2009/10/8 Gregory Kohs <thekoh...@gmail.com>: > Despite an overall three-star rating (out of four), WMF was only rated two > stars for Organization Efficency. This is described by Charity Navigator as > "Meets or nearly meets industry standards but underperforms most charities > in its Cause". The Charity Navigator site further states:
The WMF is unique in being so massively volunteer driven. The WMF exists to run the servers and handle the admin, almost everything else is done by volunteers and doesn't appear on the income statement. It's inevitable that the WMF will spend a lot of its money on admin. If you include volunteer time on the income statement, even at a nominal rate of $1/hr or something, then we would be spending almost all our resources on programmes. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
