Greg Laden posted this interesting and eye-opening analysis of the American Cancer Society, an organization with a rather benign-sounding name and one - you would think - focused primarily on funding cancer research through charitable donations.
Not so, according to Laden and the Charity Navigator. Laden goes into great detail on the matter and links to even more information - along with alternative, more principled charities - so go check out his excellent post over on his blog if you're interested. The short version is that only about $0.25 per dollar is used for actual cancer research, though it's likely more than that it spent on other support programs. Even so, the executives are extremely well-compensated.
One thing I noticed was ACS's accountability and transparency rating, which is ranked 4 out of 4 stars. In other words, they're lining their pockets with money donated to cancer research in good faith, and they aren't even trying to hide it. Takes a special kind of sociopath to do something like that. The same sort who wouldn't take candy from a baby because it's more effective to kill a baby to lower demand in the candy market.
On a more personal note, one of their reviews on Charity Navigator accuses the ACS of refusing donations from non-theist organizations. Laden links an article that shows in depth the lengths to which the ACS went trying to not take half a million dollars from secular donors. I guess they don't mind taking money away from cancer research, as long as it's none of that filthy godless money. Meanwhile apologists are quick to play the "competitiveness" card, saying that high executive salaries are justified by proportionately more talented individuals. Seems to me that if that were the case they'd be able to channel more money toward actual cancer research. That is their stated goal, is it not?