Charities - overhead vs programs

Recommended reading, economic debates, predictions and opinions.
WishingWealth
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 6701
Joined: 27 Feb 2005 10:53

Post by WishingWealth »

Charities admit fundraising mess

Another story from The Star.
..
Two prominent Canadian charities – Sick Kids Foundation and World Vision Canada – have admitted to using a discredited fundraising technique and are moving swiftly to clean up their act.

Each has been using commission-based techniques frowned upon in the charity world because they can lead to aggressive tactics. When canvassers get paid only if you donate, there's a tendency to embellish or even lie – anything to close the deal and sign up a donor to a monthly giving plan.

Both charities have long told the public and the federal regulator that only flat fees were paid to fundraisers who knocked on doors. The Star investigated and found commissions or "success payments" have been paid for years.

...

At Sick Kids Foundation the cost of management has almost doubled from just over $2 million a couple of years ago to $3.7 million in 2006.

Salaries are a big part of that. O'Mahoney is paid $612,000 a year and there are three vice-presidents each earning roughly $200,000 a year.

Those are unusually high salaries for a Canadian charity, particularly O'Mahoney's. The president of World Vision Canada, Dave Toycen, earns a salary of $175,000 to run a much larger organization that (unlike the Sick Kids Foundation which just raises funds) delivers services overseas and in Canada, and also fundraises.

O'Mahoney's salary is higher than that of the president and CEO of Sick Kids hospital, who is paid $563,061.56 to run the entire hospital.
After Enron, Lord Black, cheating at exams :wink: , such a story doesn't get much traction.
Crooks can go on crooketeering; people have become blasé.

WW
WishingWealth
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 6701
Joined: 27 Feb 2005 10:53

Post by WishingWealth »

Charity's ploy 'horrifying'
In The Star.
Give $150 to save the life of a Canadian needing an organ transplant.

That's the message being aggressively telemarketed to millions of homes nationwide by a Toronto-based charity called the Organ Donation and Transplant Association of Canada.

Tens of thousands of Canadians moved by the emotional pitch have pledged their hard-earned money. "It's about saving a life," the telemarketer says, promising donations will "go towards providing a much needed organ to someone who desperately needs it."

The problem is, the donations do not save lives. Of the roughly $4 million the charity has told the federal Charities Directorate it raised in the last three years, the majority was spent on telemarketing, office expenses and other unknown items. Only $410,000 (about 10 per cent) has gone to transplant research. There are no doctors, organ donors or transplant recipients on the charity's board of directors.

...
Why shoud those bizzness wizards refrain when the masses keep handing out monies like automatons.
And governments overwhelmed by the thought of even looking into the task of cleaning up the whole thing.
Creative (or not) destruction: That would be a start.

blondeWW
User avatar
kcowan
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 16033
Joined: 18 Apr 2006 20:33
Location: Pacific latitude 20/49

Post by kcowan »

WishingWealth wrote:...
And governments overwhelmed by the thought of even looking into the task of cleaning up the whole thing.
Creative (or not) destruction: That would be a start.

blondeWW
I think the government should demand that a minimum percentage of the funds raised must go to the claimed purpose. Clearly 10% does not cut it.

If the charity falls below 80% they lose their designation.
For the fun of it...Keith
Knowsitall
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 1492
Joined: 21 Feb 2005 19:00
Location: St.john's nl

Post by Knowsitall »

Catholic Charity is by far the best but keep it at the local level.

My RC Parish has a monthy collection envelope ATTN(ASSISTANCE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD) AND EVERY CENT GOES TO HELP THOSE IN NEED IN THE CITY.

We do not have any overhead or administation expenses.

Over the past five years we have dstributed well in excess of 150.000 dollars to those in need regardless of color creed etc.
------------------------------------------------------------

Moonman says'All Human beans are not crooks)
blonde
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 3250
Joined: 19 Feb 2005 13:43
Location: Calgary area

Post by blonde »

Study the SYSTEM/S.

Do not be surprised to learn that DO-GOODERS have their own informal process designed to 'slick' the money...it is mandatory to investigate these DO-GOODERS first...anytime there is MONEY in a pot, there is the 10-15% skim for the top-dawg as a starter...the food-chain is loaded with yabutt-ers willing to count the cash. Hmmm!! I wonder why???

There will always be Mega-Money for the taking when a slogan is designed to do what that slogan is designed to do...mega creativity abound...take mega while the taking is available is the 'culture'...

Giving to 'charity' is a good thing providing it starts at home and stays at home.

Don't Trust Anyone and more important Look After #1.

BTW, trust me, believe me.
Sometimes the questions are complicated and the answers are simple...Dr Seuss

Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind...Dr Seuss
User avatar
parvus
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 10014
Joined: 20 Feb 2005 16:09
Location: Waiting for the real estate meltdown on Rua Açores.

Post by parvus »

the esteemed blonde wrote:
There will always be Mega-Money for the taking when a slogan is designed to do what that slogan is designed to do...mega creativity abound...take mega while the taking is available is the 'culture'...

Giving to 'charity' is a good thing providing it starts at home and stays at home.

Don't Trust Anyone and more important Look After #1.
Bravo! Standing Ovation! Take a Bow! 8) 8) 8)

I was going to to respond perkily to WW with some blondisms, but wasn't getting anywhere with my thoughts about how charity has become big business rather than a simple selfless act of helping, through the philanthropic contribution of time, brains or (least importantly) assets.

In my own instance, I get annoyed when every year the Toronto police association phones asking for a tithe donation to send a kid to the ball game. I always say no.

Sometimes the UCS telemarketer asks why, often accusing me of not caring about poor children. Curious way to run a shakedown public appeal. (Running through my head always is the fact that a constable makes more than me, so do it on your own overtime dime instead of expecting a mordida from me, fella :P ).

Once, I said if it were worth doing, it would be worth doing with stable funding from taxes. The telemarketer blew a head gasket, angrily responding that taxes are too high (and the fees raked in by serial charity entrepreneurs underpaid public-spirited fund-raisers aren't? :roll: ).

Next time they call, I may take the high road and say, instead of taking a kid to the ball game, why don't you volunteer some time, or hell, put it into summer school, so poor kids have more career choices in mind than winning the lottery of being sports stars or rap moguls. Bean-counting has its attractions. (Though, come to think of it, if they actually saw a non-steroid-enhanced ball game, they might learn how to wear a ball cap properly. :lol: )

Hell, you might even consider diverting money from the single-biggest line item in the municipal budget to, gasp, public health, in-school parenting programmes and child care centres. :shock: (Naw, that may lead to a reduction of peace officers required in the future. :twisted: )

Then again, the TPA are a dull-witted lot; their great idea for PR during an election campaign was to plaster the subway system with posters of latino gang members supposedly interested in whom people voted for (Norm Gardner, step on down).

How's that for earning community trust. :wink:
Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muß man schweigen — a wit
Imagefiniki, the Canadian financial wiki Your go-to guide for financial basics
Image
tedster
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 8515
Joined: 27 Feb 2005 10:11
Location: Montreal

Post by tedster »

Knowsitall said
My RC Parish has a monthy collection envelope ATTN(ASSISTANCE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD) AND EVERY CENT GOES TO HELP THOSE IN NEED IN THE CITY.
Yes the people in need are likely the Parish Priests looking to buy something to lure young boys into the sacristy. Ot to pay their legal defense bills once caught.
Knowsitall
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 1492
Joined: 21 Feb 2005 19:00
Location: St.john's nl

Post by Knowsitall »

I am happy to report to you Tedster that no such charges have occurred in our parish which has since inception been served by the Jesuits.

A broad brush statment like that it what I expect to see from you.

For your information the money is handled by a group of lay people in the parish and yes I am one of the counter of that collection along with 3 others who open the locked bags which it is sealed into following our 3 weekend masses.We have the only key to the rather large lock on each collection bag and on Monday morning we open it and make up the deposit and take it directly to the bank.All of us sign off on the offical count and it is then given to the parish secretary for information of the clergy.

The ATTN committee of 6 make the decisions on disbursements of the funds to those in need at semi monthly meetings.

We do have a small food bank of non pershible supplies of food etc but access is restricted to the committee but our priest has every right to give from it.It has an inventory value of -3 thousand of mostly food hardly worthy of anyone stealing.

No system is perfect but we try.

As to sexual abuse of kids ,I find this horrific and they should castrate everyone who is involved in this terrible crime.

At least the RC church openly admits to this now and the slightest whiff immediately sends the police into action.I t is unfortunate such events took place in the church but they did and hopeful all have been caught.

You must have been hurt in some terrible way by the RC church to say such things as you did.
tedster
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 8515
Joined: 27 Feb 2005 10:11
Location: Montreal

Post by tedster »

knowsitall
am happy to report to you Tedster that no such charges have occurred in our parish which has since inception been served by the Jesuits.
Well that is good news. So, we are ''one down'' how many to go?
At least the RC church openly admits to this now and the slightest whiff immediately sends the police into action.
They do? and why doesn't th Catholic Church take action before the Police have to?

Actually, I was never hurt by the RCs except that I realized they were all BS. Thanks to two facts. 1: I was possessed of a brian. and 2: The Jebbies taught me to use it. How was I hurt? I was a little late in my ''epiphany'' However, The Catholic Church.. and to be fair, any other organized religion, are all a bunch of Money grabbers. Those who believe them are like you.
User avatar
AltaRed
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 33399
Joined: 05 Mar 2005 20:04
Location: Ogopogo Land

Post by AltaRed »

tedster wrote: However, The Catholic Church.. and to be fair, any other organized religion, are all a bunch of Money grabbers.
Actually they are businesses designed to milk the system and feed the heirarchy. It is just that the RCs have had the well oiled machinery in place for a longer time and are better at it than anyone else.
User avatar
parvus
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 10014
Joined: 20 Feb 2005 16:09
Location: Waiting for the real estate meltdown on Rua Açores.

Post by parvus »

Speaking of charities and misguided messages ...

One of my boon companions died recently, leaving his gorgeous sister alone in my keep (or on my shoulder, depending on her mood). I haven't figured out yet whether Ethel is lonely without Fred, but I certainly miss having two squawking cats scrambling around here at my feet. In time, I will get another cat or two for company (primarily, I suppose, for me and DW, but maybe also for Ethel too; that may take some significant how-do-you-do time).

What I find curious is that the Toronto Humane Society advertises a lower kill/euthanasia rate than the City of Toronto's Animal Services. So, don't you think I'm going to be more motivated to adopt one of the City's wee forlorn beasties over those at the Humane Society? Jumpin' bejeez, talk about a (hopefully only potential) dead cat bounce. :roll:
Last edited by parvus on 06 Aug 2007 11:13, edited 1 time in total.
Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muß man schweigen — a wit
Imagefiniki, the Canadian financial wiki Your go-to guide for financial basics
Image
YogiBear
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 1482
Joined: 20 May 2006 20:13

Post by YogiBear »

tedster wrote:I was possessed of a brian. [emphasis added]
You were? A Brian? No problem for me, but perhaps the RC attitude to Tedsters and Brians together would help explain your antipathy to the RC church ... :wink:
tedster
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 8515
Joined: 27 Feb 2005 10:11
Location: Montreal

Post by tedster »

yogi said
You were? A Brian? No problem for me, but perhaps the RC attitude to Tedsters and Brians
You are right, typing with two fingers doesn't help. Please read ''Brain'' in lieu of ''Brian''. Apologies to all Brians.
Jo Anne
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 3648
Joined: 19 Feb 2005 21:33

Post by Jo Anne »

parvus wrote:In time, I will get another cat...
I can FedEx Hank to you.
User avatar
parvus
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 10014
Joined: 20 Feb 2005 16:09
Location: Waiting for the real estate meltdown on Rua Açores.

Post by parvus »

Jo Anne wrote:
parvus wrote:In time, I will get another cat...
I can FedEx Hank to you.
:)
Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muß man schweigen — a wit
Imagefiniki, the Canadian financial wiki Your go-to guide for financial basics
Image
WishingWealth
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 6701
Joined: 27 Feb 2005 10:53

Post by WishingWealth »

@ The Star: http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/664804
Ottawa targets rogue charities
Tough new guidelines in wake of Star exposé make it easier to revoke charitable status
July 12, 2009
Kevin Donovan

Charities that use the bulk of their donations on high-priced fundraisers, or lie to donors to get money, face tough new rules making it easier for the government to suspend or revoke their charitable status.

The guidelines, introduced after a year of consultation, attempt to bring order to the 83,000 charities in Canada, ranging from multi-million-dollar agencies run as corporations to groups run out of a kitchen.

The Charities Directorate, part of the Canada Revenue Agency, warns charities they must be honest with the public when asking for donations. Donors must be told what the money will be used for, and how much of it will go toward the cause.

A Star investigation found dozens of cases of charities lying to donors about how much of their donation goes to good works, and about what their charity does. Some charities claimed they were operating programs that simply did not exist. Others claimed most donor money went to good works, yet the Star found 80, 90 or more per cent of donations paid fundraisers.
...
RE: "Tough new guidelines in wake of Star exposé make it easier to revoke charitable status"
My opinion on this: Will NOT happen; that's BS.
The only way to solve that problem is to remove the charitable status for all charities - period. With a phase out time ex. 5 years.

But this too won't happen: So it is status quo all over.
The 10%ers and wannabe tenners can sleep tight.

WW

added
Last edited by WishingWealth on 12 Jul 2009 17:12, edited 1 time in total.
izzy
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 3019
Joined: 19 Feb 2005 19:06
Location: Winnipeg MB

Post by izzy »

Fundraising costs above 70 cents on the donor dollar will raise serious concerns with the watchdog and could lead to the charitable status being revoked.

The problem is obvious using simple math.If I donate $100 to a charity in response to a fundraiser and get a $40 tax refund but only $30 goes to the actual charitable cause ,why does government encourage my involvement at all?.It would be less expensive for them to simply send $30 directly to the charity and leave me out of it.
max88
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 475
Joined: 26 Oct 2007 21:29
Location: Toronto

Post by max88 »

izzy wrote:
Fundraising costs above 70 cents on the donor dollar will raise serious concerns with the watchdog and could lead to the charitable status being revoked.

The problem is obvious using simple math.If I donate $100 to a charity in response to a fundraiser and get a $40 tax refund but only $30 goes to the actual charitable cause ,why does government encourage my involvement at all?.It would be less expensive for them to simply send $30 directly to the charity and leave me out of it.
No offense but without the $40 government encouragement, your $100 donation will more likely become $60. So only $18 goes to the actual cause.
User avatar
SoninlawofGus
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 1284
Joined: 21 Aug 2007 12:10
Location: Ottawa

Post by SoninlawofGus »

I too have received the piles of literature, seen the ridiculous CEO salaries, the questionable CRA filings, and many of the issues outlined in this thread, but this strikes me as a particularly cynical thread. I'd like to shift some of the focus to those charities that people think are actually worthwhile; after all, 1 billion people remain below the poverty line and there is no shortage of unjustices in the world.

Upthread, Bylo mentioned his neighbor's charity. He liked that one. What is it? Similarly, James mentioned a friend keeping the books straight at a charity -- which one?

I'm not at all convinced by the "it isn't worth it" to find a good charity argument. That, frankly, is a very weak argument. I find much more logical the philosphical arguments laid out by Peter Singer in his book "The Life You Can Save." (For example, would you save a drowning toddler if it meant it would ruin your new suit?)

Recently, we've made contributions to Tabitha Foundation and Faith's Orphan's Fund. Both very small (collecting just a few hundred thousand Cdn according to the CRA). So small they could either be stealing our money or using it for very good things; I'm inclined to believe more the latter, but, like anything, we all have to decide who we should trust.
iluvnascar
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 1141
Joined: 25 Apr 2005 08:21
Location: London, Ontario

Post by iluvnascar »

I have established a charitable trust in the form of an endowment fund. Each year, I get to direct the income on the endowment to any charity that I choose. I've decided all available funds will go to support organizations whose purpose is to assist addicts (drugs and/or alcohol) with rehab and recovery.

There is far too little help available for these poor souls who find themselves addicted.
User avatar
chiaroscuro
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 3042
Joined: 09 Apr 2005 09:56
Location: SW Ontario

Post by chiaroscuro »

SoninlawofGus wrote:I too have received the piles of literature, seen the ridiculous CEO salaries, the questionable CRA filings, and many of the issues outlined in this thread, but this strikes me as a particularly cynical thread. I'd like to shift some of the focus to those charities that people think are actually worthwhile; after all, 1 billion people remain below the poverty line and there is no shortage of unjustices in the world.
It's called bashing, and you notice the same culprits at it, time after time. :roll: Their agenda is soooo transparent. When they don't like an entity, they do a "Sun" on it. Find the worst examples, and use that as a springboard for attack. Never ever do a thoughtful analysis of the entity as a whole.
Last edited by chiaroscuro on 13 Jul 2009 23:20, edited 3 times in total.
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen." ~~AE
WishingWealth
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 6701
Joined: 27 Feb 2005 10:53

Post by WishingWealth »

My charity giving is very close to home and it is direct.
The total givings is probably above average.
Apart from a bit of Church* giving, it is all non tax-exempt.

WW

* although an atheist/agnostic, I give to the church in order to help take care of the buildings and 'heritage' of the place.
User avatar
Quebec
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 1645
Joined: 24 Oct 2009 16:49
Location: Quebec City

Post by Quebec »

I'd like to shift some of the focus to those charities that people think are actually worthwhile
Here are the two organizations I give to every year:

1- Médecins Sans Frontières/Doctors Without Borders Canada

From their website:
"Our mandate concerns emergency relief (...) We launch our operations in areas where there is no medical infrastructure or where the existing one cannot withstand the pressure to which it is subjected. (...) For more than 35 years, we have been providing medical help to people caught in many kinds of catastrophes: armed conflicts, natural disasters such as floods and earthquakes, epidemics of disease, and famines. (...) At all times, MSF directs at least 80% of its revenue to fund its programme activities. A minimum of 80 cents from every dollar is spent supporting field operations"

Basically MSF sends teams of volunteers (medical doctors, nurses, ...) to places where there are huge temporary medical needs due to wars, natural disasters, etc. "with complete independence from political, economic and religious influences". To give an idea of the number of people involved: "In 2008, 143 Canadians departed on 172 field missions with MSF in 31 countries".

MSF's financial statements are audited by KPMG. In the statement of operations for 2008 we see that total revenue was $28.6m, of which $21.9m consisted of donations. As for expenses, $17.5m was spent on "Emergency, medical, nutrition and health projects" (mostly in Africa), $5.8m on other program services, $4.0m on fund-raising (14% of revenues) and $1.1m on "management and general" expenses (4% of revenues).

2- Fondation Autisme Montréal

From their website:
"The Fondation Autisme Montréal (FAM) was created in 1991 to help people living with autism and/or autism spectrum disorders (ASD) and their families by funding respite and leisure services to help organizations offering services to individuals with autism or ASD or developing new service projects for this clientele"

The largest expense of the foundation is a contribution to a summer camp for children with autism/ASD, known as the "Summer Respite Service". This camp "allows 140 participants to maintain the abilities acquired during the school year and live new experiences". While the number of participant may seem low, you have to realize that these children have special needs and a lot of staff are needed to run this camp, making it quite expensive relative to "normal" summer camp. The camp gets some govt funding but never enough to cover these costs.

There are no financial statements on the Foundation website and the CRA Charities website is down for the weekend for maintenance, so I can't provide any up-to-date financial numbers for this one. It's a small foundation though, with only 4 employees. The amount raised per year must be on the order of $100k. My wife used to work with autistic children in Montreal so this is how I know about this foundation.

Other considerations

I believe in concentrated giving: chose 1 to 3 charities and focus on them. Giving a few cents every time a bucket is held in front of you is pretty lame, and you don't know if the money will actually go to the cause. Also I think buying merchandise from a company just because a small fraction of the profits will go to a charity is a waste. If you really believe in the cause, just write a cheque and ask for your charitable donation receipt!
tedster
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 8515
Joined: 27 Feb 2005 10:11
Location: Montreal

Post by tedster »

I give to Centraide, the Mtl Gen'l Hospital, Auberge Madeleine, Sun Youth, Planned Parenthood. Used to give to the Sally Ann but stopped when they came out against women's rights over their own bodies.
Taggart
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 6893
Joined: 05 Dec 2005 07:34

Re: Charities - overhead vs programs

Post by Taggart »

Which charities spend the most on administration?

MoneySense ranks Canada’s 40 largest charities by what they spend on administrative expenses.

By Sarah Efron | From MoneySense Magazine, Dec/Jan 2010
Post Reply