There are many that of a system whereby you make a telephone call then
they automatically snag money from you. Now some of them seem very
deserving, but I would dearly love to know how much of that money goes
to the nominated cause. Not much I would think, as they have the adverts
to pay for as well as salaries of well paid executives. I believe that
the law should force them to declare how much actually goes into the fund.

On 13-Dec-17 3:52 PM, Broadback wrote:
There are many that of a system whereby you make a telephone call then
they automatically snag money from you. Now some of them seem very
deserving, but I would dearly love to know how much of that money goes
to the nominated cause. Not much I would think, as they have the adverts
to pay for as well as salaries of well paid executives. I believe that
the law should force them to declare how much actually goes into the fund.

It does. Every charity has to prepare annual accounts and to make them
available on request.

You can check what percentage of income any given charity spends on the
cause he

http://www.aliveandgiving.com/

--
--

Colin Bignell

On Wednesday, 13 December 2017 15:52:24 UTC, Broadback wrote:
There are many that of a system whereby you make a telephone call then
they automatically snag money from you. Now some of them seem very
deserving, but I would dearly love to know how much of that money goes
to the nominated cause. Not much I would think, as they have the adverts
to pay for as well as salaries of well paid executives. I believe that
the law should force them to declare how much actually goes into the fund.

Maybe you can find out from the websites acciosaited with the charity.

The TV channel might give specail, rates to charioties or they might be able to claim it back on or against tax.
AS for excutives it would depend how much they get, but if yuo;re organising large sums of money and peolpe you do need someone that knows about such things, I doubt those that work in the local oxfam would be able to do those jobs.

Broadback submitted this idea :
There are many that of a system whereby you make a telephone call then they
automatically snag money from you. Now some of them seem very deserving, but
I would dearly love to know how much of that money goes to the nominated
cause. Not much I would think, as they have the adverts to pay for as well as
salaries of well paid executives. I believe that the law should force them to
declare how much actually goes into the fund.

My own favourite point of contention. Save the jaguar, save the donkey,
save the elephant. One even had the cheek to ask you to text some
ridiculous amount to them. £199 I think it was. Hundreds of spurious
seeming charities seeking money, like you I would like to see their
accounts.

Then there are the door to door chuggers pestering for money,
professional chuggers and much of what you might pay will be claimed by
them.

On Wednesday, 13 December 2017 16:49:20 UTC, Nightjar wrote:
You can check what percentage of income any given charity spends on the
cause he
http://www.aliveandgiving.com/

However that doesn't show how much the charity gets from particular fundraising streams after the cost of fundraising.

It's been discussed before that street direct debit chugging may not get the charity any money in the first year or worse, and the lotteries run by external lottery organisers might only pay the charity 20% of the ticket take.

Owain

And the fluffy toys and or the information they give you about your polar
bear or whatever.
I personally find most of those commercials appear on the cheaper to
advertise channels and more during the day when granny is watching feeling
sorry for the cuddly tigers. The famine and need of drinking water for
humans appear at tea time to help you feel guilty, and most of the rest seem
to be any time.

To be honest if you could be sure the gov matched what you sent, then fine
but I've had cause to donate to one of the get drinking water to African
villages ones in the past them what happens? These people move on and the
water stays where it was and then they have no water again. No joined up
thinking wastes money.
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Broadback" wrote in message
news
There are many that of a system whereby you make a telephone call then
they automatically snag money from you. Now some of them seem very
deserving, but I would dearly love to know how much of that money goes to
the nominated cause. Not much I would think, as they have the adverts to
pay for as well as salaries of well paid executives. I believe that the
law should force them to declare how much actually goes into the fund.

On 13/12/2017 16:49, Nightjar wrote:


It does. Every charity has to prepare annual accounts and to make them
available on request.

But a lot of money is collected by third parties who pass on very little
to the charities. Charities may report how much they spend in their own
fund raising but it doesn't necessarily tell you that the £5 they
received from a third party company ABC is a result of the public giving
£1 million.

You can check what percentage of income any given charity spends on the
cause he

http://www.aliveandgiving.com/

Again this doesn't necessarily give any indication of the spend related
to the money the public thought they were giving to the charity but was
in fact spirited away before the charities actually received it. It
doesn't necessarily show how much is spirited away by corruption in the
countries receiving the funds.



--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 13-Dec-17 10:36 PM, alan_m wrote:
On 13/12/2017 16:49, Nightjar wrote:


It does. Every charity has to prepare annual accounts and to make them
available on request.

But a lot of money is collected by third parties who pass on very little
to the charities. Charities may report how much they spend in their own
fund raising but it doesn't necessarily tell you that the £5 they
received from a third party company ABC is a result of the public giving
£1 million.

You can check what percentage of income any given charity spends on
the cause he

http://www.aliveandgiving.com/

Again this doesn't necessarily give any indication of the spend related
to the money the public thought they were giving to the charity but was
in fact spirited away before the charities actually received it.

I knew the chief accountant of one of the large charities that uses
third party collectors. He told me that, while some of the money does go
to the third party, the charity would have had to pay out more to get
the same amount through their own collection efforts, so more of the
money given by the public actually got to the cause. OTOH, the fund
raiser of a much smaller charity I used to donate medical equipment to
said that, as their fund raising was essentially her, a volunteer,
telephoning businesses, the economics of third party collection simply
didn't work.

It
doesn't necessarily show how much is spirited away by corruption in the
countries receiving the funds.

I was under the impression that most charities working overseas sent
goods, rather than funds. However, that does not mean that all the goods
get where they are going. Some charities, such as Against Malaria
Foundation, have very robust controls and independent auditing to ensure
they do. Others may not have such close control. I would expect that
emergency aid was the area where it was most difficult to exercise close
control.


--
--

Colin Bignell

On Wednesday, 13 December 2017 17:31:02 UTC, Brian Gaff wrote:
And the fluffy toys and or the information they give you about your polar
bear or whatever.
I personally find most of those commercials appear on the cheaper to
advertise channels and more during the day when granny is watching feeling
sorry for the cuddly tigers. The famine and need of drinking water for
humans appear at tea time to help you feel guilty, and most of the rest seem
to be any time.

Yes that's true and a lot get sent via the old postage system.


To be honest if you could be sure the gov matched what you sent,

Remind me where the govenment gets it's money from, I donlt want the govenment doing charity work.

then fine
but I've had cause to donate to one of the get drinking water to African
villages ones in the past them what happens?

I guess it depends who you;'re paying.

I've asked chuggers and door to door collectors collecting for these causes why I should go against the will of God, and they look at me with a puzzled expression, so I say well if God wanted these people to have clean water then surely being all powerful he'd supply it in the form or rain but for some reason he chooses not to, so do you expect me to go against his wishes..
Of course this only really works with the those of religious leanings collecting for whatever cause.

"Nightjar" wrote in message
...
On 13-Dec-17 10:36 PM, alan_m wrote:
On 13/12/2017 16:49, Nightjar wrote:


It does. Every charity has to prepare annual accounts and to make them
available on request.

But a lot of money is collected by third parties who pass on very little
to the charities. Charities may report how much they spend in their own
fund raising but it doesn't necessarily tell you that the £5 they
received from a third party company ABC is a result of the public giving
£1 million.

You can check what percentage of income any given charity spends on the
cause he

http://www.aliveandgiving.com/

Again this doesn't necessarily give any indication of the spend related
to the money the public thought they were giving to the charity but was
in fact spirited away before the charities actually received it.

I knew the chief accountant of one of the large charities that uses third
party collectors. He told me that, while some of the money does go to the
third party, the charity would have had to pay out more to get the same
amount through their own collection efforts, so more of the money given by
the public actually got to the cause. OTOH, the fund raiser of a much
smaller charity I used to donate medical equipment to said that, as their
fund raising was essentially her, a volunteer, telephoning businesses, the
economics of third party collection simply didn't work.

It doesn't necessarily show how much is spirited away by corruption in
the countries receiving the funds.

I was under the impression that most charities working overseas sent
goods, rather than funds.

And its far from clear how many of the goods do
get used for what they were intended to do, and
how many are unsuitable and just end up unused.

However, that does not mean that all the goods get where they are going.
Some charities, such as Against Malaria Foundation, have very robust
controls and independent auditing to ensure they do.

And that involves considerable cost that doesnt
end up with those who are supposed to benefit
and just provide a job for someone in the charity.

Others may not have such close control. I would expect that emergency aid
was the area where it was most difficult to exercise close control.

And ends up with lots spent on fancy 4WDs
for the hander outers to hoon around in.

In article ,
Harry Bloomfield wrote:

Then there are the door to door chuggers pestering for money,
professional chuggers and much of what you might pay will be claimed by
them.

We're now getting chugged at our local filling station: every
transaction you are invited to "Donate 25p to charity? Press Yes or No"

(This is the local air ambulance.) I always press No.

I think I might change filling stations. (except ... they will all be
at it soon)

John