I can understand why people have a declining view of nonprofits given recent scandals.

1)Black Lives Matter https://www.law.com/corpcounsel/2022/04/06/controversy-puts-cloud-over-companies-donations-to-black-lives-matter-nonprofit/?slreturn=20220517071912

2) Red Cross https://www.propublica.org/article/how-the-red-cross-raised-half-a-billion-dollars-for-haiti-and-built-6-homes

3) Wounded Warrior Project https://www.military.com/daily-news/2019/08/09/after-public-crisis-and-fall-grace-wounded-warrior-project-quietly-regains-ground.html

4) Clinton Foundation https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/420131-feds-received-whistleblower-evidence-in-2017-alleging-clinton-foundation/

I am not getting into the validity of these claims, I am pointing out that in today's world facts and reality have no bearing on what people believe, and if a nonprofit is embroiled in a scandal, it colors opinions on the entire sector.

I think that for some the feeling is that becoming a nonprofit is mainly a tax avoidance scheme. When the idea of tax exemptions for nonprofits was first proposed, the idea was to provide some assistance to entities such as soup kitchens, orphanages and other social service organizations in their work. Nonprofits were supposed to be organizations run purely out of a desire to help humanity and the govt. wanting to promote that, supported them by removing them from their tax burdens.

But now we are seeing that some nonprofits are growing so large as to rival major corporations in revenue and assets and are in a position to pay their fair share. These giant nonprofits do not need the assistance that tax exemption provides and should not even be considered in the same category as the nonprofits that own and operate rail museums. Even the largest rail history nonprofit is but a pauper compared to these mega nonprofits.

So when the average person creates an opinion about how much they trust the nonprofit sector, I don't think that the little rail museum down the street run by volunteers comes to mind. What comes to mind is how the Red Cross raised all that money for Haiti and built 6 houses, or how the Clinton Foundation was characterized as "pay to play" or more recently why BLM bought houses with some of their donated millions. These scandals, like it or not, color public perception of the nonprofit sector and cause the increase in negative attitudes. I doubt very much that they even thought of the little rail museum down the street when responding to the surveys.

Several non-profit railroad museums do take in quite a bit of money though.

B&O = $4.5 M
TVRM = $5.4 M
California State = $2.4 M
IRM = $4.6 M
NC Transportation Museum = $3.6 M


When it relates to my post above it's interesting to note that IRM and TVRM are in the lead financially. So I'm not sure these executive director salaries are worth anything personally ;)

A couple things: the change the tax code which can encourage the taking of the standard deduction for middle class people rather than itemizing may have left many who made donations assuming it would be of benefit that turned out not to do them any good may have soured the somewhat. And, I have known several nonprofits who have had paid and unpaid management staffs - In some cases - the majority - those without paid executive help could have greatly benefited by having a paid staffer who knew nonprofit management to handle the technicalities. Not saying that all unpaid leaders were incompetent, just many of them were better versed in restoration or operating skills than fiscal. Of course, I've known some paid staff who had similar characteristics also..... but your mileage may vary. the Alaska project and Richard Glueck's demonstrate that paid leadership isn't necessary by their success, but i could name many more that suffered from not having the right people - paid or otherwise - in leadership positions. It isn't money wasted unless you make the wrong choice, in which case you're demonstrably incompetent also. Just sayin'.....

Based upon the errors and speculation contained in prior posts, I had two choices:

1.) To note the errors and correct them with appropriate substantiation, which based upon prior experience would meet with some contradiction offered by someone based upon something they heard from some guy at the Dead Horse Gulch and Northern.

2.) Offer some peripheral indignity with only tangential relevance to the matter at hand, whatever that is, i.e. join in..

As I said, not interested in being a woodpecker in a petrified forest (anymore).

Pro Tip: If you are still on Farcebook, you clearly don't understand "it's free and always will be" means you are the product, not the customer.

Besides, "that's for old people, like my parents".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uo0KjdDJr1c

It was 60 years ago, you know when a new car was easily had for $1500, that the closest thing to "a billion here, a billion there and pretty soon you are talking real money" was stated by then Senator Everett Dirkson.

Five mil is chump change these days.

I have no clue what point you are attempting to make.

I do.

I lived in Baltimore and am intimately familiar with the B&O Railroad Museum.

I looked at that and said "If they're ONLY taking in $4.5 million a year--and that would have to include charging for special events in the roundhouse--they're in trouble......."

Based on their own tax returns, for four consecutive years between 2015-2018, the B&O was running in the red anywhere from $87K to as much as $923K each year. Of the ten years running 2010-2019 they have only been in the black for four of them, those profits ranging anywhere from $1.5M to 52K.

Net income for the previous decade was $426,639, so they did come out in the black at the end, despite some clearly (and one very) bad year.

I won't speculate on the frankly (in my opinion) absurd salary paid to their executive director, or on the management strategies and policies that ran them in the red for four years... BUT, they've kept their doors open, and managed some fine restorations over the years, and have come out ahead financially. Additionally, since they appointed their new director in 2018, they seem to have stayed in the black. So, they must be doing something right with "only" $4.5M.

Just my take.

Speaking of the B&O Museum. Remember when the B&O Museum privately raised money to build a stables for the Baltimore Mounted Police unit only to have the city defund the unit? Looks like the City may have to pay the full cost of that structure even though they don't now want to use it.

https://www.baltimorebrew.com/2020/06/22/baltimore-could-face-unintended-cost-following-councils-cut-of-the-mounted-police-unit/

Fortunately the Museum's contract guarded against that, but would the failure of City Govt. to follow through on their end of the deal affect future development efforts undertaken by the museum? The nonprofit could get a black eye from this debacle although they did everything right and worked in good faith.

I think the original post in this thread has to clarify what a "non-profit" is. I don't think there is any value in comparing our railway groups to the various "Go Fund Me" groups that very often are political lobbying organizations.

So what DO people consider an appropriate salary for the head of a museum?

That's hard to say, Ed. In the professional world you tend to get what you pay for. Someone especially talented who does a good job as a museum director may well be worth six figures.... nearly a quarter million seems high to me. But that salary is also part of a contract between the employer and the employee, and for those involved parties to negotiate. They know more than I do about that, maybe a quarter million a year is fair compensation, maybe not, what more can I say?

In the USA a “non-profit” is - “ A non-profit organization is a group organized for purposes other than generating profit and in which no part of the organization's income is distributed to its members, directors, or officers.“

And “For federal tax purposes, an organization is exempt from taxation if it is organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, public safety, literary, educational, prevention of cruelty to children or animals, and/or to develop national or international sports.”

From Cornell Law school.

It's not private information between an employer and an employee. It's public information. The reason it is public information is so that people like you and me can look at how an organization operates and decide where to give our money (donations).

For me, based on the financials that I see on paper as well as the actual work that I see done when I visit... IRM is by far the best place to donate my money. That's my personal decision of course and your mileage may vary.



Well.. this is a tricky question to answer. Ideally, a non-profit is run by dedicated volunteers. If there are no capable volunteers ready to lead the organization, there may be some other issues that need to be addressed.

The amount of compensation is public, but the negotiations and decisions behind how much any organization pays an employee are not. We know that the B&O executive director is paid $243,000 a year, but we do not know how the employer and employee came to agree to that amount.