LOWER POTTSGROVE >> After nearly 20 years and more than $10 million raised, the Pottstown Relay for Life may have to look for a new home.
The Pottsgrove School Board approved the use of Pennypacker Stadium for the 2017 Relay for Life, but expressed strong reservations about whether that approval will re-occur for 2018.
Board President Rick Rabinowitz joined board members Al Leach, Jim Lapic, Ashley Custer and Bill Parker Tuesday night in expressing concerns about how much of the money raised at the Relay ends up in the hands of cancer researchers.
Lapic said when his mother was dying of cancer, “we needed research” and he would like to see more money going in that direction.
Leach, who cast the only vote against approving the Relay’s use of the stadium next year, said “like one cent of every dollar raised goes to research.”
As it turns out, that figure is not quite right, according to the latest available information.
Although getting exact figures on what Forbes Magazine has listed as the 10th largest charity in the United States depends on where you look.
Laura Weis, senior director for division communications at the American Cancer Society’s Hershey office, wrote in an email replying to Mercury inquiries that out of $941 million in revenues in 2015, ACS spent $151 million on research.
That works out to 16 percent of all funds raised going to research.
However, the American Cancer Society’s website indicates that its 2015 revenues were only $632 million, and that $144 million of that went to research in 2015. That’s 22.3 percent.
In an email to The Mercury, Weis wrote that 25 percent of the charity’s budget goes to “operating expenses.”
She also noted, after this article was published on-line, that the web site figures use 2014 data and the figures she provided are more accurate.
But it’s important to note that the American Cancer Society spends money on more than just research.
According to its mission statement, the group devotes its efforts to “preventing cancer, saving lives, diminishing suffering through research, education, advocacy and service.”
In a June 2016 post, the independent charity rating site “Charity Navigator” posted a financial rating of 60.32 points out of 100, or one out of four possible stars for the American Cancer Society for the 2014 fiscal year – the latest for which tax figures were available.
It indicated that only 60 percent of the money raised went to “program expenses” in 2014.
That is represents a 4.5 percent drop in spending on “program expenses” from the previous year, according to the site, which gives American Cancer Society four out of four stars for “accountability and transparency.”
The charity watchdog site indicated that the American Cancer Society’s tax records show 34.4 percent of its money is spent on fundraising expenses, 6 percent on administration and it has an operating efficiency of 36 cents on the dollar.
After an earlier version of this article was published on-line, Weis wrote “CharityWatch doesn’t publicly disclose their ratings methodology, so we don’t know by what criteria we’re being judged. And with Charity Navigator, for example, certain overhead categories that it uses to determine financial performance, including fundraising expenses, are counted twice.”
Custer said her concern is about how much of the money raised goes to executives.
“I think the pay for the CEO of American Cancer Society is appalling,” she said. “Its not fair that the money we raise is not going into research, but into the pockets of people in a board room.”
Last April, Gary Reedy, the former chairman of the board of directors for the American Cancer Society, took over as CEO, replacing John Seffrin, who retired.
No compensation information for Reedy was immediately available.
Charity Navigator listed Seffrin’s 2014 salary at $863,304.
However in the 2009-2010 fiscal year, Seffrin’s total compensation package, which likely included more than just salary, was listed at $2.4 million and he was identified as the second highest paid CEO of a national charity, according to another site – Charity Watch, run by the American Institute of Philanthropy.
That information was posted by the Better Business Bureau, which has ranked the American Cancer Society as “an accredited charity.”
Weis also responded to this aspect of the article, writing “to the points on executive compensation: we’re proud of our ongoing effort to recruit and retain key talent, including executives.”
She also wrote “executive compensation is a way for us to stay competitive and retain skilled and experienced executives” and that the board of directors, which sets compensation “is informed by current market data on similar organizations and consultation from Towers Watson, an industry-leading compensation consulting firm.”
School board member Patricia Grimm, who is a cancer survivor, passionately defended keeping the Relay in the Pottsgrove School District.
“It is an honor to have them in Pottsgrove, it is not about the money,” she said.
“If you’ve never been to one, you don’t know what its about. This is a community celebration of life, I don’t care where the money goes,” said Grimm.
Rabinowitz replied that he has been to a Relay for Life even in the past; has lost relatives to cancer, and that some people in Pottsgrove may care where the money goes.
“We raise millions of dollars and it may not be going to the people who need it,” he said. “That’s distressing.”
Replying to criticism on the PGSD Discussion Facebook page, Rabinowitz wrote “While no one questions that the Relay for Life is a wonderful community event, the fact is that .01 of every dollar raised at this event goes to cancer research. Expressing concern about this information is hardly shameful. Asking if there is a way to find alternatives that put more money in the hands of the people that need it is not shameful. Asking questions is NOT shameful.”
Leach, too, stressed that his opposition has nothing to do with the event or the organizers, but what happens to the money that is raised.
“I also don’t want my beliefs in the parent company to be a reflection of any person or people involved with Relay for Life. They are very committed to fighting cancer and promoting the awareness,” Leach wrote on the site.
“I wish we could have the same event with another company, as organized as Relay, that provided more funds to those that really need the help. I personally just can’t support the way the parent company does business,” he wrote.
According to Charity Navigator, the American Cancer Society had total 2014 revenues of $862,312,318 and $812,461,752 of that revenue – or 94.2 percent – came from contributions.
“Events,” like Relay for Life, raised $440,934,404 – or 51.1 percent – of 2014’s revenue for the American Cancer Society.
And Pottstown is no slouch in that department.
Since it started in 1998, Pottstown’s Relay for Life has said $10.7 million for the American Cancer Society, said Weis. This year, it is on track to raise about $400,000, she said.
The use of the stadium, by the way, is not free. The school district charged $5,300 for its use in June for the 18th Pottstown Relay for Life.
Over those years, Pottstown’s Relay has hosted 14,000 registered participants and is considered one of the largest in the country and is ranked 15th largest in the world.
Weis also said that “we get questions all the time about where the money goes and it is absolutely a valid question to ask.”
And it may be asked.After voting to approve the Relay for Life’s use of the stadium next year, the board also decided to put together a committee to look into not only American Cancer Society’s fundraising priorities, but also into whether there might be any preferable alternatives.
Lapic, Custer and Grimm all agreed to serve on that sub-committee.
“Maybe Pottsgrove could do its own, we certainly know what we’re doing, and ensure money goes to more useful research-based organization,” Custer said.
Following up on Business Manager David Nester’s suggestions, one of the first groups the committee is likely to speak with is the American Cancer Society.
