Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Corruption in charities

Options
12467…17

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    tayto lover
    Registered Users Posts: 51,569 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    Is the Peter Mc Verry Trust a good charity to support?


  • Options
    #93
    corner of hells
    Registered Users Posts: 8,362 ✭✭✭corner of hells


    zerosugarbuzz wrote: »
    It’s the ones that are spending circa 70% plus on expenses and running costs that irk me. There are regular reports about the disgraceful job the Catholic Church did with regard to mother and baby homes in the past. But no comment about the fact that the Catholic Church run the main charities associated with homelessness and drug addiction in the present day. Can’t seem to put 2 and 2 together.

    Ive been working in charities involved in adfiction and homelessness for years , the Catholic Church does not run them.


  • Options
    #94
    corner of hells
    Registered Users Posts: 8,362 ✭✭✭corner of hells


    ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »
    One of the main reasons I don't as well. Too many fingers in the pie, unless I know exactly where its spent in not donating.

    There is probably a worker in a homeless charity for each legit homeless person in Ireland. Its an industry.

    Possibly, but i wouldn't expect a maintenance man council an addict , nor would I expect a social care worker cook dinner.


  • Options
    #95
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,459 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »
    There is probably a worker in a homeless charity for each legit homeless person in Ireland.

    So what? It is a service that is heavy on personal services. There is probably more than one worker in our hospitals for each patient in the hospital.

    It's a nonsense metric to focus on. (pun intended).
    zerosugarbuzz wrote: »
    It’s the ones that are spending circa 70% plus on expenses and running costs that irk me. There are regular reports about the disgraceful job the Catholic Church did with regard to mother and baby homes in the past. But no comment about the fact that the Catholic Church run the main charities associated with homelessness and drug addiction in the present day. Can’t seem to put 2 and 2 together.

    Church has very little role in homeless charities - Crosscare is the only church agency afaik. I don't think the church has much of a role in drug addiction. What church-run charities are you talking about?

    Again, why is spending on 'running costs' a sign of a problem? Charities need offices, desks, computers - homeless services need hostels with food, light, heat. How are these services supposed to run without 'running costs'?

    Which charities are you talking about here with the circa 70%?
    Cal4567 wrote: »
    Now I know said charity will say they are doing great work etc, I'm sure they do, but this is another example of the overlap that's out there. They turn up out of the blue when there is already a number of existing charities doing this work. Is this the most efficient way to do things? No.
    Should we say the same for plumbers? Or for butchers shops? We don't need any more new plumbers or new butchers to 'turn up out of the blue' because that's not the most efficient way?


  • Options
    #96
    jimmycrackcorm
    Registered Users Posts: 14,329 ✭✭✭✭jimmycrackcorm


    zerosugarbuzz wrote:
    There are regular reports about the disgraceful job the Catholic Church did with regard to mother and baby homes in the past. But no comment about the fact that the Catholic Church run the main charities associated with homelessness and drug addiction in the present day. Can’t seem to put 2 and 2 together.

    Talk about conflation and innuendo. Why not give details of which and what CC charities are doing so wrong.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    jimmycrackcorm
    Registered Users Posts: 14,329 ✭✭✭✭jimmycrackcorm


    JustAThought wrote:
    It’s shocking when you scratch the surface - the CEO has no medical background. I am sure there are plenty of other competent charity managers/CEO’s that would also do a good job in this role - and for less than 148,000 PER ANNUM of the childrens cancer money.


    I don't think you understand what a CEOs job is and why they get paid what they do. And no, you aren't sure there are other competent charity managers who would do the job for less, because you don't understand it.

    Comparing a CEO to a manager is the first clue. Would you consider one of the most successful CEOs ever, Steve Jobs, as manager of Apple?


  • Options
    #98
    humberklog
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 10,421 Mod ✭✭✭✭humberklog


    tayto lover wrote: »
    Is the Peter Mc Verry Trust a good charity to support?

    I wouldn't.

    McVerry started off in the flats in Ballymun. Whilst his intention was to house people who had been thrown out of the family flat it quickly developed into essentially Doss Houses.
    If a lad in a functioning family had a mate who ended up in a McVerry flat you could nearly put money on it he'd be in that flat within weeks and using heroin.
    The McVerry approach was a disaster for a generation of kids and the broader Ballymun community. Gangs of lads given an easy option of addiction, criminality and zero social responsibility. Mcverry"s flats made the blocks unlivible for anyone else.
    McVerry's un-evolving approach to a solving a problem only created an enviroment that allowed the problems to grow.
    Few people outside of Ballymun could see what was happening. McVerry is an excellent communicator and was given a lot of airtime to get his perspective of the problem out there and people outside of Ballymun believed him and bought into his solution.
    His Trust is huge now. And the Trust's solution at its core hasn't changed much.

    As for the bona fide of its accounts? I don't know, it's not that important in my opinion. What is important is that the McVerry Trust is a prime example of a charity creating more of the mess it requires to survive.


  • Options
    #99
    downtheroad
    Registered Users Posts: 2,795 ✭✭✭downtheroad


    Duplication is a huge issue in the charity sector. I volunteer with Alone and quite enjoy it, but can't understand why there is a need for both Alone and Age Action to operate instead of merge and create one charity that focuses on the elderly. Instantly there would be huge savings in terms of expenses, as there wouldn't me 2 offices rented, 2 CEOs, 2 finance teams, 2 HR teams, etc. Obviously this would be turkeys voting for Christmas if it was put to the boards of Alone and Age Action to merge but these amalgamations should be forced through by the Charities Regulator to increase efficiency and cut costs so that donations and money are better spent.

    Somebody earlier mentioned Irish Cancer Society. Why aren't they overseeing all cancer charity in Ireland? Run it like a private business, set up individual departments for breast cancer, testicular cancer etc, instead of having Breast Cancer Ireland and Marie Keating Foundation doing very similar work.

    10,000+ charities in Ireland somebody else mentioned earlier. Stupidly high number for a country of our size. Numerous mergers would go some way to having a more efficient charity sector in the country.


  • Options
    #100
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,459 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    downtheroad wrote: »
    Duplication is a huge issue in the charity sector. I volunteer with Alone and quite enjoy it, but can't understand why there is a need for both Alone and Age Action to operate instead of merge and create one charity that focuses on the elderly. Instantly there would be huge savings in terms of expenses, as there wouldn't me 2 offices rented, 2 CEOs, 2 finance teams, 2 HR teams, etc. Obviously this would be turkeys voting for Christmas if it was put to the boards of Alone and Age Action to merge but these amalgamations should be forced through by the Charities Regulator to increase efficiency and cut costs so that donations and money are better spent.

    Somebody earlier mentioned Irish Cancer Society. Why aren't they overseeing all cancer charity in Ireland? Run it like a private business, set up individual departments for breast cancer, testicular cancer etc, instead of having Breast Cancer Ireland and Marie Keating Foundation doing very similar work.

    10,000+ charities in Ireland somebody else mentioned earlier. Stupidly high number for a country of our size. Numerous mergers would go some way to having a more efficient charity sector in the country.

    So when you say that they should 'run charities like a private business', what products should they be selling to who?

    And should we be eliminating duplication in the butchery business, and the plumbing business and the management consultancy business by bringing them all together under one business and we could save loads of money on HR and other costs?


  • Options
    #101
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,459 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    humberklog wrote: »
    I wouldn't.

    McVerry started off in the flats in Ballymun. Whilst his intention was to house people who had been thrown out of the family flat it quickly developed into essentially Doss Houses.
    If a lad in a functioning family had a mate who ended up in a McVerry flat you could nearly put money on it he'd be in that flat within weeks and using heroin.
    The McVerry approach was a disaster for a generation of kids and the broader Ballymun community. Gangs of lads given an easy option of addiction, criminality and zero social responsibility. Mcverry"s flats made the blocks unlivible for anyone else.
    McVerry's un-evolving approach to a solving a problem only created an enviroment that allowed the problems to grow.
    Few people outside of Ballymun could see what was happening. McVerry is an excellent communicator and was given a lot of airtime to get his perspective of the problem out there and people outside of Ballymun believed him and bought into his solution.
    His Trust is huge now. And the Trust's solution at its core hasn't changed much.

    As for the bona fide of its accounts? I don't know, it's not that important in my opinion. What is important is that the McVerry Trust is a prime example of a charity creating more of the mess it requires to survive.

    So the heroin problem in Ballymun is down to PMV? Did he cause the heroin problems in Sherrif St and Fatima and Athlone and Limerick too?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    Government buildings
    Registered Users Posts: 423 ✭✭Government buildings


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    So when you say that they should 'run charities like a private business', what products should they be selling to who?

    And should we be eliminating duplication in the butchery business, and the plumbing business and the management consultancy business by bringing them all together under one business and we could save loads of money on HR and other costs?

    The difference is the plumbing business and the butchery business are not charities.


  • Options
    #103
    humberklog
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 10,421 Mod ✭✭✭✭humberklog


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    So the heroin problem in Ballymun is down to PMV? Did he cause the heroin problems in Sherrif St and Fatima and Athlone and Limerick too?

    No, the problem was there. He threw fuel on it.


  • Options
    #104
    corner of hells
    Registered Users Posts: 8,362 ✭✭✭corner of hells


    humberklog wrote: »
    No, the problem was there. He threw fuel on it.

    He responded to a problem that was not being addressed atcall by the state , methadone provision was in its infancy along with needle exchanges and BBV were starting to have a huge impact on these communities. He was certainly weii intentioned but to say he threw fuel on the fire is wrong.


  • Options
    #105
    downtheroad
    Registered Users Posts: 2,795 ✭✭✭downtheroad


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    So when you say that they should 'run charities like a private business', what products should they be selling to who?

    And should we be eliminating duplication in the butchery business, and the plumbing business and the management consultancy business by bringing them all together under one business and we could save loads of money on HR and other costs?

    Well the butchers, plumbers and management consultants are private enterprises backed with their own capital, however if they wanted to achieve cost efficiency they certainly could set up something similar to the Real Estate Alliance to centralise certain administrative functions and reduce their overheads.

    Where charities are spending money that is donated to them by the public or granted by the government, they should be accountable for every cent that is spent, and where there are opportunities to identify efficiency with the goal of reducing overheads and expenses then those opportunities should be taken.

    The amalgamation of similarly aligned charities would achieve various cost reductions. And I would also expect that the ethos of the charity is to benefit the end user or recipient of the charity's time, resources and money, therefore they should want to reduce their costs to ensure that more funds are available to be directed towards providing services to those that the charities were set up to assist.


  • Options
    #106
    spring lane jack
    Closed Accounts Posts: 163 ✭✭spring lane jack


    The haughty stuck up types who are quick to demonize those from lower socio economic backgrounds always tend to gravitate to these organizations.


  • Options
    #107
    humberklog
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 10,421 Mod ✭✭✭✭humberklog


    corner of hells wrote: »
    He responded to a problem that was not being addressed atcall by the state , methadone provision was in its infancy along with needle exchanges and BBV were starting to have a huge impact on these communities. He was certainly weii intentioned but to say he threw fuel on the fire is wrong.

    His response was wrong-headed.

    He gave refuge to 12 and 13 year olds that needed assistance and shelter where the State was failing and not interested in. Those kids would in turn pull in other kids that came from more functional and less chaotic households.

    PMV housed vulnerable 13 year olds in mostly unregulated houses that they were able to come and go from and take drugs. It moved drug usage from the stairwells into the flats and away from where responsible adults could see there kids.

    PMV essentially gave young teens a "free gaff" where drug usage and criminality could fester away from the public gaze.

    Whatever way it's framed it isn't now and never was a good idea to allow 12 and 13 year olds to leave their families and be allowed stay unsupervised in a flat where open drug dealing and abuse was taking place.
    That's what PMV did. Now whether that was done "well intentioned" or not it doesn't make it right.


  • Options
    #108
    ThunbergsAreGo
    Registered Users Posts: 10,399 ✭✭✭✭ThunbergsAreGo


    humberklog wrote: »
    His response was wrong-headed.

    He gave refuge to 12 and 13 year olds that needed assistance and shelter where the State was failing and not interested in. Those kids would in turn pull in other kids that came from more functional and less chaotic households.

    PMV housed vulnerable 13 year olds in mostly unregulated houses that they were able to come and go from and take drugs. It moved drug usage from the stairwells into the flats and away from where responsible adults could see there kids.

    PMV essentially gave young teens a "free gaff" where drug usage and criminality could fester away from the public gaze.

    Whatever way it's framed it isn't now and never was a good idea to allow 12 and 13 year olds to leave their families and be allowed stay unsupervised in a flat where open drug dealing and abuse was taking place.
    That's what PMV did. Now whether that was done "well intentioned" or not it doesn't make it right.

    I'm guessing you are from the area?


  • Options
    #109
    humberklog
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 10,421 Mod ✭✭✭✭humberklog


    ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »
    I'm guessing you are from the area?

    Not too far. Close enough to have seen friends and school mates being sucked into the PMV system.


  • Options
    #110
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,459 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    humberklog wrote: »
    His response was wrong-headed.

    He gave refuge to 12 and 13 year olds that needed assistance and shelter where the State was failing and not interested in. Those kids would in turn pull in other kids that came from more functional and less chaotic households.

    PMV housed vulnerable 13 year olds in mostly unregulated houses that they were able to come and go from and take drugs. It moved drug usage from the stairwells into the flats and away from where responsible adults could see there kids.

    PMV essentially gave young teens a "free gaff" where drug usage and criminality could fester away from the public gaze.

    Whatever way it's framed it isn't now and never was a good idea to allow 12 and 13 year olds to leave their families and be allowed stay unsupervised in a flat where open drug dealing and abuse was taking place.
    That's what PMV did. Now whether that was done "well intentioned" or not it doesn't make it right.

    Sounds like he was an early practicioner of the Housing First model, recognised all over the world as the most effective way of getting people out of homelessness.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Housing_First

    I'm not sure that your theory that keeping injection happening out on the landings is some kind of deterrent stands up, given what happens in every set of Council flats in the country! and indeed in many other countries.


  • Options
    #111
    humberklog
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 10,421 Mod ✭✭✭✭humberklog


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    Sounds like he was an early practicioner of the Housing First model, recognised all over the world as the most effective way of getting people out of homelessness.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Housing_First

    I'm not sure that your theory that keeping injection happening out on the landings is some kind of deterrent stands up, given what happens in every set of Council flats in the country! and indeed in many other countries.

    I don't see mention in your link of having 12, 13 and 14 year olds living and sleeping unsupervised in a 3 bedroom flat with maybe 12-16 other people who are adults, addicts, criminals etc. But hey- if someone has made a success of that system good luck to them. It just doesn't strike me as best practice. I know there was no success with it in Ballymun in the '80s.

    Maybe times have changed but having 12 year olds evade the attention of social services but with access to an unregulated service providing accommodation in a squat living with adult junkies and criminals then fair enough. I just can't square it in my head.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    upandcumming
    Registered Users Posts: 2,715 ✭✭✭upandcumming


    Kareem Unsightly Vegetation wrote: »

    Personally SVP are my favorite Ireland focused charity.

    SVP paid some scumbags bail in Mullingar a few years ago - never gave a cent since.


  • Options
    #113
    beggars_bush
    Registered Users Posts: 4,365 ✭✭✭beggars_bush


    upandcumming wrote: »
    SVP paid some scumbags bail in Mullingar a few years ago - never gave a cent since.
    every SVP is run separately
    I wouldn't penalise every branch for the mistake of a few people

    I know the huge work they do on multiple issues in towns all over ireland


  • Options
    #114
    Darc19
    Registered Users Posts: 3,817 ✭✭✭Darc19


    kildare lad wrote: »
    I think there's something like 10,000 registered charities in Ireland , that's a huge number for a country the size of Ireland .

    The problem is that almost every non profit is lumped in as a "Charity" organisation and that includes most schools.

    There should be segregation

    Community based Charites - income less than €1m a year

    "Large" Charities - Goal, Concern, Trocaire etc

    Education based charities - schools etc

    Service based charities - rehab centres, addiction centres, disabilty centres

    "Trust" type charities - benevolent funds, trusts.


    Each would have parameters to abide by such as pay levels, accountability, financial governance.

    But probably no chance of such change happening


  • Options
    #115
    anewme
    Registered Users Posts: 11,867 ✭✭✭✭anewme


    beggars_bush wrote: »
    every SVP is run separately
    I wouldn't penalise every branch for the mistake of a few people

    I know the huge work they do on multiple issues in towns all over ireland

    Our local SVP helped our family years ago (Over 40) One of the Conference Members gave my Dad a pair of his own good leather shoes.


  • Options
    #116
    mariaalice
    Registered Users Posts: 12,376 ✭✭✭✭mariaalice


    A lot of the issue is a result of how our social service developed in Irish society. Charities run by religious orders were the only social services for a long time or if they were not run by a religious order they have a religious ethos, for example, the morning star hostel. There was a sectarian element as well there were COI orphanages and a COI hospital The Adelaide, the SVP has a religious ethos.

    The state left a lot of responsibilities to charities to provide social services.


  • Options
    #117
    corner of hells
    Registered Users Posts: 8,362 ✭✭✭corner of hells


    mariaalice wrote: »
    A lot of the issue is a result of how our social service developed in Irish society. Charities run by religious orders were the only social services for a long time or if they were not run by a religious order they have a religious ethos, for example, the morning star hostel. There was a sectarian element as well there were COI orphanages and a COI hospital The Adelaide, the SVP has a religious ethos.

    The state left a lot of responsibilities to charities to provide social services.

    I think your talking about the Regina Ceoli , still in existence but no support provided other than bed and board, they're a real throwback .


  • Options
    #118
    mariaalice
    Registered Users Posts: 12,376 ✭✭✭✭mariaalice


    corner of hells wrote: »
    I think your talking about the Regina Ceoli , still in existence but no support provided other than bed and board, they're a real throwback .

    They have a men and woman hostel I was only using it as an example.


  • Options
    #119
    Mimon
    Registered Users Posts: 1,474 ✭✭✭Mimon


    corner of hells wrote: »
    Absolutely, im posting from my penthouse over looking the Sydney Opera House.

    You seem to be on the frontline so your salary is justified. No one should critisise you getting properly paid for difficult and dedicated service.

    What about admin, executives etc with inflated salaries? This is where charities fall down too often


  • Options
    #120
    dublin49
    Registered Users Posts: 1,288 ✭✭✭dublin49


    Kareem Unsightly Vegetation wrote: »
    I find it amusing that many people look down their noses in moral superiority at charities not giving 70, 80, 90% or whatever of donations directly to the "cause" and use this as a justification for giving nothing to any charity, meaning that instead of the needy getting 60 cent or whatever of every euro, they get zero.

    Personally SVP are my favogrite Ireland focused charity.

    So suck up some shady accounting as a few quid of your donation might get by the suits at the trough.No need for charities.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    mariaalice
    Registered Users Posts: 12,376 ✭✭✭✭mariaalice


    Mimon wrote: »
    You seem to be on the frontline so your salary is justified. No one should critisise you getting properly paid for difficult and dedicated service.

    What about admin, executives etc with inflated salaries? This is where charities fall down too often

    Someone has to arrange to pay the staff and manage the money, therefore, you need admin staff the frontline staff doesn't and cant exists in a vacuem.


Advertisement