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
24567…17

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,611 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Charity is basically a meaningless word in Ireland. They're companies run for the enrichment of the founders and staff.
    When you have more employees of homeless charities than homeless people it's a clear con. Legally it may be fine but people assume they're giving their money for a cause, not to create jobs for the people working in the charities.

    At the end of the day charities shouldn't be funded by the state. If a service is deemed essential by the state and money should be spent on it then do it. Otherwise you're funnelling hundreds of millions into a sector full of shysters.


  • Options
    #33
    Mimon
    Registered Users Posts: 1,474 ✭✭✭Mimon


    whisky_galore wrote: »
    Nice work if you can get it. Overpaid glorified carnival barkers.

    I know outrage rant but car allowance of 10,000 is obscene!

    "The Irish Cancer Society employed an average of 150 people in 2018 at a cost of €7.6 million out of a total expenditure of €20 million."


  • Options
    #34
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Deleted User wrote: »
    They're companies run for the enrichment of the founders and staff executives.
    FYP. Charity staff are among the worst-paid in the country. If you want a well-paid job that's relevant to your qualifications, charity is the last place you go.

    CEO & CFOs tell staff there's no money for pay rises, ask them to pay for their own work equipment and tell them to think of the charity and everyone they're helping. All the while the same executives award themselves six figure salaries, discretionary bonusses, unvouched expenses and drive around in expensive company vehicles.

    I never donate to the big charities any more. If I can help it, I stick to directly funding good causes (e.g. the Zoo) or charities where I know who's involved and what they do. Faceless charities like Concern and Bóthar are pissing your money down the drain.


  • Options
    #35
    crossman47
    Registered Users Posts: 1,496 ✭✭✭crossman47


    Mimon wrote: »
    I know outrage rant but car allowance of 10,000 is obscene!

    I don't know but that may be for nurses calling to people in their homes.


  • Options
    #36
    Half-cocked
    Registered Users Posts: 4,319 ✭✭✭Half-cocked


    Bothar. I have been making a monthly donation to them for years. I have farmer friends who have reared and donated animals to them. And now it appears that their CEO was nicking €1000's off them. It's alleged that he even paid himself an unauthorized 13th month salary. Really thinking about hitting the cancel button on the direct debit.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    YellowLead
    Registered Users Posts: 7,667 ✭✭✭YellowLead


    To be fair there are 100s if not 1000s of charities so proportion wise it’s only teeny percentages that have been scandalised.
    And it’s usually not the whole org - a couple of people at the top so i feel sorry for those working there who do their very best to help and who process everything accordingly. It’s unfair to just blast the whole sector. There is incredible work being done out there - you may realise it if you have to rely on one one day!


  • Options
    #38
    riffmongous
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,627 Mod ✭✭✭✭riffmongous


    Deleted User wrote: »
    At the end of the day charities shouldn't be funded by the state. If a service is deemed essential by the state and money should be spent on it then do it. Otherwise you're funnelling hundreds of millions into a sector full of shysters.
    And what about all the volunteers that make up most of the workforce of a charity, who is going to pay for them?


  • Options
    #39
    Montage of Feck
    Registered Users Posts: 3,492 ✭✭✭Montage of Feck


    I've always been quite cynical about bothar and their methods. Sending out high maintenance European breeds to African farmers is very misguided in my opinion.

    🙈🙉🙊



  • Options
    #40
    Lmkrnr
    Registered Users Posts: 187 ✭✭Lmkrnr


    How can you donate 10 ect quid to a charity knowing the CEO is getting 100k plus. Makes no sense. Your better off giving something direct to the person that needs it.


  • Options
    #41
    BattleCorp
    Registered Users Posts: 11,758 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    Mimon wrote: »
    I know outrage rant but car allowance of 10,000 is obscene!

    I would think that the figure of €10,000 per annum isn't as much as many other CEO's would be paying when leasing their cars.

    A Ford Focus (not exactly a CEO style vehicle) is €8,160 per year to lease from LeasePlan. That doesn't include fuel or insurance.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    BattleCorp
    Registered Users Posts: 11,758 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    crossman47 wrote: »
    I don't know but that may be for nurses calling to people in their homes.

    That figure is published on the website as being the allowance for the CEO. Nothing to do with nurses.

    That said, I don't think it's excessive to be honest.


  • Options
    #43
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,387 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    riffmongous wrote: »
    And what about all the volunteers that make up most of the workforce of a charity, who is going to pay for them?

    Very few charities have a majority of workforce as volunteers - maybe SVP, but almost any charity that has significant size is going to have professional, paid, full-time staff. There's nothing wrong with having professional, paid, full-time staff.
    AllForIt wrote: »
    What I would like to know is, now many people the ICS sustains in full employment; obvs most involved are volenteers but how many are not.
    Did you try looking in their annual report? Charities have specific reporting obligations that cover all this kind of information now.
    Mimon wrote: »
    Wonder how the red cross works? Apparently 100% of donations will go to the where it should.

    Seems to be if not direct fraud a lot of the charities are run as much for the people working for the charity as the recipients of the charity. With overinflated salaries.
    How could 100% of donations go anywhere? Someone is going to have to pay the bank, and pay the online payment provider, and pay to host the website, and pay to manage the website, and pay the accountant who manages the finances, and pay the HR person who recruits the staff to do the work.


  • Options
    #44
    Gregor Samsa
    Registered Users Posts: 8,908 ✭✭✭Gregor Samsa


    Lmkrnr wrote: »
    How can you donate 10 ect quid to a charity knowing the CEO is getting 100k plus. Makes no sense. Your better off giving something direct to the person that needs it.

    Let’s take the Irish Cancer Society as an example. One of the many services they provide is night nurses for people suffering from cancer.

    Do you think it would be better for these people to arrange their own collection of fivers and tenners here and there, save it all up and then go and directly employ a nurse with the money themselves?

    Charities aren’t just a conduit for money. Some of them provide services - much needed services that In themselves cost money to provide and arrange. Now, I don’t know if the individual salaries of the CEOs and admin staff are justified or not, but any charity providing professional services is going to have to hire professionals, and to fund those professionals, you need other professionals to be able to consistently bring the money in.


  • Options
    #45
    corner of hells
    Registered Users Posts: 8,356 ✭✭✭corner of hells


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Charity is basically a meaningless word in Ireland. They're companies run for the enrichment of the founders and staff.
    When you have more employees of homeless charities than homeless people it's a clear con. Legally it may be fine but people assume they're giving their money for a cause, not to create jobs for the people working in the charities.

    At the end of the day charities shouldn't be funded by the state. If a service is deemed essential by the state and money should be spent on it then do it. Otherwise you're funnelling hundreds of millions into a sector full of shysters.

    Ive been working in charities for a long time provide support for people in addiction , experiencing homelessness, struggling with significant mental ill health.
    The state does not jyst hand out money nowadays , most funding is delivered based on targeand KPIs being reached. Drop in services count foot fall of service users , NQSF standards must be adhered, staff must receive regular training and supervision, outcomes must reached .
    Im paid a reasonable enough salary, its pays my bills, mortgage etc and provides for my family.
    Im on a 7 day shift , that means rostered of Christmas, bank holidays etc and so on.
    The state funds charities because it cheaper than employing staff and providing services directly themselves.

    My caseload varies from chronic addicts, entrenched homeless often with significant physical mental and physical ill health.... im not a shyster , in fact none of my colleagues could deemed shysters.


  • Options
    #46
    JP Liz V1
    Registered Users Posts: 85,030 ✭✭✭✭JP Liz V1


    fryup wrote: »
    never realised until recently that charities had ceo's and boards of management....i always presumed that they were run by volunteers top to bottom

    maybe i'm just too innocent

    I thought the same :o
    https://forumofgames.com/




  • Options
    #47
    YellowLead
    Registered Users Posts: 7,667 ✭✭✭YellowLead


    JP Liz V1 wrote: »
    I thought the same :o

    I have some shocking news for you both....Santa isn’t real....the government doesn’t print money but people pay taxes....


  • Options
    #48
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,387 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    JP Liz V1 wrote: »
    I thought the same :o

    So did you think that every doctor, nurse, psychologist in the St John of God services all round the country were volunteers, providing services in their spare time?

    Did you think that every nurse, psychologist, occupational therapist, speech therapist working in disability services like Brothers of Charity, Daughters of Charity, Rehab, Assist Ireland are all volunteeers, providing services in their spare time?


  • Options
    #49
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,283 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    When I was in college a charity scandal hit, myself and a friend tried to overcome the issue with a private organisation, we had an accountants firm specialising in auditing onboard, pur deal basically was we gave awards on 3 levels, bronze, silver and gold.

    Bronze basically meant that 50% of donations made it to whatever concern you were donating to

    Silver was 50% went to the concern and that the CEO’s salary & expenses was under 10% of total take

    Gold was 70% of donations made it to the actual cause, CEO and all the high level execs combined salaries made up less than 15% of the entire take.

    We talked to about 150 charities, over 100 point blank refused a free audit and certification, of the ones that allowed us audit most failed, id say abour 15 met the criteria for bronze , 0 silver or gold, of those that met the criteria for bronze a few asked that the gold and silver levels be scrapped so they had nothing to ‘work up to’

    We scrapped the whole project , the lesson we learned is that the closest to ‘reputable’ charities are usually based around helping animals domestically and even then getting 50% of the money to truly help whatever cause is a struggle.

    Needless to say I havent donated to anyone since


  • Options
    #50
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    corner of hells wrote: »
    Ive been working in charities for a long time provide support for people in addiction , experiencing homelessness, struggling with significant mental ill health.
    The state does not jyst hand out money nowadays , most funding is delivered based on targeand KPIs being reached. Drop in services count foot fall of service users , NQSF standards must be adhered, staff must receive regular training and supervision, outcomes must reached .
    Im paid a reasonable enough salary, its pays my bills, mortgage etc and provides for my family.
    Im on a 7 day shift , that means rostered of Christmas, bank holidays etc and so on.
    The state funds charities because it cheaper than employing staff and providing services directly themselves.

    My caseload varies from chronic addicts, entrenched homeless often with significant physical mental and physical ill health.... im not a shyster , in fact none of my colleagues could deemed shysters.

    I have often wondered if it might be more cost effective to have charities run totally by government departments. Say Environment take control of all the housing charities under one central office, thereby cutting down drastically on the repetition of admin, etc.
    An expanded mental health department under health, etc.
    Rather than going out begging/fundraising, just raise income tax and VAT by 1/2%
    I’m a great believer in the saying that charity begins at home. Local charities tend to be run totally by volunteers and are more transparent. One larger one that comes to mind in one called Build4Life Cystic Fibrosis. It was set up to raise funds for dedicated cystic fibrosis units in University Hospital Cork. When it reached its target, it disbanded. No big office. No overpaid CEO.


  • Options
    #51
    whisky_galore
    Registered Users Posts: 15,747 ✭✭✭✭whisky_galore


    Montage of Feck wrote: »
    I've always been quite cynical about bothar and their methods. Sending out high maintenance European breeds to African farmers is very misguided in my opinion.

    Expecting a heifer from Kildare to perform better than a native breed that has been there for thousands of years. Whiff of white man's burden about these kinds of charities too.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    Bellbottoms
    Registered Users Posts: 934 ✭✭✭Bellbottoms


    If anyone wants to look into it. A certain Dublin councillor runs a charity employing one unnamed employee. Said employees salary is not listed on their annual report.

    Not suggesting that anything fishy is going on. But I find it odd, that it's not listed.


  • Options
    #53
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,283 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    Bellbottoms wrote: »
    If anyone wants to look into it. A certain Dublin councillor runs a charity employing one unnamed employee. Said employees salary is not listed on their annual report.

    Not suggesting that anything fishy is going on. But I find it odd, that it's not listed.

    Might this person not have been here legally ?


  • Options
    #54
    Bellbottoms
    Registered Users Posts: 934 ✭✭✭Bellbottoms


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    Might this person not have been here legally ?

    No Dubliner born and bred.

    Loves a good day off.


  • Options
    #55
    riffmongous
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,627 Mod ✭✭✭✭riffmongous


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    Very few charities have a majority of workforce as volunteers - maybe SVP, but almost any charity that has significant size is going to have professional, paid, full-time staff. There's nothing wrong with having professional, paid, full-time staff.
    .

    I disagree here, when I volunteered at two of the largest charities (in Austria) the number of volunteers was far greater than the paid staff. Now maybe the paid staff do more hours in total but still, we were talking 15000/8000 staff and 50000/75000 volunteers, who is going to pay for them? Especially when the ambulance services would need to be paid competitively to compare with professional services.


  • Options
    #56
    gmisk
    Registered Users Posts: 31,847 ✭✭✭✭gmisk


    BattleCorp wrote: »
    I would think that the figure of €10,000 per annum isn't as much as many other CEO's would be paying when leasing their cars.

    A Ford Focus (not exactly a CEO style vehicle) is €8,160 per year to lease from LeasePlan. That doesn't include fuel or insurance.
    It definitely isn't as much as many other CEOs but it still isn't a great look.
    Rte I think are at around 824k a year on cars...


  • Options
    #57
    Floppybits
    Registered Users Posts: 7,533 ✭✭✭Floppybits


    The only charity I will donate to is St Francis Hospice. Seen they work they do up close and the care and attention they provide to the patients and families of those patients is second to none.


  • Options
    #58
    Bellbottoms
    Registered Users Posts: 934 ✭✭✭Bellbottoms


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    When I was in college a charity scandal hit, myself and a friend tried to overcome the issue with a private organisation, we had an accountants firm specialising in auditing onboard, pur deal basically was we gave awards on 3 levels, bronze, silver and gold.

    Bronze basically meant that 50% of donations made it to whatever concern you were donating to

    Silver was 50% went to the concern and that the CEO’s salary & expenses was under 10% of total take

    Gold was 70% of donations made it to the actual cause, CEO and all the high level execs combined salaries made up less than 15% of the entire take.

    We talked to about 150 charities, over 100 point blank refused a free audit and certification, of the ones that allowed us audit most failed, id say abour 15 met the criteria for bronze , 0 silver or gold, of those that met the criteria for bronze a few asked that the gold and silver levels be scrapped so they had nothing to ‘work up to’

    We scrapped the whole project , the lesson we learned is that the closest to ‘reputable’ charities are usually based around helping animals domestically and even then getting 50% of the money to truly help whatever cause is a struggle.

    Needless to say I havent donated to anyone since


    What was the response like from the charities who failed the audit?


  • Options
    #59
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,283 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    Bellbottoms wrote: »
    What was the response like from the charities who failed the audit?

    “We didnt realise our operational expenditure was so high, we’ll give you a call if we make changes in the future... trying to feign a straight face


  • Options
    #60
    YellowLead
    Registered Users Posts: 7,667 ✭✭✭YellowLead


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    “We didnt realise our operational expenditure was so high, we’ll give you a call if we make changes in the future... trying to feign a straight face

    As if anybody would say that. This is made up. And of course no business or charity is going to hand over their accounts to a bunch of students!!!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,283 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    YellowLead wrote: »
    As if anybody would say that. This is made up. And of course no business or charity is going to hand over their accounts to a bunch of students!!!

    They handed them to an accounting firm and in many cases are publicly available anyway.


Advertisement