"It's the toughest of the bunch, rating more than 500 charities on a scale of A+ down to F. Because it disregards certain, potentially suspect, expenses and donations, it fails some nonprofits that the other raters approve."

– Newsweek

"The American Institute of Philanthropy is the pit bull of watchdogs. Its staff members dig deeper than most other overseers, going to state and federal records to get information that charities do not volunteer, honing in on program efficiency and exposing abuses.”

“The National Cancer Coalition…shows up as a star performer on Charity Navigator, but gets an F at the more forensically minded Charitywatch.org [AIP’s website]. Why? Philanthropic accounting is notoriously slippery and error filled. Charitywatch.org reclassifies things like telemarketing and direct mail costs that are frequently booked by charities as ‘program expenses,’ simply because the fund-raisers slipped in, say, an educational ‘don’t drink and drive’ remark during their calls.”

AIP “isn’t afraid to give charities a flunking grade if they spend too much on fundraising or have accumulated eye-popping reserves.”

[AIP President Daniel Borochoff's group] has unearthed accounting chicanery aimed at achieving a higher ranking. For example, groups report lower fund-raising costs, and lower costs per dollar raised, by reassigning fund-raising costs to program expenses. This can be accomplished by including some sort of advocacy message in fund-raising materials: A veterans group sending out fund-raising letters might encourage the flying of American flags in the same missive.

“The American Institute of Philanthropy's rating standards are generally considered the sector's most stringent.”

“Watchdog organizations, such as the American Institute of Philanthropy, provide an important public service as it is quite difficult to distinguish the money pit from the effective organizations simply by analyzing the direct mail sent by public interest organizations.”