My two cents and intuition… it may be a fixated nutter but I think it is much more personal then someone who feels they have been wronged for health insurance for family.
Pre-planned usually implies that the plan was put together before the need existed, so that you could pull it off the shelf when you needed it.
For example, you’ve got a plan for how to manage your funeral arrangements. You make this plan well in advance, so that when you actually die, the planning doesn’t have to happen, because it was all “pre-planned” and someone just has to execute the plan.
Probably not applicable to this shooter, unless he just happened to put together a plan for shooting a CEO in his spare time in case he ever needed it.
Who is running it? This reminds me of CEO pay for various non profits CEO of American red cross 700K. Which isn’t that high for a big organization. CEO of Salvation army something like 200K. Recently I had a conversation with a logistics person with Operation Smile Canada in the Bogota airport. We were waiting from same plane to Toronto. We both flew economy. Stuff like that makes me want to give to a charity. That and she was on fire for the work she was doing.
I Canada the system generally pays the surgeon a flat fee for the surgery. So the surgeon has an incentive to maintain productivity. Anesthesia fees are determined generally by the length of surgery so somewhat out of anesthesia’s control. It seems to work okay. Anesthesia docs can make extra money by doing things like pain control clinic etc.
The American Red Cross is one of the most sophisticated response organizations in the world. Leading that group for $700k is a bargain. Cliff Holtz could earn $100,000,000 in the promise sector.
Executive salaries need to be large enough to attract the right talent and to make it worthwhile for them to take the job. It’s not a bad thing to have competitive pay to get the right people.
On where to choose to donate, you could decide that by how much a charity gives to the cause, vs. other purposes. Some of those large orgs could still use your dollars.
I use Charity Watch. I also look at the 990’s before I make a donation. There is not a charity listed on your link that I give to because of those 7 figure compensations. I want my dollars to impact the target, not the one asking for the donation.
Which is of course self defeating if those salaries are (a) a small fraction of the funds raised and (b) necessary to attract the talent getting the donations to effectively impact the target requires. There are several good methods of assessing the “bang for buck” a charity generates. That’s a better focus that the top few salaries they pay. There are hundreds of thousands of useless charities out there that would satisfy what seems to be your main criteria.