A lot of "legit" charities use creative accounting. The "efficient" ones spend a lot on their Program Services and not much on Fundraising. So instead of printing brochures for fundraising, they'll print brochures full of useful information about their cause, and conveniently have the address so you can mail in a donation - probably a self addressed return envelope too. They do the same thing with employee costs. The Executive Directors will typically spend the majority of their time fundraising, but they'll say they're spending all of their time running the program and educating. Cancer Fund was just too far over the top to get away with it.
There are some that are well run and efficient. I don't think the Salvation Army enriches their top executives as much as you'd expect considering how big they are. The local leadership is certainly not in it for the salaries.
In the early 1990s William Aramony was the CEO of the United Way (google him). He was running a scam and was convicted of fraud. The local United Way chapter then acted like they were totally independent and tried to distance the local United Way of Greater Knoxville from the national organization that they were joined at the hip with. I hated the way they'd be in bed with local business leaders and shake down employees every year with their pledge cards. I was lucky that I worked in a couple of places that stood up to them and wouldn't allow them to apply their high pressure tactics to the employees.
The Love Kitchen has been a very good charity. I hope that with Ellen Turner's passing and Helen Ashe in her middle 80s that their outstanding work carries on for years to come.
Unfortunately it takes money for just about any organization to be effective. The Boys and Girls Clubs do a great service... but their Executive Director would be considered highly compensated and rich relative to all but maybe 1% of the population.
I'm sure that Bill Gates' foundation has many highly compensated managers. However, for what that group does, it's worth it.