>To me (probably as to most people) giving to charities is not only about doing something good but it brings a personal satisfaction (not sure if this is the right term though, but you understand). When I was growing up (raised by my mother of very modest means - she was a factory worker) I remember every week someone (some hasidic Jew) would stop by our apartment and my mother would give them some money. And she would always say that no matter how little you have, somebody has less and we should help. So it kind of got ingrained in me that one must give. So my wife and I give two or three grand every year to various charities. One of the charities, homeless shelter, is not shy reminding us (at least once a week) of the money they need. Recently I looked them up on the Charity Navigator rating and see that the principal of the charity is making about $160K and his wife about $60K. And together they are in about 15% of total expense. Then I looked up another homeless shelter in our area and their principals make about the same (a little less) but because they raise much more money the % of expense is much lower (about 1.5%). So I am wondering, should I drop the more "expensive" charity in favor of the one which puts more money into the programs? Do you think it is reasonable that a principal of a charity makes a lot of money (at least by Obama's standards - I had to get this one in {g}).?

I doubt that the principal salary is always a good indicator, though a 6-digit looks like a warning sign to me.
The organization where I am working partizipates in United Way Pledge compain that provides the list of charities, to which I can give money directly. While making preliminary research on candidates I can understand better where my donation goes, and how they (probably) use it.
Other than that, when giving money to others to manage them, you never know exactly whether it is for good, and not for a profit for some "professional" managers.