To the editor:
It is wonderful to be recognized as one of “America’s Favorite Charities” by the Chronicle of Philanthropy. However this ranking provides an incomplete and inaccurate picture by counting only tax-deductible gifts and failing to include giving to 501(c)(4) organizations.
The Chronicle conducts this annual ranking ostensibly as a proxy for popularity among donors. But by counting only tax-deductible gifts and excluding giving to 501(c)(4)s — particularly in the case of organizations that are made up of related 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) organizations, have overlapping employees, and pursue a common mission — it provides an incomplete picture of the charitable landscape.
501(c)(4) organizations are tax-exempt organizations under the IRS code. And in the context of the ACLU, the Chronicle’s ranking excludes $138 million of giving to our organization.
Moreover, the work of 501(c)(4) organizations can be every bit as charitable as the work of organizations that are funded only by tax-deductible gifts. Well over 200 full-time staff members are on the payroll of the ACLU (as opposed to our Section 501(c)(3) component, the ACLU Foundation) and their work is just as meaningful and impactful as that of colleagues who work for the tax-deductible arm. Just last year, the ACLU was the largest underwriter of a referendum in Florida that restored voting rights to 1.4 million individuals who had been denied the right to vote because of felony convictions. Certainly the donor support of that work is worthy of being counted when one looks at the charitable landscape.
One could even argue that gifts to 501(c)(4) organizations are even more charitable than tax-deductible gifts, because the donor receives no tax benefit from gifts to 501(c)(4) — as opposed to gifts to 501(c)(3)s.
Most important, by failing to count gifts to 501(c)(4)s, the Chronicle is undercutting its ability to measure America’s favorite charities. The ACLU currently has 1.6 million members who have given it 501(c)(4) contributions over the past two years — 1.6 million people whose gifts are excluded in the Chronicle’s ranking.
Ironically, although the Chronicle chose to exclude giving to the ACLU’s 501(c)(4), it published an article in the same edition about the ACLU’s use of data to renew lapsed donors — the vast majority of whom are donors to the 501(c)(4).
The Chronicle admittedly outlined a transparent and consistent set of criteria by choosing to count only tax-deductible gifts to charitable organizations. But in the spirit of achieving the goal it set out for itself — identifying America’s favorite charities — it may need to reassess its methodology and metrics.
Mark Wier
Chief Development Officer
ACLU
New York