Is Food for Thought in Forestville approaching Scam Charity territory?

Food for Thought in Forestville is or has approached being a pseudo charity. Although their directive is as "a grassroots organization dedicated to meeting the nutritional needs of persons living with or affected by AIDS/HIV",. according to tax records they're spending less than 25% of their "revenue" on those nutritional needs. Meanwhile a top heavy staff grows, expensive vanity projects far from FFT's prime directive flourish, the "Director" is making $100,000.00, and almost all of the "work" is done by hundreds of volunteers. How to get them back on the right track?
https://www.eri-nonprofit-salaries.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=NPO.Form990&EIN=680181095&Year=2012.

I have gone in, and seen people being helped....but, for the money they are given - thru grants, etc.....they have waaaaayy more resources financially than organizations that feed people with a broad spectrum of illnesses. I have no problem with their mission statement, and wanting to serve a particular population - but maybe we need to move away from AIDS being a bit of a 'cause celebre' vs. other illnesses that are just as devastating...potentially more so. I just wish, with all that frickin' money, they'd open up to those with Hep. C, lupus... basically other autoimmune conditions that are considered by western medicine to cause more deaths than HIV at this point. I know, I know, I'm going to get hate mail. I'm not saying AIDS isn't f-ing awful; I'm just saying that there are other diseases, now, that are, public health-wise, leading to more deaths.

Also, when I asked to volunteer there, the volunteer coordinator told me they had 500 volunteers already. Why, why, do they have so many volunteers when so many food banks can hardly stay open because of lack of funding and volunteers?

Once again, I love the mission statement, and I love the idea of the garden....but with the amount of money they get, their target population is very small. So yes, it's out of whack.

And wow, $100K? Really? Ummmmm. That's a lot. Are they listed/rated on: charity watch?

I apologize if I offended anyone; I know this is a touchy subject - but maybe with community accountability they will use their resources more efficiently.

Hari

PS: given that nearly all the food is donated or grown in their gardens, it actually does make a bit of sense that they wouldn't be putting much of their budget into food.....simply because they don't have to pay for most of it. So I'm actually surprised that the percentage is even 25%. But, I haven't read all the stats. I'm just going by my experience going in and talking to people....and hearing all their fundraising drives. And the reality is that people like to give to a cause they feel good about....and AIDS is one of those causes. It really is a catch-22 for them, because opening up their client base may make them ineligible for certain AIDS-specific grants.

Since you haven't read the stats provided in the link, here they are for you in a nut shell. Food for Thought buys 98% of its food from other food banks and outlets (Redwood Empire Food Bank). Perhaps 3% is "donated" meaning it is begged at grocery stores throughout the County. The Garden produces virtually NOTHING at a cost of $30,000.00 or so a year. The "Garden" is purely a Vanity project, left over from the current Directors last job at Ocean Song and his sidekick from the Occidental arts and ecology center. Bottom line Food for Thought PAYS for virtually all the food they distribute and furthermore that expenditure is only about 23% of it's budget. Hence They are no longer primarily an AIDS Food Bank but something else entirely. That something else is primarily a set of high paying jobs that have NOTHING to do with providing Food to People!
Here's even MORE disturbing information about FFT's practices!
https://sfbay.craigslist.org/nby/rnr/2946086817.html

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by hari:

PS: given that nearly all the food is donated or grown in their gardens, it actually does make a bit of sense that they wouldn't be putting much of their budget into food.....simply because they don't have to pay for most of it. So I'm actually surprised that the percentage is even 25%. But, I haven't read all the stats. I'm just going by my experience going in and talking to people....and hearing all their fundraising drives. And the reality is that people like to give to a cause they feel good about....and AIDS is one of those causes. It really is a catch-22 for them, because opening up their client base may make them ineligible for certain AIDS-specific grants.

---

This is heartbreaking that they've lost their way. It used to be such a wonderful organization but those tax documents don't lie! I used to volunteer there but was put off by dozens of conflicting "rules" and a general condescension towards Volunteers.

I can't say whether Food For Thought is well run or not (but if they've got 500 volunteers they must be doing something right! And managing an organization with 500 volunteers is a significant task!)

However what I can say is that the person who started this thread is out of integrity. They registered as "Fraudster Alert". They replied twice under that username, which is fine. However they just registered again with the same email address as "Cornsilk" and "piled on" the original post, making it seem as though there are more people who share their opinion. :nono: I also have no doubt that the same person was responsible for the Craigslist post. They clearly have an axe to grind.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Cornsilk:

This is heartbreaking that they've lost their way. It used to be such a wonderful organization but those tax documents don't lie! I used to volunteer there but was put off by dozens of conflicting "rules" and a general condescension towards Volunteers.

---

How does presenting facts and links from two different accounts negate truth or integrity? I often agree with myself. Ok it was dumb. However the posts stand on their own concerning the truth and FACTS in the links they delineate. To accuse me of the Craigslist posting is wrong. And yes I do have an axe to grind, that is a once wonderful organization that I was a long time volunteer have devolved into a moneymaking outfit intent on it's high salaried self over it's original intent. I dare say it has a devoted (sometime cultish) following that needs to be informed and my switching accounts was an (obviously) misguided attempt to fully express myself and retain anonymity.Sorry I didn't mean to obfuscate the important message that people need to hear. Please forgive my clumsy zealousness and check out the tax information in the first link and go from there. PS: to the Moderator, lesson learned here.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Barry:

However what I can say is that the person who started this thread is out of integrity. They registered as "Fraudster Alert". They replied twice under that username, which is fine. However they just registered again with the same email address as "Cornsilk" and "piled on" the original post, making it seem as though there are more people who share their opinion. :nono: I also have no doubt that the same person was responsible for the Craigslist post. They clearly have an axe to grind.

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Fraudster Alert:

How does presenting facts and links from two different accounts negate truth or integrity?

---

Trying to appear as two different users is out of integrity. If you try to deny it, you are further out of integrity.

Quote:

---

Ok it was dumb.

---

Agreed!

Quote:

---

However the posts stand on their own concerning the truth and FACTS in the links they delineate.

---

The only FACT you posted was the link to their IRS Form 990. The rest was your clearly biased interpretation.

Quote:

---

To accuse me of the Craigslist posting is wrong.

---

perhaps...

Quote:

---

And yes I do have an axe to grind, that is a once wonderful organization that I was a long time volunteer

---

Thank you. And while we're on the topic, how about telling us the circumstances around your departure from FFT as a volunteer?

Quote:

---

switching accounts was an (obviously) misguided attempt to fully express myself and retain anonymity.

---

Lame excuse. Furthermore, anonymity is not available here. Users are required to provide their real name, especially when it comes to saying anything negative. Is "Rincon Scherer" your real name? Are you man enough to stand up an be accountable for your charges? Given that your integrity has already been compromised, if you want to post further you'll need to contact me to validate your real name.

Quote:

---

PS: to the Moderator, lesson learned here.

---

You're welcome.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Fraudster Alert:

...my switching accounts was an (obviously) misguided attempt to fully express myself and retain anonymity...

---

I now also notice that your sockpuppet user (Cornsilk) also granted gratitude to your first user's posts. I think a full confession is in order (ie: "Yes, I deliberately created a second user to appear as if another user shared my opinion. Furthermore I made an equally fraudulent excuse for my action.") :waccosun:

At the risk of "fueling the fire" an executive director of a NPO making [not even] 100K is perfectly reasonable.

I have no association with Food For Thought. But I do know the non-profit world and paying highly skilled professionals a remotely fair and adequate wage is necessary. Reading and interpreting budget numbers without having an understanding of industry budgeting practices in general doesn't allow one to see or understand the full story.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Fraudster Alert:

Food for Thought in Forestville is or has approached being a pseudo charity. Although their directive is as "a grassroots organization dedicated to meeting the nutritional needs of persons living with or affected by AIDS/HIV",. according to tax records they're spending less than 25% of their "revenue" on those nutritional needs. Meanwhile a top heavy staff grows, expensive vanity projects far from FFT's prime directive flourish, the "Director" is making $100,000.00, and almost all of the "work" is done by hundreds of volunteers. How to get them back on the right track?
https://www.eri-nonprofit-salaries.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=NPO.Form990&EIN=680181095&Year=2012.

---

Thanks Barry for your diligence on this. I've been following this thread since the first posting from "Fraud Alert" and even my simple investigation showed that the user name was only registered on 4/06, the day before the first attack. I use that word purposely, because I too have volunteered at the FFT annual calabash fundraiser for years, plus belong to a gleaning group that regularly delivers food there. I'd like to see a very clear explanation of what this person has against FFT.

As an aside, in one of the postings it is alleged that the garden at the Forestville site is a "vanity project" that doesn't even produce food for the patients. You're clearly missing the point here. The garden was designed as a therapeutic garden, where patients can sit in a beautiful spot in nature and forget for a moment their health issues and just enjoy the incredible space that has been created. There is something magical about the amazing teepee of gourds and beans that is grown every year, with the sound of the gentle falling water in the pond nearby. If I never harvested a single vegetable from my own garden, I would still go to the effort every year just for the contemplative aspect, and my garden is nowhere near the magic at the FFT site.

I hope anyone who has read this and dropped their admiration for this worthwhile charity because of this thread will realize that the original poster has an undisclosed axe to grind, so much so that he's used at least three different addresses to make it look like he's not just one bitter fellow.

Incase you're referring to me, I'm a woman...and you have my real name.
.
Yes, the organization does good work. However, 100K for a nonprofit that size is a lot. I mean, I know people who have run much larger organization (PAWS, for example)...who make half that...and they have to pay for rent in San Francisco. But we can agree to disagree?

What I tried to get across was that from my visit, and inquiring about who was served, etc. ....Well, I still think it's a huge problem that they get so much grant money - and are serving a fraction of the people served by other (much poorer) foodbanks. I'm not saying anything negative about FFT, I'm just saying the resources are concentrated there - both financially and thru volunteer-hours. And that is a problem with any organization that essentially taps the funding market dry for an entire issue: In this case, food for people with health issues in this area.

Another example of this is that for those of us involved in animal welfare/rights, it's maddening that so much money goes to PETA. There are so many local organizations, and actual shelters and sanctuaries that have no money and have to close.....partly because people have given to the most well-known and celebrated organization. Sad. :(

All I'm saying is: I wish the resources were spread according to how many people are helped. And I wish organizations with similar missions would help each other out.

Disclaimer: This is just my 2 cents, and I don't really care enough about it to start an online feud about it.:2cents:

Harriet

The points about the duplicity of "Fraudster Alert" are well taken. Having said that, I'll also say that I'll never give a penny to any "nonprofit" if I know that someone there makes anywhere in the neighborhood of $100,000 per year. If they think they need that much money, let them work in a for-profit company and get their money by selling a product or service, rather than spending donations meant for charitable causes on a bloated materialistic lifestyle. Anybody who thinks their "need" for a six-figure income trumps the need for the donations to be spent to help those in real need is suffering from a bad case of greed. There are plenty of dedicated, competent people who can run a nonprofit without pocketing that much of the money.

Does anyone know if the figure cited by Fraudster Alert--"...they're spending less than 25% of their "revenue" on those nutritional needs"--is accurate? I tried to look up Food For Thought on Charity Navigator, but they haven't assessed them yet (there are too many charities for them to cover them all). Any charity that doesn't spend the majority of its income on the stated mission instead of on "administration" etc., is not a good bet to donate to. As Charity Navigator puts it: "...in most cause areas, the most efficient charities spend 75% or more of their budget on their programs and services and less than 25% on fundraising and administrative fees." So again, does anyone besides Fraudster Alert (who has compromised his credibility) know what the percentages are for Food For Thought? Anyone from Food For Thought? Hello?

Readers who don't already know this may be interested to check GuideStar.Org, where you can view the forms 990 that provide detailed financial information about non-profits. You can set up a free account there and look through the records of any local non-profit. Most of my career has been in non-profit administration and consulting, and I use this resource frequently to help me understand non-profits that I am in contact with.

Non-profits offer a wide range of salaries to directors. In general, the larger the overall budget, the higher the Executive Director's salary will be, within limits. In the North Bay there are EDs whose salaries exceed $200K, and others who work for as little as $30K. There is often a corresponding range of difference in the experience, knowledge, and skills of EDs, as well as the size and impact of the organization. It's hard to say if a wage is "fair" or if the budget is well-managed unless you know both the non-profit industry and the particular organization and people involved. However, for those who enjoy supporting worthy causes, the 990s for the organization are a good source of information.

...

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Dixon:

..., I'll also say that I'll never give a penny to any "nonprofit" if I know that someone there makes anywhere in the neighborhood of $100,000 per year. If they think they need that much money, let them work in a for-profit company and get their money by selling a product or service, rather than spending donations meant for charitable causes on a bloated materialistic lifestyle. ....

---

maybe this deserves a different thread..
I don't have any problem with the sheer dollar amount, as long as it's not obfuscated to make it look like the person receiving the salary is one of the donors him/herself. In my ideal society the companies that are run purely for profit would sell toys and useless widgets; those serving the needs of mankind wouldn't generate profits at all. Profits are essentially parasitic, and are used to motivate people to engage in activities that otherwise wouldn't be worth their time - or as a carrot, so others will share some of their current assets to help the business operate in hopes of later rewards.

The way our economy has evolved, however, salary for the workers (and managers) is tied to profits for the owners. It's a simple system so it works ok, but it's not ideal.
In this hypothetical charitable organization, society is benefiting from its actions. We want it to operate successfully. I don't see that there has to be the equivalent of a donation back to his own organization before we'd hire an employee for it. Don't bind the mouths of the kine and all that....

I was a client and a volunteer for years at Food for Thought, I worked on the office side for a number of months which I grew to call the dark side thanks to the rude, unpleasant, condescending characters, namely Ron Karp and Rachel Gardiner. They are cold hearted corporate jerks who only care about their vacations and salaries and making sure no clients get an extra banana.

They made me hate being there, I took a month off to see if I could feel better about the place, and stopped in to drop off some shirts and books for clients, alas I had to deal with Rachel who ignored for five minutes and then told me to throw in an office of someone who had quit. I left still intending to return that Saturday but the more I thought about it the more I knew I could not return, so I wrote to Elisa and told I could not come back and I would not take any food from them either.

Later that day, I ran into someone who told me about the firing of Linda, I could not believe even as evil as they are the could be that stupid to fire the only person that brought any heart and compassion to the place, the person that everyone comes to visit just because they like her so much, the person who did more work than all of them put together, the last person who actually cared about the clients, but I was wrong I think it was jut this that made them get rid of her because she made them look bad, and they are scum.

Every person I know who stopped being a volunteer there did so because of Rachel, she is the worse thing to happen to that place since Ron, two sides of the same putrid coin. All who know and love Linda should make their feelings known to the people running this place. Wayne Ryerson

[A wacco member who is a very reputable local business owner that I know personally asked me to post this. She does not want to join the discussion but did want to pass on her comments. - Barry]

I've been a Food for Thought volunteer for many years and expect to continue for as long as there is a need. I admire and respect the leadership, staff and volunteers for unwavering commitment, absolute integrity and amazing work on behalf of people living with HIV and AIDS. There's no doubt about it, Food for Thought is a community treasure that deserves our respect and support.

My limited exposure to Food For Thought as a volunteer delivering vegetables has been positive. It seems like a very organized and active organization. It is a good thing if all of us can be remunerated well. It would uplift the whole economy. I will continue to support the Food For Thought mission in my own limited manner. Daniel O.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Barry:

[A wacco member who is a very reputable local business owner that I know personally asked me to post this. She does not want to join the discussion but did want to pass on her comments. - Barry]

I've been a Food for Thought volunteer for many years and expect to continue for as long as there is a need. I admire and respect the leadership, staff and volunteers for unwavering commitment, absolute integrity and amazing work on behalf of people living with HIV and AIDS. There's no doubt about it, Food for Thought is a community treasure that deserves our respect and support.

---

It is a very tarnished treasure now, run by greedy, cold hearted bureaucrats, the love and compassion of the place have been replaced with avarice. Wayne

Attempts at character assassination and personal attacks, particularly against such well-loved and respected members of our community as Ron and Rachel, say infinitely more about the attacker than they do about the intended targets.

Thank you for posting this, Larry. I would add Doug, too, a remarkable man, so loving and so deeply loved in our community.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Larry Robinson:

Attempts at character assassination and personal attacks, particularly against such well-loved and respected members of our community as Ron and Rachel, say infinitely more about the attacker than they do about the intended targets.

---

...

I think the Moody Blues had it right - It's a 'Question of Balance'. I can understand your love of 'free speech'. But isn't it also true that in a free society free speech goes hand in hand with 'responsibility'! Free speech does not mean one can just put someone or something down without context, facts and reasons. Usually free speech refers to ideas and expression of one's beliefs and not negative ranting without explanation and reasoning. If one needs therapy, best not to do it at someone else's expense and in the public forum. Daniel O.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by haolegirl52:

we all cherish those most beloved in our communities, yet everyone is entitled to voice their opinion and experience that may differ from someone else's. often, the anger expressed translates as grief expressed at the loss or subtraction of a feeling or emotion---the magic, if you will----of what once was, or the sense of "family" or "community" that once initially brought a client or a volunteer to this particular doorstep. what is often seen from the outside can radically differ from the experience of being under a roof, day to day, or week to week....once the masks are unveiled, the truths revealed and the unsavory-ness exposed, the experience changes for some and gets to be communicated. often, looking in from the outside only reveals the prettiness and kindness that is held to surface, when in reality, those in question might just be human after all---complete with their capacity for ugliness, cruelty and the abject underhandedness that all of we humans are capable of, once our underbellies are exposed...thank god for freedoms of speech...

---

...

I looked through the 990 quickly and it didn't look out of line to me. Ron makes about $93k, but I think most directors of anything are overpaid and it doesn't seem out of line with what directors make. Hell, school principals make at least 110,000-I think that's way overpaid too - and summers off (don't get me started). . At least 30% of the revenue goes directly to food and clients. And if we're talking program expenses as a whole, they look to be about 90% vs mgt and fundraising. I don't think they are top heavy with employees. They have 10. And I bet most of them are part time.
That said, I also must say that I am a long time volunteer. I love the organization. And with that said too, I am not going to get into any arguments so if people disagree with my interpretation of the 990, express away but I am not going there so don't expect me to reply. I hate that niggly stuff that goes on here.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Dixon:

The points about the duplicity of "Fraudster Alert" are well taken. Having said that, I'll also say that I'll never give a penny to any "nonprofit" if I know that someone there makes anywhere in the neighborhood of $100,000 per year. If they think they need that much money, let them work in a for-profit company and get their money by selling a product or service, rather than spending donations meant for charitable causes on a bloated materialistic lifestyle. Anybody who thinks their "need" for a six-figure income trumps the need for the donations to be spent to help those in real need is suffering from a bad case of greed. There are plenty of dedicated, competent people who can run a nonprofit without pocketing that much of the money.

Does anyone know if the figure cited by Fraudster Alert--"...they're spending less than 25% of their "revenue" on those nutritional needs"--is accurate? I tried to look up Food For Thought on Charity Navigator, but they haven't assessed them yet (there are too many charities for them to cover them all). Any charity that doesn't spend the majority of its income on the stated mission instead of on "administration" etc., is not a good bet to donate to. As Charity Navigator puts it: "...in most cause areas, the most efficient charities spend 75% or more of their budget on their programs and services and less than 25% on fundraising and administrative fees." So again, does anyone besides Fraudster Alert (who has compromised his credibility) know what the percentages are for Food For Thought? Anyone from Food For Thought? Hello?

---

Meherc,

Thanks for your professional opinion about the 990. Good info. I worked as top administrative staff for a local non-profit, a major one, the ARC, back in the day. For three years. Don't even get me started about top exec pay and the non-profit corporate culture!

I haven't weighed in here, since I have no direct experience with, "Food For Thought". Just a comment about your comment about High School (or any other) Principals getting, "the summer off", based on my direct experience as a public school teacher.

I would say that the idea that public school staff get the summer off, is a misunderstanding of reality. Lots of work goes on during the summer. Administrative staff (Classified as well as Certificated.)

The idea that those folks get three months, or two and a half months, off for vacation, just ain't necessarily so. Even during regular school year breaks, the work load is such, that very little of it is spent relaxing. Hardest job I've ever done. Always more to do.

I'm no fan of hierarchy, and I think District level staffing and salaries are a problem. But, that's another argument.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Praksys:

Free speech does not mean one can just put someone or something down without context, facts and reasons.

---

sure it does. That's what's "free" about it.

Let's start calling it 'freeish speech'!
I beg to differ, so called; ‘free speech’ is not absolute. Even in law slander, inciting violence or crime, libel, and obscenity are considered exceptions to free speech. As an aside, I am also expressing my personal opinion that one should take responsibility for what one says. This is my moral opinion and not a legal one. As my grandmother used to say, “Sonny, if you don’t have something nice to say, don’t say it.” I admit I have had to compromise on this one by attempting to include something positive when bringing up a negative. It’s just my opinion. D. O.

(From Wikipedia)
In practice, the right to freedom of speech is not absolute in any country and the right is commonly subject to limitations, as with libel, slander, obscenity and incitement to commit a crime.

The right to freedom of expression is recognized as a human right under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and recognized in international human rights law in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

Article 19 of the ICCPR states that "… everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference" and "everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice".

Article 19 goes on to say that the exercise of these rights carries "special duties and responsibilities" and may "therefore be subject to certain restrictions" when necessary "for respect of the rights or reputation of others" or "for the protection of national security or of public order (order public), or of public health or morals".

..

The modern notion of 'free speech' is not absolute. This is the thread I'm following.
I still don't know what the person who who complained about Food For Thought is talking about. I am of the opinion that a person should take responsibility for what they say and where they say it. What do saints have to do with it?

Marilyn is a professional tax preparer (See her listing in the WaccoBB Business Directory here) so she has good visibility into people's earnings and organizational reporting.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by meherc:

I looked through the 990 quickly and it didn't look out of line to me. Ron makes about $93k, but I think most directors of anything are overpaid and it doesn't seem out of line with what directors make. Hell, school principals make at least 110,000-I think that's way overpaid too - and summers off (don't get me started). . At least 30% of the revenue goes directly to food and clients. And if we're talking program expenses as a whole, they look to be about 90% vs mgt and fundraising. I don't think they are top heavy with employees. They have 10. And I bet most of them are part time.

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Praksys:

I Free speech does not mean one can just put someone or something down without context, facts and reasons.

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by podfish:

sure it does. That's what's "free" about it.

---

As I've said before, Free Speech does not apply here. Should anybody else want to chime with criticism of Food For Thought or any of it's directors, please be sure to include:

• Your full real name
• Your experience with FFT (Were you an employee/volunteer/or client? Please explain how you know what you want to share)
• Exactly what happened, not just your judgment of what happened or your assessment of their character.

I also want to warn posters that such statements, if untrue, count as defamation per se, and expose you to a civil lawsuit.

Wow people, let's get a grip on reality now. What is the problem with Ron making what he does? He's been serving the community for a great portion of his life, and F4T is his baby! I feel he certainly deserves every penny he gets! (BTW, is that amount Net or Gross?) Sounds like there are a lot of jealous people out there that are only out of the money! Remember how many lives are saved (mine for one) due to F4T. How much would you consider a human life is worth? How about 10? How about 100? I would be 6 feet under by now if were not for F4T. I feel I'm worth $100,000 and actually a good deal more! I worked in the medical field all my life, and have seen people come and go due to this illness. God bless all the people there, the workers and volunteers! I am grateful and would donate my piggy bank savings if only I had the opportunity to do that... (yes pay for the workers.... after all, they must eat and sleep in a house too!) Let's get off our greed motives for a moment and venture inward to ask that perhaps Ron needs this amount for some unknown cause or reason. I don't feel this is overqualified pay for someone that devoted his entire life to helping others through charitable means!

I have a different autoimmune condition than yours, Seahorse, and am on disability for it. I asked F4T for help, and they said 'no', and they also said 'no' to a friend of mine with stage 4 cancer. This, while food was rotting in their garden. Literally. I saw it. It's great that you were helped - but you are not 'worth' more than the rest of us who also have illnesses, and cannot get healthy, organic produce from any foodbank.

All I'm saying is that in my opinion it would be ethical, with the amount of resources they have, to serve more clients - because they have more resources. In my mind, that is the only ethical thing to do. But obviously we have different opinions, because you were helped (and your life is worth over $100,000)...and I wasn't, so I'm chopped liver. ????

And please, don't tell me to go to a different food bank. There aren't any that get the kind of support F4T does, so they really are in a unique position to help more people - but are choosing not to. And that sucks. Well, for me it sucks.

So please try to put yourself in someone else's shoes - someone who is also very ill, but can't get help, and maybe see what that feels like. Stand outside their meditation garden and know that even though you're ill too, you're not allowed in. And wander through the gardens with kale, some of it going brown, wishing you too could have some. HIV is an awful condition - but to not help other people with autoimmune conditions? I mean, to not help people with Hep C, which is, at this point, has a lower survival rate than HIV? C'mon now. As Amy Poehler would say: Really???????

Times have changed. AIDS is no longer the death sentence it once was - so all I'm hoping is for F4T to broaden the scope of who they serve to include other illnesses that are just as devastating as having an HIV+ status (including conditions that have a higher mortality rate at this point).

H

PS: God I'm sick of this discussion. I really thought it was over. *Sigh*

Hello everyone at Food for Thought & Wacco Community,

I worked as a volunteer at FFT for almost a school semester, as I was also a volunteer at the school close by. Due to a conflict in my own time schedule that involved being accepted for new employment, it was necessary for me to stop volunteering at both places. I felt a little sad and frustrated, because I enjoyed my volunteer time at both places.

As a volunteer at FFT, I filled food orders, accepted paperwork at the front desk from clients, cleaned the bathrooms, weeded, built compost, and raked leaves in the beautiful garden, sometimes with Doug from OAEC, and fed the chickens. I worked at a fundraising event in San Francisco, by way of another generous volunteer who happily provided transportation over the weekend.

I found everyone at FFT to be welcoming, courteous, helpful, extremely humorous, generous and cooperative, with a genuine caring group attitude that created healthy community comradery in our work, playfulness and professionalism.

I grew up in San Francisco in a family whose parents worked hard and also served in their community as professional volunteers. My parents included my sisters and me in their volunteer work on a regular basis. I can't remember ever questioning our participation in volunteerism, with a large cross-section of organizations we valued. Because of my life-long experience in working as a volunteer, I am well aware of how disturbing and stressful it can be when people are dissatisfied with how the organization is run, or mismanaged. It shows up quickly in many ways. I found a remarkable absence of political/personal conflicts at FFT.

The most noteworthy and outstanding memories I have of being their volunteer, were how well everyone treated me, how hysterically funny their humor was, how respectfully people behaved toward one another and how kind they were to clients. Seasoned volunteers took a great deal of patience to train me and quickly extended an attitude of inclusiveness. I looked forward to all of the pleasant and rewarding experiences I had at Food for Thought. Everyone worked hard to do their fair share and then more, filling endless bags of groceries, and remaining on-task with whatever needed to be done.

It was touching to frequently hear the most tenderhearted and thoughtful expressions of generosity and warmth, spoken about many individuals and families whose orders we were filling. The bags of food were also brimming with our collective energy of caring thoughts, attention to particular likes and dislikes, so that people's needs were often met with a special and personal touch.

We took a group photo during the holidays which I recently came across while unpacking at my new home in Occidental. I will always treasure it. By the way, I experienced the Garden as a living source of inspiration, love, care, relaxation and joy. It holds a healing energy that has been planted deep and watered by caring souls. I never saw a weed that I needed to pull from the FFT Garden, called 'vanity'.

Thank you to the person who took the time and effort to do the research and help clarify the numbers being held up for scrutiny at FFT. I appreciate your professional way of presenting a more helpful perspective on this topic. And thank you Barry for upholding standards of communication on Wacco that support well researched facts & numbers, non-violent communication skills and truthful identities. I find it helpful when people truly care about the well-being of our community, and help educate us by comparing and contrasting information that is not commonly known. We are living in times when there will potentially be many more sensitive and important community topics that will be of great concern to the majority of us. It is my intention to participate in responsible discussions that are mutually respectful. I feel there is room for all who have concerns about anything, to contribute powerful opinions and voices, and still uphold respectful and inclusive language.

Throughout this discussion I have heard pain, disappointment and fear in the words of those who are very ill, who feel their personal needs for services, food and other resources are not being met. I want to acknowledge the feelings of the people who are without and who feel unseen and unappreciated. Please know that there are those of us who do indeed care and see the many challenges all illness can bring. My access to internet is limited, but I do know there are more community gardens being planted around Sonoma County, and perhaps someone may be prepared to donate land for more community garden space, or someone already has a surplus of home grown food to donate to those in need?

Thank you all for taking time to read my contribution here, and thank you everyone for your important contributions as well.

In peace & good health,
Phyllis Bala
Sacred Ground Occidental

I'm not going to write a long dissertation like some have. I just want to reinforce Hari's statement that for the amount of dollars F4T takes from our community, and the 500 volunteers they have, it would be nice if they would broaden the scope of I'll people to whom they provide healthy, life saving food. Particularly since they get most of their food free or at low cost, and have the ability to serve a larger client base of people with life threatening diseases.
Thanks for considering this point of view!
Big Bob

Personally, I think that any conversations about non-profits soliciting donations from their community is worthwhile--particularly when there is discourse in the air already...

As a recent former volunteer/employee of Food for Thought for a total of 17 years, I can tell you that dialogue about this very issue of serving other populations has already discussed amongst board and staff. One of the many problems this food bank has today is physical capacity; there are delivery days where you can barely maneuver through certain refrigeration areas and storage rooms in the building as it is—an issue that certainly would need addressing and rectifying before a project of serving additional populations could be formulated. The issue to consider first is how to insure that there is enough fiscal stability and building capacity in place to continue to serve the existing client base and the ever-growing population of new people coming in the door with HIV--which was, and is today, the original mission statement from FFT’s beginnings back in 1988. And, the need to upgrade the client menu selection to bring in healthier choices of healing and nutritious foods is imperative-- an expensive, but necessary task for FFT to consider in this economy--but a consideration that hopefully is still positioned and on their plate of "things to do"--sooner than later, I would hope, given the recent, most generous endowment from the estate of J. Russell Wherritt.

The subject of the gardens has been a contentious issue for years now. Is it a garden that provides enough real food year 'round for the population that they serve? Is there food rotting daily on the food bank’s summertime vines due to lack of daily harvesting? Is it honestly just a project that sustains the Calabash! fundraiser? Is it really, honestly utilized by clients on a daily basis for its original concept to be a "healing" and "nurturing" place for clients to experience when they visit? Or is it a vanity project and collaboration of good will with their friends at OAEC? Unfortunately, due to zero security measures, it has become a seasonal resting place/campsite for the creatures of the night in good weather months, including the homeless population from the Forestville trail, who eat and sleep in its lovely beds, and who bathe in the new, pricey memorial installation. It is also a garden for some of the surrounding neighbors to enjoy the bounty from—after hours, of course--- borrowing tiny new, plant starts at whim and helping themselves to tomatoes and hanging gourds from the fence line. Are these gardens actually feeding enough for the humans it serves? Or is it simply a pretty place unlike the often ugly, sterile and concrete food giveaway pantries? These are the questions that have come up for years now.

Maybe the bigger questions posed here are not about this particular non-profit having to be the one who needs to address and rescue other populations with life-threatening illness. Food for Thought came at a time when no one wanted to have anything to do with people who had contracted the virus. Sick people were stigmatized and could not, would not be served with the uninfected populous. So perhaps it’s time for those with the tenacity and skills to work on helping to create an FFT model where their passions lie.



Other agencies now, such as Ceres Project for example, have stepped up to the plate in their efforts to expand services and create sustainable gardens. The Food for Thought issues that have arisen as of late have more to do with deep dissatisfaction with internal issues: are there questionable administrative and ethical current practices? Should the current " leadership" that, in spite of making its significant mark in the community in the past, step down and should their Board consider re-thinking infusing new blood and new vision at the top from a pool of HIV/AIDS and management professionals, who could honor their grassroots beginnings instead of herding it into more of a "corporate structuring"? And, most importantly to many and to myself these days: at what point did FFT lose its true "heart" and soul?

This is a non-profit borne out of rich and humble beginnings, from a horrific time fraught with pain and loss from a mysterious "gay cancer". The survivors and those living with HIV were, and are today, some of the few hundred volunteers working their butts off each day, each shift, doing each and every aspect of literally running the day to day of getting food to the 425 active clients and client families--some of who, gratefully receive this food as their only groceries in a week, and most who have had to come to terms that this virus didn't discriminate between the gay and the straight population after all!
Although the gay community built this agency, they are now in the minority of those served. It is because of Food for Thought’s rich and emotionally charged, grassroots beginnings and the daily reminders of the "old days" of such pain and such enormous loss for those of us who lived it, that this little important food bank is now and will always be, under the community microscope for its every move. People remember. People struggle with change. People want honest answers to difficult questions. They don’t want to be lied to or bamboozled. They see through obvious and insincere damage control tactics when there is criticism from the community. They want to be an inclusive part of decision making. They want to not feel the obvious separation between the staff side and the volunteer/client side of the building. And, they always will. It is, and always has been, an integral part of the food bank’s DNA.

So now, in these posts and others, the swords have been drawn and old, unhappy issues have surfaced and people want to know: who is running the show over there, is the Board asking the right questions and truly "managing" the ED and his deputy, and importantly and again: why does it feel that the heart and the soul of the agency has been disappeared and deemed unimportant, while its grassroots history appears to be no longer significant?


The sad answer remains unknown. My sense is that it’s time for some big changes in a faltering leadership with obvious and questionable people managing skills. But that's just my humble opinion. Personally, I can only wish FFT well for the sake of the clients in need and in honor of the incredible volunteers who serve them.

Thanks for the thoughtful and thought provoking comments.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by lindasw:

Personally, I think conversations about any of our local non-profits that solicit support and funding from the community is not a bad or exhaustive conversation ...

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Barry:

I can't say whether Food For Thought is well run or not (but if they've got 500 volunteers they must be doing something right! And managing an organization with 500 volunteers is a significant task!)

However what I can say is that the person who started this thread is out of integrity. They registered as "Fraudster Alert". They replied twice under that username, which is fine. However they just registered again with the same email address as "Cornsilk" and "piled on" the original post, making it seem as though there are more people who share their opinion. :nono: I also have no doubt that the same person was responsible for the Craigslist post. They clearly have an axe to grind.

---

Thanks for the condescending scold. You clearly missed the point. I suggest you check your integrity.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by MandT:

Thanks for the condescending scold. You clearly missed the point. I suggest you check your integrity.

---

Before I reply, please clarify what point you think I missed. :waccosun:

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Barry:

I can't say whether Food For Thought is well run or not (but if they've got 500 volunteers they must be doing something right! And managing an organization with 500 volunteers is a significant task!)

However what I can say is that the person who started this thread is out of integrity. They registered as "Fraudster Alert". They replied twice under that username, which is fine. However they just registered again with the same email address as "Cornsilk" and "piled on" the original post, making it seem as though there are more people who share their opinion. :nono: I also have no doubt that the same person was responsible for the Craigslist post. They clearly have an axe to grind.

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by MandT:

Thanks for the condescending scold. You clearly missed the point. I suggest you check your integrity.

---

MandT, got back to me privately, essentially supporting the original complaint on this thread (which I mostly have no opinion on, but see below), and was upset that I challenged the integrity of that poster.

I stand by my response. Anybody who intentionally seeks to deceive and /or misrepresent something to this "conscious community" deserves to be called out and publicly shamed as both a "natural consequence" of their mis-deed and a warning to any others who might consider such a thing.

I'm not familiar with Food For Thought, but I have a few of comments of a more general nature.

First, while Food For Thought may have started as a very grass roots organization, it sounds like it has evolved beyond that at this point. That's OK. It sounds like a substantially larger organization, that serves more people than it was at first. Things grow and change. And believe me, I know first hand how people hate change, but change happens, often for good reasons.

Secondly, a larger organization needs a professional competent management. And while people may accept a lower compensation to both support the organization, as well accepting the good karma of their work as part of their pay, that has it's limits. If you need highly skilled, dedicated management you're going to have to, and should, pay for it, in my opinion.

Some of the complaints on this thread were from people who were not accepted into the FFT program for one reason or another. I can understand their disappointment, but FFT needs to put bounds around their services. They can't feed everybody who needs help for any reason.

Sounds like there is a opportunity for a new grass-roots organization to serve the people who are not being served by FFT. Perhaps some of the disgruntled people on this thread can get together and start one, especially if they think they can do it better than FFT!

Like I said, I'm not familiar with FFT, nor the actions of their management team. The complaints on this thread my be valid... or not.

I have had quite a lot of interaction with FFT for many years--perhaps a decade, maybe longer--and I have to say that I have never seen anything distressing, anything that makes me uncomfortable, anything that raises a red flag. I admire the organization and their work, feel they fulfill their mission with integrity, efficiency, passion and dedication and have expanded their reach in ways that make complete sense to me. The people with whom I have dealt--upper management--have been the epitome of integrity. From everything I've seen, they are one of the finest nonprofits around.

If these numbers published are part of the food bank's latest damage control tactics, perhaps they should explain how $48,000 for ''Administrative Costs' translates as 3% of the budget.

This is the first non-profit Annual Report that I have ever read that has neglected to include employee salaries---which in their case, translates to a tad more than their formally published administrative amount. Personally, their payroll amounts are not an issue for me. Everyone needs to make a living for the privilege of residing where we do. But, in the case of their internal issues and problems of the last few months and in what perpetuated the beginnings of these original threads, their officially published Annual Report should have been addressed honestly and thoroughly to dissuade anymore negative chatter about what's been happening over there.

Where in this Annual Report have they included the annual cost of payroll/salaries--in the food budget? And, why did did they not share the information about how many paid employees are really on the books? There are over 1600 non-profits with annual reports published in Sonoma County. Perhaps a little more research should have been done on what sort of template should/could have been followed. Pretty pie charts on a front cover are worthless if they reflect inaccuracies or hidden information.

People are not stupid. Perhaps the once-beloved food bank needs to start remembering how important it is to tell the truth to their donors, volunteers and clients. The Board needs to re-think and review information that they are receiving and decimate it accurately to the donating public---with an eye on what they actually allow to go to press.

The idea that F4T will never return to its former democratic grassroots paradigm is only bound to sadden those of us who remember its robust and familial days. The new corporate rigor, which now organizes F4T and runs a very tight ship, and does indeed bring change and unfortunately an increasing opacness ( the very expensive printed Annual Report heralding its leadership). The board, while polite, is simply uninterested in controversy or criticism legitimate or otherwise. One senses that the Board members have very little life experience understanding of clients or volunteers. Somehow the term 'Romany-ism' comes to mind. Criticism that is raised is slandered as bitter or irrational. F4T is no longer entertaining grassroots input. The new wealth which brings it to major status has significantly created a atmosphere of change. We agree that the loss of Linda SW was a major blow to many who support F4T. She was the front, heart and soul of that organization for years. Clever and brilliantly managed society events seem to be in synch with the Sonoma County lifestyle and a reflection of the future. Most clients and volunteers cannot afford these events and that is unfortunate, because it creates a class consciousness not in keeping with the original mission. One suspects this is the trend of upper management. God forbid anyone dare express criticism of the new direction, the new reality, for the avalanche of defense is daunting. As the editor of Wacco has commented--- success is the greatest defense of all and F4T is second to none in its class.. The old ethos is dying from a thousand paper cuts. One day free donuts are banned by fiat, the next day clients can no longer have protein power, and so it goes without discussion and condescending paternalism. Still, for all that F4T is unbeatable for its excellence and its past reputation. We just pray that it doesn't end up like Face To Face, an empty shell of a once glorious HIV organization---top heavy on expensive administration and thin on services.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Barry:

[A wacco member who is a very reputable local business owner that I know personally asked me to post this. She does not want to join the discussion but did want to pass on her comments. - Barry]

---

You are such a hypocrite, Barry... with a moral compass not worth of the Devil's minion. So your FRIEND doesn't have to sign her name to her words.... YOU are allowed to be HER sock puppet.... but everyone else who has something to say but also something to protect, particularly those with whom u disagree, THEY are subject to public shaming and ridicule?!! What was it that your mother told you that made you think you were so high and mighty and special. Whatever it was - it was a lie!!

so, all we really have to do to have our "hidden agendas" and "private chit-chat" posted by barry is to be a "reputable business owner"--possible translation: pay dear barry for some ad space? be his personal banker?---well, it is barry's site after all, isn't it? his call, and all that...still, the rest are not given the opportunity to have their commentaries here cloaked in anonymity? hmmmm--yet others, who wish to not relinquish their true identity are relentlessly and arbitrarily "outed" for their attempts to voice their [usually negative] commentary. gee, this certainly smacks of nepotism and favoritism--let me re-read the by-laws here and get back to barry on this.... personally!...perhaps i can check out the pricing for some ad space while i'm at it...i want to make sure that i can someday fall under the 'reputable business owner" and "personal friend of barry" moniker so i can get barry to hide me too someday! or, can those of us who know the players on this threads start guessing at who "she", the FFT cheerleader is??!!! sent with big love.....:footstomp:....

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Barry:

[A wacco member who is a very reputable local business owner that I know personally asked me to post this. She does not want to join the discussion but did want to pass on her comments. - Barry]

I've been a Food for Thought volunteer for many years and expect to continue for as long as there is a need. I admire and respect the leadership, staff and volunteers for unwavering commitment, absolute integrity and amazing work on behalf of people living with HIV and AIDS. There's no doubt about it, Food for Thought is a community treasure that deserves our respect and support.

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Nancy M Prebilich:

You are such a hypocrite, Barry... with a moral compass not worth of the Devil's minion. So your FRIEND doesn't have to sign her name to her words.... YOU are allowed to be HER sock puppet.... but everyone else who has something to say but also something to protect, particularly those with whom u disagree, THEY are subject to public shaming and ridicule?!! What was it that your mother told you that made you think you were so high and mighty and special. Whatever it was - it was a lie!!

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by lindasw:

so, all we really have to do to have our "hidden agendas" and "private chit-chat" posted by barry is to be a "reputable business owner"--possible translation: pay dear barry for some ad space? be his personal banker?---well, it is barry's site after all, isn't it? his call, and all that...still, the rest are not given the opportunity to have their commentaries here cloaked in anonymity? hmmmm--yet others, who wish to not relinquish their true identity are relentlessly and arbitrarily "outed" for their attempts to voice their [usually negative] commentary. gee, this certainly smacks of nepotism and favoritism--let me re-read the by-laws here and get back to barry on this.... personally!...perhaps i can check out the pricing for some ad space while i'm at it...i want to make sure that i can someday fall under the 'reputable business owner" and "personal friend of barry" moniker so i can get barry to hide me too someday! or, can those of us who know the players on this threads start guessing at who "she", the FFT cheerleader is??!!! sent with big love.....:footstomp:....

---

Look at the energy you ladies are putting out....

The un-named person in this thread is NOT an advertiser and I wouldn't go so far as to call them a friend, but rather a fellow community business person. Neither of those non-attributes affected my decision to post their message of support.

What did affect my decision to post on their behalf (and allow them to be anonymous) was that they had something POSITIVE to say. Plus I knew who they were and I could validate that they were not a clone of an existing user to make it seem that there was more support than there actually was (as happened in this thread).

I'd be happy to offer the same service to others under the same conditions (Positive comments and I know they are real person that has not otherwise posted on the topic at hand).

It wasn't a matter if I agreed with them or not (I don't have an opinion on the subject of this thread).

It's really OK if the occasional good deed goes unpunished! :waccosun:

Here's what I posted:

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Barry:

[A wacco member who is a very reputable local business owner that I know personally asked me to post this. She does not want to join the discussion but did want to pass on her comments. - Barry]

I've been a Food for Thought volunteer for many years and expect to continue for as long as there is a need. I admire and respect the leadership, staff and volunteers for unwavering commitment, absolute integrity and amazing work on behalf of people living with HIV and AIDS. There's no doubt about it, Food for Thought is a community treasure that deserves our respect and support.

---

As someone who doesn't know any of you personally, and knows very little about the specific issues you're addressing re: the market, policies, etc., I will say this:1. My god this is getting ugly! Is it worth all the anger and stress? (Rhetorical question)2. If you meet the Buddha in the road, kill him. Wait. Hopefully y'all know that's just a book title. But I'd say the same thing re: "higher consciousness" in this area. If you have to say it, you're not really doing it.3. Barry, saying you only want 'positive' comments takes away from the possibility of having an actual discussion, along with the critical thinking that may entail. Is that what you meant? Because then, honestly, you are shutting a lot of people down. Having said that, you're the moderator, so.....you can do that. Maybe you meant 'helpful' rather than 'positive'? I don't know. Hari

...scratch slightly beneath the surface of the beautiful faces that front an organization, a beloved non-profit or a west county, progressive, cool and groovy online site "for the people" and you will see the unfamiliar dark underbelly that is not always shiny and pretty--or positive. welcome to the reality of humans on this planet...and in these days of atonement...
ps if your "hidden person" had something POSITIVE to say, what's to hide???
(see how silly the argument is, after all?)
big love back atcha!
welcome to the real world, kiddies!

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Barry:

Look at the energy you ladies are putting out....

The un-named person in this thread is NOT an advertiser and I wouldn't go so far as to call them a friend, but rather a fellow community business person. Neither of those non-attributes affected my decision to post their message of support.

What did affect my decision to post on their behalf (and allow them to be anonymous) was that they had something POSITIVE to say. Plus I knew who they were and I could validate that they were not a clone of an existing user to make it seem that there was more support than there actually was (as happened in this thread).

I'd be happy to offer the same service to others under the same conditions (Positive comments and I know they are real person that has not otherwise posted on the topic at hand).

It wasn't a matter if I agreed with them or not (I don't have an opinion on the subject of this thread).

It's really OK if the occasional good deed goes unpunished! :waccosun:

Here's what I posted:

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by hari:

. Barry, saying you only want 'positive' comments takes away from the possibility of having an actual discussion, along with the critical thinking that may entail. Is that what you meant?

---

I think you misunderstood me. What I said was that I accept anonymous positive comments from people that I knew weren't otherwise participating in the discussion.

I most welcome "actual discussion", and especially and "critical thinking", from members that have registered their real names, and thus take personal responsibility, on their WaccoBB profiles.

I, and I think the community at large, have a limited capacity for negativity and attacking. My hope is that having the person's real name attached to their comments will help mitigate the negative volume. I reserve the right ask (or force, if need be) someone to stop posting, especially after they have stated their case and it just becomes more of the same.

Agreed, Barry. The fact that the thread title was negative, and a judgement (there is no absolute definition of 'scam', after all).....would make any comment after that sound negative, when maybe it was just critical. So maybe just changing the title would help....

Is this even about FFT at this point though? (Again, rhetorical)

Not-hiding-Hari

the very first and most important step would be to review the spelling of APPROACHING...:heart: [Fixed! Thanks! - Barry]

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by hari:

Agreed, Barry. The fact that the thread title was negative, and a judgement (there is no absolute definition of 'scam', after all).....would make any comment after that sound negative, when maybe it was just critical. So maybe just changing the title would help....

Is this even about FFT at this point though? (Again, rhetorical)

Not-hiding-Hari

---