We’ve compiled a list of twelve well-known environmental organizations that do the best job in handling their fundraising and supporting their causes. After all, when you put your money into something, you want it to pay off, and when it comes to the environment, you want to make sure that your personal beliefs and causes are being adequately supported.
Top 12 Environmental Organizations Who Use Their Donations Well
Top 12 Environmental Organizations Who Use Their Donations Well
This website is wrong!
At least one of the figures on this site is wrong - the RSPB has income of over 50 million pounds per year, several orders of magnitude greater than the "£88,294 generated in 2006" claimed on fundraiserinsight.org.
This is seriously lazy research - I got the 50 million figure from http://www.rspb.org.uk/about/facts.asp.
Sorry bullet_proof, but the RSPB is actually the wrong one
Actually, bullet_proof, the numbers that I quoted in this article couldn't be more correct. Your claim of "50 million pounds a year" is the one that's wrong. According to the RSPB Financial Controller, Tim Pons, the amount generated for charitable organizations was actually a little less than the 88,294 quoted in their financial statement, which is an ACCURATE representation of their money. In fact, when I contacted him in reference to your comment, he said, and I quote, "I concede that it is not a very accurate representation of our income!" So the research that went into the article was actually correct, it's the RSPB website that's wrong.
Great List but here is something else you can do daily

Click to Protect Endangered Habitat
(via www.therainforestsite.com)
All you have to do is go to this web site daily and click on one little button and a donation will be made.
The Rainforest Site is dedicated to the preservation of rainforests around the world. Your daily click funds the purchase of rainforest land by The Nature Conservancy, The Rainforest Conservation Fund, The World Parks Endowment, and Rainforest2Reef. These organizations work to preserve rainforest land in Ecuador, Mexico, Peru, Paraguay and other locations worldwide.
I am glad they are putting
I am glad they are putting the donations to good use. When I donate I want most of the money going to the cause not the pockets of the organization members.
My future donations will be to one of those organizations because they make good use of the funds they receive.
This is a great resource if
This is a great resource if your thinking of making a donation.
Questionable.
I've worked for one of the organizations on this list, and have worked for another environmental organization that I am very much disappointed NOT to see on this list.
For starters, the thing one must understand is this: a lot of these organizations, when they give you the breakdown of expenditures (programmatic/fundraising/campaigns, etc), do everything in their power to, essentially, fudge the numbers to make it seem like way more goes toward programming than fundraising activity. I'm not going to name names on here, but one of these orgs (the one that I worked for), is a particularly poignant perpetrator of this activity, as they do a good deal of their fundraising through a subsidiary/affiliate organization that was specifically created to take care of the "money stuff". Therefore, they can report that a LOT more money, percentage-wise, goes toward programming.
One group that I will name that I was surprised to see left off of this list is the League of Conservation Voters (www.lcv.org). While I think organizations like WWF and NatGeo do an excellent job raising awareness, I think it is ABSOLUTELY critical to engage the legislative process to create sound environmental policy. LCV uses lobbying and campaign activity to do just that and, given the current administration and, up until the 06 elections, the congress' attitude toward the environment, have a very impressive win record in doing so.
So I don't know. I guess my point is that looking at an organization's Web site and using their financial breakdown as a model for their effectiveness and worth is a fundamentally flawed method of going about a study like this.