The WSB-TV article addressed a number of important points that are commonly mis-understood about the Humane Society of the United States:

• The Humane Society of the United States has little to no affiliation to local shelters and local Humane Societies, despite having a name that leads to the convenient but mistaken identification of the HSUS as the parent organization.
• Only a small percentage of donations made to the Humane Society of the United States are granted to local shelters and Humane Societies. In 2007, less than 6 million dollars were handed out as US grants out of over 152 million* taken in (less than 4%*). Of the almost 4%, a large percentage of the grants were handed out to organizations that did not provide direct care to animals in need.
• After Hurricane Katrina, Humane Society of the United States fundraising efforts raised 34 million dollars. By 2 years after Hurricane Katrina, only 52% (18 million) could be accounted for as spent on Katrina-related activites. The connection between reconnecting animals with their owners, the premise for the Hurricane Katrina fundraising, was tenuous at best for a number of the projects indicated as supported by Hurricane Katrina funds. As of the 2 year mark, funds related to the Gulf Coast began to make a shift to HSUS legislative goals again.
• Channel 2 attendance at a local HSUS meeting found the 2 hour discussion to be dominated by activist planning and lobbying efforts. This impression was confirmed as accurate by Cheryl McAuliffe, Georgia Director for the HSUS. Ms McAuliffe also confirmed that all budgeting was directed from the Humane Society of the United States Washington headquarters

By Friday morning, there was a response from HSUS CEO Wayne Pacelle claiming WSB-TV had used discredited source information from the Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF). It is difficult to understand how Mr. Pacelle can take the position that the CCF information has been discredited when it is able to be verified independently using HSUS IRS documents and HSUS press releases. Mr. Pacelle also indicated that all funds raised for the Hurricane Katrina crisis have been spent helping Katrina families and pets, yet this is also established as dubious, based on HSUS press releases. (unless introducing items such as cock-fighting bills are counted in this position) By Friday evening, all links to this ground-breaking and courageous article had disappeared from the WSB-TV website.

Yet, the most interesting result of the investigation is a point not (yet) pursued by WSB-TV. Is the HSUS in compliance with requirements to maintain its 501 (c) 3 tax-exempt status? According to Cheryl McAuliffe, Georgia Director for the HSUS, activist and lobbying efforts form the bulk of her activities. Yet, according to IRS 501 (c) 3 regulations:

“In general, no organization may qualify for section 501(c)(3) status if a substantial part of its activities is attempting to influence legislation (commonly known as lobbying). A 501(c)(3) organization may engage in some lobbying, but too much lobbying activity risks loss of tax-exempt status.

Legislation includes action by Congress, any state legislature, any local council, or similar governing body, with respect to acts, bills, resolutions, or similar items (such as legislative confirmation of appointive office), or by the public in referendum, ballot initiative, constitutional amendment, or similar procedure. It does not include actions by executive, judicial, or administrative bodies.

An organization will be regarded as attempting to influence legislation if it contacts, or urges the public to contact, members or employees of a legislative body for the purpose of proposing, supporting, or opposing legislation, or if the organization advocates the adoption or rejection of legislation.”

Yet the Humane Society of the Unites States dedicates a significant amount of resources to its efforts to introduce and influence legislation as demonstrated by the portion of its website tracking HSUS legislative efforts at the state and federal levels as well as through ballot initiatives.

This raises an important question. With an income of over 152* million annually, is the IRS being cheated out of substanial revenue if the Humane Society of the United States is not in compliance with the 501 (c) 3 charitable organization requirements? The HSUS claimed involvement in 140 legislative bills at the state level in 2008 alone, has claimed credit for a great deal of legislation in 2009 and publicly acknowledges ‘urging’ assorted legislators on a variety of bills.

It seems fishy to me & I simply don’t understand why the mainstream media doesn’t find it interesting as well.

Copyright 2009 by Erica Saunders http://AR-HR.com
All rights reserved

*CORRECTION: Originally stated 200 million should have referred to HSUS assets. HSUS 2007 gross income was just over 152 million. Percentages have been corrected to reflect this.

This mis-understanding regarding the involvement of the HSUS in care  for companion animals doesn’t just exist in the general public but even government organizations, a point aptly demonstrated by this quote from the director of Wayne Co. Animal Control Services (NC), “”I can’t, in good conscience, euthanize any of those animals simply to make space for these dogs when I know the Humane Society of the United States can find good homes for each of the animals seized from Thornton’s Kennels”  If the people who work in Animal Services don’t understand the work of the HSUS, why are the general public blamed for not understanding?

Why wouldn’t a reasonable person believe that a group called the Humane Society of the United States was affiliated with funding Humane Societies across the US?  Especially with statements like the following from a recent HSUS membership renewal pack:

• On the HSUS “About Us” page: “We are the lead disaster relief agency for animals, and we provide direct care for thousands of animals at our sanctuaries and rescue facilities“
• The HSUS Emergency Shelter Funding Reply Form:  “to help fund essential programs such as purchasing pet carriers, collars, leashes, food and water bowls, and to provide immediate shelter for animal displaced by floods, fires or other disasters, or wherever help is needed most” (mail-out item)
• The HSUS Disaster Rescue Relief Reply Form: “to help fund essential programs such as buying animal handling equipment, enabling HSUS Disaster Rescue Teams to safely and humanely rescue animals in danger as a result of floods and other disasters, or wherever help is most needed” (mail-out item)
• The HSUS Emergency Medical Relief Reply Form: “to help fund essential programs such as paying for medical attention for an abused animal confiscated in a cruelty case, or where help is needed most”.  (mail-out item)
• The HSUS End Animal Suffering Reply Form: “Please use my gift where it is most needed to help save the animals from senseless pain, cruelty and abuse.”
• From the cover letter (mail-out item, page 1 and page 2)

“It’s so hard to believe….
that over 4,000,000 dogs, cats, puppies and kittens die each year simply because no one loves them….”

“Whatever level you’re able to renew (plus an additional $1.00 to help us offset increased operating costs, such as fuel, shelter and medical expenses….”

“And please remember that we are doing all that we can to reach out to the public- especially children- to help them understand the need to protect all animals from suffering, abuse and exploitation.”

Sincerely, Wayne Pacelle

Look at the key words that are present in these fundraising items: direct care, rescue facilities, immediate shelter, medical attention, medical expenses, leashes, water bowls, pet carriers.  Don’t forget the dog & cat picture that comes with the donation request and the message on the back, “What little sweethearts they are!  Please keep their picture in a safe place, as a beautiful reminder of why it is so important to put a stop to suffering and cruelty”   Where are the words “legislation”,  ”lobby”, “public policy” or even “lawsuit”?  Why is the HSUS not trumpeting these efforts when soliciting funds?  Why are HSUS State Lobbyists given the title Director or Economist instead of proudly proclaiming the title that describes the majority of their day-to-day efforts?   

Deception doesn’t just occur by outright falsehood, it also occurs through inference & mis-direction.  By definition, inference is defined as ” the act of passing from one proposition, statement, or judgment considered as true to another whose truth is believed to follow from that of the former.  When it comes to HSUS fund-raising material, inference is the name of the game.  

Copyright 2009 by Erica Saunders   http://AR-HR.com
All rights reserved

The WSB-TV article addressed a number of important points that are commonly mis-understood about the Humane Society of the United States:

• The Humane Society of the United States has little to no affiliation to local shelters and local Humane Societies, despite having a name that leads to the convenient  but mistaken identification of the HSUS as the parent organization.
• Only a small percentage of donations made to the Humane Society of the United States are granted to local shelters and Humane Societies.  In 2007, less than 6 million dollars were handed out as US grants out of  over 152 million* taken in (less than 4%*).  Of the almost 4%, a large percentage of the grants were handed out to organizations that did not provide direct care to animals in need.  
• After Hurricane Katrina, Humane Society of the United States fundraising efforts raised 34 million dollars.  By 2 years after Hurricane Katrina, only 52% (18 million)  could be accounted for as spent on Katrina-related activites.  The connection between reconnecting animals with their owners, the premise for the Hurricane Katrina fundraising, was tenuous at best for a number of the projects indicated as supported by Hurricane Katrina funds.  As of the 2 year mark, funds related to the Gulf Coast began to make a shift to HSUS legislative goals again.
• Channel 2 attendance at a local HSUS meeting found the 2 hour discussion to be dominated by activist planning and lobbying efforts.  This impression was confirmed as accurate by Cheryl McAuliffe, Georgia Director for the HSUS.  Ms McAuliffe also confirmed that all budgeting was directed from the Humane Society of the United States Washington headquarters

By Friday morning, there was a response from HSUS CEO Wayne Pacelle claiming WSB-TV had used discredited source information from the Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF).  It is difficult to understand how Mr. Pacelle can take the position that the CCF information has been discredited when it is able to be verified independently using HSUS IRS documents and HSUS press releases.  Mr. Pacelle also indicated that all funds raised for the Hurricane Katrina crisis have been spent helping Katrina families and pets, yet this is also established as dubious, based on HSUS press releases. (unless introducing items such as cock-fighting bills are counted in this position) By Friday evening, all links to this ground-breaking and courageous article had disappeared from the WSB-TV website.

Yet, the most interesting result of the investigation is a point not (yet) pursued by WSB-TV.  Is the HSUS in compliance with requirements to maintain its 501 (c) 3 tax-exempt status?  According to Cheryl McAuliffe, Georgia Director for the HSUS, activist and lobbying efforts form the bulk of her activities.  Yet, according to IRS 501 (c) 3 regulations:

“In general, no organization may qualify for section 501(c)(3) status if a substantial part of its activities is attempting to influence legislation (commonly known as lobbying).  A 501(c)(3) organization may engage in some lobbying, but too much lobbying activity risks loss of tax-exempt status.

Legislation includes action by Congress, any state legislature, any local council, or similar governing body, with respect to acts, bills, resolutions, or similar items (such as legislative confirmation of appointive office), or by the public in referendum, ballot initiative, constitutional amendment, or similar procedure.  It does not include actions by executive, judicial, or administrative bodies.

An organization will be regarded as attempting to influence legislation if it contacts, or urges the public to contact, members or employees of a legislative body for the purpose of proposing, supporting, or opposing legislation, or if the organization advocates the adoption or rejection of legislation.”

 Yet the Humane Society of the Unites States dedicates a significant amount of resources to its efforts to introduce and influence legislation as demonstrated by the portion of its website tracking HSUS legislative efforts at the state and federal levels as well as through ballot initiatives. 

This raises an important question.  With an income of over 152* million annually, is the IRS being cheated out of substanial revenue if the Humane Society of the United States is not in compliance with the 501 (c) 3 charitable organization requirements?   The HSUS claimed involvement in 140  legislative bills at the state level in 2008 alone, has claimed credit for a great deal of legislation in 2009 and publicly acknowledges ’urging’ assorted legislators on a variety of bills. 

It seems fishy to me & I simply don’t understand why the mainstream media doesn’t find it interesting as well.

Copyright 2009 by Erica Saunders   http://AR-HR.com
All rights reserved

*CORRECTION: Originally stated 200 million should have referred to HSUS assets.  HSUS 2007 gross income was just over 152 million.  Percentages have been corrected to reflect this.

In 2007, the HSUS granted $5,632,209 to organizations and individuals across the US, yet 59% of that money went to only 3 states: Louisiana, Mississipi and California. 

• California received $1,456,420 with $1,360,000 of that going to the organization Californians for Humane Farms which operates out of the Sacramento, California HSUS office.  (93% of funding for lobbying efforts)
• Louisiana received $1,204,625.  Half of that ($600,000) went to Skip Bertram at the Louisiana State University Veterinary department,  and the overwhelming majority of remainder was spread to Humane Societies and Animal Control departments in chunks ranging from $30,000 to $10,000. 
• Mississippi received $1,240,900. Mississippi State University Foundation received $900,000.  Again, the overwhelming majority of the remainder was distributed in large chunks ranging from $50, 000 to $10,000 to Humane Societies, Animal Control Departments and Rescues.

If we use Californiaas a guide, 2007 was the year in which the groundwork was being laid for the “Great Egg Fight of 2008″ otherwise known as Proposition 2.   Consider the financial leverage exerted by the Humane Society of the United States when the HSUS threw its weight and funds into the fight in support of Californians for Humane Farms (CHF), when HSUS and CHF are the same organization.

So, it stands to reason that a similar percentage (90%) of the funding to the similarly funded states was intended for political purposes.  In 2007,  the $900,000 grant  to Mississippi State University was for a Spay/Neuter program assisting in the HSUS spay/neuter mandate.   In addition to the focus on spaying and neutering of pets, 2007 marked the beginning of the continuing HSUS focus on using dog-fighting  as a means of leveraging support for changes in legislation, with the attention focused in the states of Louisiana and Mississippi.  2007  was where the HSUS began to enjoy success in its push for pet-related legislative changes:  California, Louisiana and Mississippi were the test cases. 

Is this part of the reason that the indicated 34 state push for legislation  to be occurring so early in 2009?  Will the 2008 tax information provide documentation of the massive amounts of money being funnelled into generating support from cash-strapped animal control departments and rescues?  How many of these groups could use an extra $10,000 – $50,000 in their budget, especially in the current financial climate?  How many could stand to lose the same amount from their budget through not supporting the HSUS legislation as presented?

Copyright 2009 by Erica Saunders
All rights reserved  

hsus-grants-analysis

hsus-2007-grants-analysis