Caveat Emptor! The board for the Wounded Warrior Project fired CEO Steven Nardizzi and COO Al Giordano over controversy that the WWP needed to restructure the way it spends the money it raises. Things aren’t looking good for the nation’s largest veteran charity. According to its 2014 tax return, the organization spent $26 million in conferences and meetings, money that could have been spent to care for wounded vets.

As I noted in “A Wounded Warrior Warning?” in May 2015:

While WWP expenditures appear to qualify under the legal parameters for 501©(3) nonprofits, only about 55 cents of every dollar WWP takes in goes to direct benefits for a wounded warrior. We have no objection to WWP’s considerable efforts to raise funds, but it should raise questions when such a large percentage of donations fail to make it to our wounded warriors.

My recommendation?

The growth of veteran support organizations since 2001, some of them worthy of your investment, is as viral as those surprise military homecoming videos — and most of those organizations are appealing to similar sentiments.

Of course, no American Patriot would oppose supporting veterans, particularly those who have suffered severe injuries. I know more than a few of them, and The Patriot Post has helped build several houses to accommodate the needs of severely injured warriors.

But, when organizations pitch strong sentimental appeals asking for your money, whether those appeals be for starving children in Africa or disabled Veterans at home, caveat emptor.

When investing your dollars to support veterans, seek out good third-party evaluations to determine how much of those dollars will actually support that mission, and choose one where at least 75% of revenues do just that.

By the way, Donald Trump doesn’t support veterans either. For example, he tried to get the vets peddling wares to make ends meet kicked off the street around Trump Tower.