COMBAT GOOGLE SUPPRESSION! For regular updates, please subscribe via RSS or email (r/h sidebar)

Sunday, September 30, 2007

Is that charitable trust trustworthy?

I have received another charity mailing, this time from the World Children's Fund. There's so many that I feel guilt at not being able to give to all. And aren't they well-presented these days?

But there's something about the name of this one - similar to other charities somehow. So I google it. Page after page on Google, each leading you directly to their site.

But now for blogpower! I look to see what my fellow bloggers say. Here's one, and it's most interesting. I say no more, since I have no money to fight in court.

I shall now add Elmer to my links, and the US charity evaluation site, Charity Navigator.

Another case where bloggers have proved to be useful, I would say.

5 comments:

James Higham said...

You might like to look at my latest post, based on Longrider's concern [plus his comments on "charitable" groups].

Alittle tangential to the issue but relevant, methinks.

By the way, your concerns about BP widgets are being discussed right now in our Mailing List but as you're not there, you ae not participating. You need to get in there to answer Wolfie's question.

Sackerson said...

Thanks, I have now read it. How much do people at the Charities Commission get paid, I wonder?

I have also (I think) joined the mailing list but it seems there's also an approval procedure. Meanwhile, I can't see Wolfie's question. Can you help, please?

Matt Wardman said...

UK Charity Accounts 2004 here:

http://tinyurl.com/22p6uw

The key figure is that spend half of the money raised on direct mail.

Don't touch with a bargepole.

Sackerson said...

Matt: welcome, and thank you very much. Though I think it's not the only charity to spend a lot on admin.

Do you think we should ask the government to attend to it? Doubtless they'll say IT IS TIME to CRACK DOWN on potential abuses, SHAKE UP the charity sector, and ROLL OUT a RAFT OF MEASURES to MAKE SURE this doesn't happen again. (Sorry, I don't do NuLabSpeak as well as the pros.)

Sackerson said...

Matt: glancing at the accounts, I note the employees' remuneratiion was only about £20k per capita, but "professional fees" showed an increase of about £100,000 between 2003 and 2004. What could these fees be for?