There is an art to turning a tactical win into a strategic victory, and we need to start thinking about how to do that now. The Komen Foundation will continue to exist and to raise money, and in six months or a year their politically motivated defunding of PP will be forgotten by many people. We need to help people make the decision to donate directly to Planned Parenthood instead of Komen based on the good each organization does. Our mission should not be to only sway potential donors over this one incident, but to help potential donors make their decision wisely. To do that, there is a set of data we need - and that I haven't seen side--to-side anywhere else. It may be out there, perhaps even in one of the many diaries I haven't seen because I can't spend the whole day reading DK, but the factual ammunition we need should be the topic of a diary by itself.
So here's the info I will need to encourage someone to donate directly to Planned Parenthood instead of Komen:
What is the percentage of funds used for administration versus actual health care by each organization? This is not as simple a number as it might seem, because if an organization like Komen raises money and gives it to another organization, and each organization has administrative costs, the net effect is lessened. For instance, if Komen raises $100.00, spends $20 on administration, and allots $80.00 to another organization that also takes $20.00 for administration, only $60 of that $100.00 is available for healthcare.
I have seen numbers tossed around about Komen's administrative overhead, but never with a side to side comparison with Planned Parenthood. Thanks to anybody who can provide them.