to have a label Games in Beijing will showcase the fast- Pharmaceuticals Inc., is outsourcing the tion adopted today addresses EU citizens con- detailing its exact origin,” wrote London Times growing Chinese animal testing industry, work to China, where scientists are cheap cerns, and creates a harmonized approach,” the European correspondent David Charter, the official Xinhua news agency disclosed and plentiful and animal-rights activists are EC announcement stipulated.
    [Show full text]
  • Mining's Toxic Legacy
    Mining’s Toxic Legacy An Initiative to Address Mining Toxins in the Sierra Nevada Acknowledgements _____________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The Sierra Fund would like to thank Dr. Carrie Monohan, contributing author of this report, and Kyle Leach, lead technical advisor. Thanks as well to Dr. William M. Murphy, Dr. Dave Brown, and Professor Becky Damazo, RN, of California State University, Chico for their research into the human and environmental impacts of mining toxins, and to the graduate students who assisted them: Lowren C. McAmis and Melinda Montano, Gina Grayson, James Guichard, and Yvette Irons. Thanks to Malaika Bishop and Roberto Garcia for their hard work to engage community partners in this effort, and Terry Lowe and Anna Reynolds Trabucco for their editorial expertise. For production of this report we recognize Elizabeth “Izzy” Martin of The Sierra Fund for conceiving of and coordinating the overall Initiative and writing substantial portions of the document, Kerry Morse for editing, and Emily Rivenes for design and formatting. Many others were vital to the development of the report, especially the members of our Gold Ribbon Panel and our Government Science and Policy Advisors. We also thank the Rose Foundation for Communities and the Environment and The Abandoned Mine Alliance who provided funding to pay for a portion of the expenses in printing this report. Special thanks to Rebecca Solnit, whose article “Winged Mercury and
    [Show full text]
  • North Bloomfield Gravel Mining Co. Records: Finding Aid
    http://oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/tf2f59n5kg No online items North Bloomfield Gravel Mining Co. Records: Finding Aid Processed by The Huntington Library staff; supplementary encoding and revision supplied by Xiuzhi Zhou and Diann Benti. The Huntington Library, Art Collections, and Botanical Gardens Manuscripts Department 1151 Oxford Road San Marino, California 91108 Phone: (626) 405-2129 Email: [email protected] URL: http://www.huntington.org © 2000 The Huntington Library. All rights reserved. North Bloomfield Gravel Mining mssHM 51035-51130 1 Co. Records: Finding Aid Overview of the Collection Title: North Bloomfield Gravel Mining Co. Records Dates (inclusive): 1890-1891 Collection Number: mssHM 51035-51130 Creator: North Bloomfield Gravel Mining Company. Extent: 96 pieces in 1 box Repository: The Huntington Library, Art Collections, and Botanical Gardens. Manuscripts Department 1151 Oxford Road San Marino, California 91108 Phone: (626) 405-2129 Email: [email protected] URL: http://www.huntington.org Abstract: This collection consists primarily of letters from the secretary to the president of the North Bloomfield Gravel Mining Company of Nevada County, California, in 1890-1891 related to the company and hydraulic mining. Language: English. Access Open to qualified researchers by prior application through the Reader Services Department. For more information, contact Reader Services. Publication Rights The Huntington Library does not require that researchers request permission to quote from or publish images of this material, nor does it charge fees for such activities. The responsibility for identifying the copyright holder, if there is one, and obtaining necessary permissions rests with the researcher. Preferred Citation [Identification of item]. North Bloomfield Gravel Mining Co.
    [Show full text]
  • The Greyhound Protection Act More Than 100 Nonprofit Organizations
    The Greyhound Protection Act More than 100 nonprofit organizations and community leaders support the Greyhound Protection Act, which phases out commercial greyhound racing and additionally bans the use of live-animal lures used in training dogs in this industry. Key Endorsements Animal Wellness Action Eastwood Ranch Rescue Federation of Humane Organizations of West Virginia GREY2K USA Education Fund GREY2K USA Worldwide National Greyhound Adoption Program Stop Predatory Gambling The Center for a Humane Economy Local Animal Shelters Alaska SPCA (Alaska) Stone County Humane Society (Arkansas) Humane Society of Ventura County (California) spcaLA (California) Dumb Friends League (Colorado) The Animal Haven, Inc. (Connecticut) Alaqua Animal Refuge (Florida) Flagler Humane Society (Florida) Gulf Coast Humane Society (Florida) Humane Society of Manatee County (Florida) Humane Society Naples (Florida) Humane Society of Tampa Bay (Florida) Humane Society of the Treasure Coast (Florida) Jacksonville Humane Society (Florida) Peggy Adams Animal Rescue League (Florida) Southeast Volusia Humane Society (Florida) Your Humane Society SPCA (Florida) Atlanta Humane Society (Georgia) Kaua'i Humane Society (Hawaii) Hinsdale Humane Society (Illinois) Naperville Area Humane Society (Illinois) West Suburban Humane Society (Illinois) Bartholomew County Humane Society (Indiana) Animal Rescue League of Iowa (Iowa) Great Plains SPCA (Kansas) Kingman County Humane Society (Kansas) Leavenworth County Humane Society, Inc. (Kansas) PAWS Animal Adoption Center (Maine) The Heart of the Earth Sanctuary and Rescue (Maryland) Animal Rescue League of Boston (Massachusetts) Baypath Humane Society of Hopkinton (Massachusetts) Cape Ann Animal Aid (Massachusetts) A Helping Paw Humane Society (Massachusetts) Medfield Animal Shelter (Massachusetts) MSPCA-Angell (Massachusetts) Michigan Humane (Michigan) Blue Earth Nicollet County Humane Society (Minnesota) Minnesota Humane Society (Minnesota) Oktibbeha County Humane Society (Mississippi) Center for Animal Rescue and Enrichment of St.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Animal Equality 2015
    Additional information - for Animal Charity Evaluators - Assessment of Animal Equality 2015 Due date: October 7th 2015 1 1. What are your goals? Your vision? Your mission? (Update after strategic lines 2015) Vision Animal Equality works to create a world without animal suffering. Mission Animal Equality is a voice for farmed animals all over the world inspiring society and companies to adopt compassionate choices. 2. What are our objectives of the year? Goals in 3 or 5 years? Strategy Plan 2016 ­ 2020: Animal Equality has just finished its strategic plan for 2016­2020 and is working with an external company to have it summarized and transformed into a more visual document. As part of the strategic plan the organization has done a thorough internal and external analysis. Internal analysis: compilation of the financial, relations, material goods, management, function, procedures, dynamics of the organization in 8 countries. It has given insight to some of the internal problems that must be addressed as part of the strategy plan. As part of the external analysis we have analysed the education, legislation and companies in the 8 countries we are working in. This adds on to our STEP and SWOT analysis carried out sometime ago,as well as to the meat study being carried out in Germany to give AE an idea of what will be the areas of focus of the organization in the next years taking into account the organization's reality and resources. The organization’s country and international directors then had a 3 day meeting to discuss the organization's reality, identity and focus in the upcoming years.
    [Show full text]
  • Executive Summary
    Mining’s Toxic Legacy An Initiative to Address Mining Toxins in the Sierra Nevada Executive Summary Published March 2008 by The Sierra Fund The Sierra Fund’s Initiative to address legacy mining pollution has been made possible by the support of: The California Endowment The Richard and Rhoda Goldman Fund and True North Foundation Executive Summary ________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Is human health, water quality or the environment at risk from historic mining toxins? The Gold Rush changed California demographics as indigenous people were dislocated and mining towns appeared and disappeared across the Sierra Nevada Mountains. A less recognized consequence of the California Gold Rush was the massive environmental destruction that took place, which still plagues the Sierra today. Working with partners from state, federal, and tribal governments as well as from the academic, health, and environmental communities, The Sierra Fund’s report “Mining’s Toxic Legacy” is the first comprehen- sive evaluation of what happened during the Gold Rush, including: the cultural, health, and environmental impacts of this era; the obstacles that lie in the way of addressing these impacts; and a strategic plan for taking action on the longest neglected environmental problem in the Golden State of California. The California Gold Rush clawed out of the foothills of the Sierra Nevada considerable gold—93 tons or 2.7 million troy ounces in the peak year of 1853 alone... In the course of doing so, everything in the region and much downstream was ravaged. Wildlife was decimated. Trees were cut down to burn for domestic and industrial purposes and to build the huge mining infrastructure that was firmly in place by the 1870s.
    [Show full text]
  • Scoping Comments of the San Juan Ridge Taxpayers Association (SJRTA)
    COM MENTS OF THE SAN JUAN RIDGE TAXPAYERS ASSOCIATION ON THE PROPOSED SAN JUAN RIDGE MINE Submitted to the Nevada County Planning Department December 4, 2012 Sacramento Bee, December 31, 1997. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .....................................................................................................1 II. BACKGROUND.....................................................................................................................4 III. OUR LOCAL ENVIRONMENT ........................................................................................8 A. SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT ........................................................................................................8 B. ECOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT .............................................................................................10 IV. COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT .........14 A. THE EIR MUST CLEARLY DESCRIBE THE PROPOSED PROJECT; CEQA DEMANDS AN ACCURATE, STABLE AND FINITE PROJECT DEFINITION THAT ADDRESSES THE “WHOLE OF THE ACTION” UNDER REVIEW. ...........................................................................................................14 1. The Proposed Action Should Be Described in a Manner that Provides for Full Disclosure and Evaluation of Potentially Significant Impacts ..............................................15 2. Additional Information Is Needed ..................................................................................19 B. CEQA REQUIRES IDENTIFICATION OF POTENTIALLY “SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS
    [Show full text]
  • Quarterly Fall 2003 Volume 52 Number 4 About the Cover
    AWI Quarterly Fall 2003 Volume 52 Number 4 ABOUT THE COVER Buck is one of more than 100 dogs seized from the premises of random source animal dealer C.C. Baird. Buck, emaciated and suffering from heartworms and ehrlichia, was taken in by the Doberman Rescue Group of Oklahoma. After receiving much-needed medical attention and time to recuperate, Buck and another hound, Max, will be available for adoption. All of the animals seized, who have no doubt been through a nightmarish situation, will eventually be placed in new, loving homes. The case against Baird is ongoing, and indictments have not been issued yet. We hope that 1) USDA will revoke Baird’s license to do business as a dealer selling animals for experimentation, 2) the U.S. government will WILDLIFE gain custody of the more than 600 dogs that reportedly remain at Baird’s Martin Endangered Species for Sale...2 Creek Kennel in Williford, Arkansas, and 3) the U.S. Department of Justice will When Ethics Fail You, Just Make Threats…4 AWI vigorously pursue a case against Baird, prosecuting him for his crimes against the Quarterly animals to the fullest extent allowed by law (see story pages 10-11). USDA Ignores Ringling Bros.’ Elephant Abuse...5 Fall 2003 Volume 52 Number 4 FREE TRADE FOUNDER Christine Stevens Endangered Species for Sale AWI at the WTO Dolphins Swim Down the Streets of Cancun…6-7 DIRECTORS Marjorie Cooke Roger Fouts, Ph.D. our government wants to facilitate trophy hunters importing markhor from Jen Rinick/AWI NEWS FroM CAPItoL HILL John Gleiber Pakistan and wood bison from Canada, leather manufacturers importing Fredrick Hutchison, Jr.
    [Show full text]
  • Wrenn Colostate 0053A 13455.Pdf
    DISSERTATION PROFESSIONALIZATION, FACTIONALISM, AND SOCIAL MOVEMENT SUCCESS: A CASE STUDY ON NONHUMAN ANIMAL RIGHTS MOBILIZATION Submitted by Corey Lee Wrenn Department of Sociology In partial fulfillment of the requirements For the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado Spring 2016 Doctoral Committee: Advisor: Michael Carolan Lynn Hempel Michael Lacy Marcela Velasco Copyright by Corey Lee Wrenn 2016 All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT PROFESSIONALIZATION, FACTIONALISM, AND SOCIAL MOVEMENT SUCCESS: A CASE STUDY ON NONHUMAN ANIMAL RIGHTS MOBILIZATION This project explores the intra-movement interactions between professionalized and radical factions in the social movement arena using a content analysis of movement literature produced by the Nonhuman Animal rights movement between 1980 and 2013. Professionalized factions with greater symbolic capital are positioned to monopolize claimsmaking, disempower competing factions, and replicate their privilege and legitimacy. Radical factions, argued to be important variables in a movement’s health, are thus marginalized, potentially to the detriment of movement success and the constituency for whom they advocate. Specifically, this study explores the role of professionalization in manipulating the tactics and goals of social movement organizations and how the impacts of professionalization may be aggravating factional boundaries. Boundary maintenance may prevent critical discourse within the movement, and it may also provoke the “mining” of radical claimsmaking for symbols that have begun to resonate within the movement and the public. Analysis demonstrates a number of important consequences to professionalization that appear to influence the direction of factional disputes, and ultimately, the shape of the movement. Results indicate some degree of factional fluidity, but professionalization does appear to be a dominant force on movement trajectories by concentrating power in the social change space.
    [Show full text]
  • The State of the Animals: 2001 More Than a Slap on the Wrist
    Overview: The State of Animals in 2001 Paul G. Irwin he blizzard of commentary tors have taken part in a fascinating, environments; and change their inter- marking the turn of the millen- sometimes frustrating, dialogue that actions with other animals, evolving Tnium is slowly coming to an end. seeks to balance the needs of the nat- from exploitation and harm to Assessments of the past century (and, ural world with those of the world’s respect and compassion. more ambitiously, the past millenni- most dominant species—and in the Based upon that mission, The HSUS um) have ranged from the self-con- process create a truly humane society. almost fifty years after its founding gratulatory to the condemnatory. The strains created by unrestrained in 1954, “has sought to respond cre- Written from political, technological, development and accelerating harm atively and realistically to new chal- cultural, environmental, and other to the natural world make it impera- lenges and opportunities to protect perspectives, some of these commen- tive that the new century’s under- animals” (HSUS 1991), primarily taries have provided the public with standing of the word “humane” incor- through legislative, investigative, and thoughtful, uplifting analyses. At porate the insight that our human educational means. least one commentary has concluded fate is linked inextricably to that of It is only coincidentally that the that a major issue facing the United all nonhuman animals and that we choice has been made to view the States and the world is the place and all have a duty to promote active, animal condition through thoughtful plight of animals in the twenty-first steady, thorough notions of justice analysis of the past half century—the century, positing that the last few and fair treatment to animals and life span of The HSUS—rather than of decades of the twentieth century saw nonhuman nature.
    [Show full text]
  • Milwaukee CFC Booklet 2004
    Letter from the Chair My Fellow Colleagues: As employees of the United States of America, we have very few opportunities where we can come together and speak with one voice on an issue upon which we can all agree. As we are all public employees, I would like to think we all have freely chosen to serve the public and as such are concerned about the well being of our fellow citizens. That being assumed, I would like you to join me in supporting the Combined Federal Campaign, our vehicle for showing the general public that we are concerned about our fellow human beings. The one chance where we can come together and make a positive statement about whom we are and show that we do care, in a UNITED VOICE. I know that many of us would like to have more discretionary income than we currently have. We all want the best for our families, but I ask each of you to stop for a moment and consider the strife that many of our fellow human beings experience every day, some in this country and many more abroad. There are so many who need help. I ask you to look into your hearts and find a way to support the Combined Federal Campaign. If we could average just $2 a week ($4 a pay period) per employee, we could raise almost $1 1/2 million, well over the $699,000 goal of last year’s campaign. To do it everyone would have to give. It is easy to rationalize not giving.
    [Show full text]