>However, from the American Institute of Philanthropy’s Charity Watch on 24 August: "The Clinton Foundation is an excellent charity... they are able to get 88 percent of their spending to bona fide program services and their fundraising efficiency is really [good]. It only costs them $2 to raise $100."
>
>I don't know where you get your information from but it most certainly does not agree with what I have seen:
>
>http://nypost.com/2015/04/26/charity-watchdog-clinton-foundation-a-slush-fund/
>http://thefederalist.com/2015/04/27/in-2013-the-clinton-foundation-only-spent-10-percent-of-its-budget-on-charitable-grants/

I can answer the second just from the headline. Most foundations with famous people's names on them are pass-thrus. They simply choose other charities to donate to. But the Clinton Foundation actually does work, so yes, they only give away 10% to other organizations, but that's because they're spending most of the money on programs they run.

http://www.factcheck.org/2015/06/where-does-clinton-foundation-money-go/

As for it being "a slush fund," none of the Clintons is paid by the foundation. Someone posted the 990s (that's the equivalent of a 1040 for a 501(c)(3)) in a FB group I belong to the other day. They listed board members and how much they're paid, and Bill, Hillary and Chelsea are paid nothing. OTOH, Bill and HIllary have given over $23M to charity between 2001 and 2015, much of it through their two foundations. You can read the details here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/what-we-know-about-the-charitable-giving-by-hillary-clinton-and-donald-trump/2016/08/25/1b261400-6a30-11e6-ba32-5a4bf5aad4fa_story.html?postshare=5921472146192860&tid=ss_tw

Tamar

Tamar