Published Wednesday, Sept. 3, 1997

`Questions raised in shelter's fund raising`

By Karen Coates
Herald Staff Writer

While the Humane Society of Mercer County is raising funds to help build an animal shelter for unwanted dogs and other strays, questions have been raised over the way the campaign is being conducted.

A former employee of the telemarketing company hired to raise about $80,000 for the project and a potential donor have concerns about the tactics being used. But the company's owner and the society's officers say the campaign is on the up and up.

Ultimate Visions Fundraising and Marketing recently took over the campaign from S & G Marketing, said Gerda Widmyer, head of the society's board of directors and a 25 year-member. The company is owned by Emily Gramsky, previous co-owner of S & G.

In a letter to The Herald dated Aug. 14, Denise Chambers, a former telemarketer for Ultimate Visions, wrote of her concerns about the campaign. ``... the residents and businesses of Mercer County have a right to know that not `every' penny of their donation or membership fee acquired in this way is going into this shelter fund.''

Miss Chambers said she quit the company because of misgivings she had about the firm. She said that when she phoned potential donors, she identified herself as a member of the society when she was not.

``I gave the `impression' that I was calling from the Humane Society,'' she wrote. ``When in reality I was employed by a local telemarketing fund-raising company.''

But she was not the only one with complaints about the campaign.

Roberta Knauff, owner of Rob's Pets and Supplies, Hermitage, said she was willing to donate when she was contacted by what she believed was S & G, but was more cautious when she received another phone call from a new solicitor.

Mrs. Knauff said Mrs. Gramsky identified herself as helping with the society fund-raising because S & G was no longer involved.

Unaware that Mrs. Gramsky was a telemarketer and not just a ``member'' of the society, Mrs. Knauff said she was hesitant about sending her donation to a residential address.

``The red flags were raised,'' Mrs. Knauff said. ``I refused to send a donation to her (Mrs. Gramsky's ) home.''

Both representatives from the Humane Society and Mrs. Gramsky, however, said the concerns are unwarranted.

Emily Gramsky of Ultimate Visions Fundraising and Marketing said claims made by former Ultimate Visions telemarketer Denise Chambers were unwarranted because Miss Chambers was fired from the firm. Ms. Chambers alleged telemarketers misrepresented themselves as members of the Humane Society and said she quit the job.

Ultimate Visions is the telemarketer for the Humane Society's fund-raising campaign.

Mrs. Widmyer said potential givers are being told that the society has changed telemarketing firms for the annual fund-raiser.

Both Mrs. Widmyer and Mrs. Gramsky said the society broke its contract with S & G more than a month ago because of a difference of opinion between Mrs. Gramsky and S & G co-owner David Shipton on running the campaign. Shipton declined to comment.

Since it began soliciting funds in July, Ultimate has raised a total of $7,397 toward a goal of $80,000.

Mrs. Widmyer, Mrs. Gramsky and Humane Society President Tammy Treimer didn't want to go public with the amount of money being paid to the firm for each donation that it secures. If donors want to know how donations are being split, Mrs. Widmyer said, they must call her to find out.

She would only reveal that the amount paid to the telemarketer is less than half of each donor's pledge to the society.

The rest of the money, depending on the donor's wishes, would be put toward the construction of a small, $40,000 shelter on Bend Road in Jefferson Township or for veterinary or operating costs, she said.

``I'm trying to do something good here,'' Mrs. Gramsky said, adding that raising funds for the society was difficult in the past.

Unlike other telemarketing firms, which Mrs. Gramsky claims charge 80 to 90 percent of pledges, Ultimate is getting ``little'' profit because of her long-term relationship with the society, she said.

According to New York Better Business Bureau representative Javier Currais, the 80 percent to 90 percent figure is close to what telemarketers usually keep for their services.

In a 1994 report by the New York Attorney General's Office that studied how telemarketers profited from running campaigns for charitable organizations, only 102 of 584 telemarketers gave 50 percent or more of the funds to the charity.

Currently, Mrs. Widmyer said, the only money coming into society coffers is from the telephone fund-raiser and donations, such as litter and food, from residents and businesses. ``Very few people donate,'' she said.

RELATED STORY

Back to TOP // Herald Local news // Local news headlines // Herald Home page

Updated Sept. 15, 1997
Questions/comments: herald@pgh.net
For info about advertising on our site or Web-page creation: advertising@sharon-herald.com

MERCER COUNTY

Questions raised in shelter's fund raising

`Questions raised in shelter's fund raising`