Over 40% of charity's pay chief executives more than €100,00

Some in the poverty industry seem to be thriving in this recession:

irishtimes.com/newspaper/bre … king4.html

If there is any charity who refuses to reveal their cost you can only consider not donating to them until such time as they are open and transparent about their operations. Surely they are not for profiting off the poverty and misfortune of others… :angry:

Some deflation!
first headline says they get €100, then OW’s has just €10

These charity bosses will be needing a dig out themselves pretty soon!

Read this article in the print edition of the Irish times this morning. This version provides more details on the pay compared to total organisational income and staff member than the online version.

It indicates that most of these people are running large organisations by Irish standards. For instance the CEO of the Cope Foundation earns €130,000 per year to run an organisation with an annual income of €60 million and 805 staff.

What would CEOs of private sector organisations with similar incomes and staff complements earn?

You’d know they weren’t government controlled costs.

Since we are using enterprise terms in the charity arena lets try some others, shall we?
What profit did return on that €60 million ‘income’?
How much of the ‘market share’ do they have?

Not really fair question are they?
Just like donations are not income

If there were a competitive search process for CEOs it would be one thing.

Fungus Finlay, for all his flaws was chosen/headhunted by the board; other charities are run like family fiefdoms or the founder, despite a lack of alternative career options decides a high salary is essential to retain his services (RTE style)

True…and another thing I’ve noticed is that many charities morph into other charities, seeminly to accomodate the career paths of the “charidee” professionals. Take Alcohol Action for example (those nice folks who are trying to make booze more expensive and consign the Heinken Cup and the Guinness Jazz Festival to the history books.) They appear to be an outgrowth of Barnardos…

alcoholireland.ie/about/team-members/
Team Members
Fiona Ryan, CEO Fiona spent seven years as a journalist in Dublin and Belfast before moving to charities to do advocacy/campaigning work. Before joining Alcohol Action Ireland, she was advocacy/campaigns manager for Barnardos
*
Cliona a Murphy MSc, BSS, CQSW, Policy Development Officer
Before joining Alcohol Action Ireland, Cliona worked as policy development officer for Barnardos

The Board of Alcohol Action Ireland
• Norah Gibbons, Chair of Alcohol Action Ireland/ Director of Advocacy Barnardos*

So basically, charities in Ireland are actually quangos which happen to draw extra funding from the public.

I thought it was “income” rather than funding :smiley:

It’s 'cause they really care! [for themselves]

I am not clear about the point of your questions and how they should relate to the CEOs salaries.

The vast majority of charities do generate reserves which are equivalent to profits but obviously they are debarred from paying out a profit to shareholders. If these reserves are excessively high. There is an argument that the CEOs of organisations in this category should actually have their salaries cut because they are delivering poor value to the tax payer.

If donations are not income to be used to run the organisations, what are they? Did donors give the money so it could be invested in the stockmarket?

I have a question for you. Do you think that €130k pa is a lot of money to run an organisation with 805 staff?

There are apparently 3,000 staff in the bailed out banks earning over 1000,000 per year (irishtimes.com/newspaper/fin … 96609.html). How many of them manage 805 staff?

Contrary to the some of the allegations made on this thread public advertizing of all posts is a condition for receipt of state funding. Even if Bernardos used a headhunting firm they would have had to advertize as well.

Don’t get me wrong - I am aware of huge waste of money in the non profit sector and I find the uncritical reception which this sector gets from the media and it lack of accountability, compared to the mainstream public sector infuriating. However I don’t actually think the salaries of the CEOs of very large non profit organisations is an example of this waste.

How the salaries of the CEOs of the tiny charities - that is another matter.

What’s more, they are paid like public servants? :confused:

Volunteer, what?

Isn’t there a charities bill/act in the pipeline for…the past several decades?

What I look for in a charity is accountability, transparency and VALUE FOR MONEY. I’m still looking…

in the IT article on this they said ‘turnover’.

is it only now this is being discussed , sure ‘we’ were talking about this scandal 15 years ago …

as Jack Reacher says … the little things are the big things …

cope-foundation.ie/category/ … ual-report

I hope i got that link right. Probably all the charities should be looked at individually as they are complex businesses, with strong cultures and great heritage.

From the annual report (and i could be wrong) is it right to say that annual income of cope is €60m of which €55m or so is direct from the government?

It spends €41m in payroll costs and €13m or so on other costs. Cope seems to have an important role to play in helping lower ability folks in Cork city? The report seems to state that it has 2,000 clients (are these people it helps or people who help more than one person?

Would most of its clients benefit from full time family carers? If so it would seem that its better to pay the carers more from the budget of COPE and have a slimmed down but effective COPE organisation.

I’m not sure of this at all and I don’t want to annoy anyone but it seems that COPE is really a state body with a big board and admin costs. It would be interesting if anyone knew this case. Also I’m not ‘picking’ on COPE but the information is available right? I wonder how it works really.

Numbers can be very deceiving so a big caveat is need.

There’s a charities thread somewhere. I pulled numbers for one or two charities like Marie Keating. Basically, well-paid jobs for some execs; lots of money in fundraising costs; a small amount on actually doing what they’re meant to do. There’s an argument that small charities are actually less efficient than the government at collecting and distributing money.

One that comes out well is the Irish Cancer Society IIRC.

charitynavigator.org/index.c … &listid=28

Charity navigator evaluates charities in the US

Best charities should spend 25 per cent or less on admin and fundraising fees.

charitynavigator.org/index.c … tudies.ceo

charity … yeah its one of those things you cant discuss openly,
another one of those topics (remmeber all the ones during the CT ) that the frappachino intelligentsia brigade have wrapped in cotton wool and no dissenting or questioning voice may be alloweed to speak. fuck me Im getting tired of history repeating itself in ever decreasing circles .

bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-1 … keter.html

In fiscal 2010,** InfoCision gathered $5.3 million for the society **(America Cancer Society) . Hundreds of thousands of volunteers took part, but none of that money – not one penny – went to fund cancer research or help patients, according to the society’s filing with the U.S. Internal Revenue Service and the state of Maine.
**Every bit of it went to InfoCision, **the filings say. The society actually lost money on the program that year, according to its filings. InfoCision got to keep 100 percent of the funds it raised, plus $113,006 in fees from the society, government filings show.

I would still implore people to give generously and give what they can to help out those in needs. Try to give via as direct a route as possible.
Its not your fault if theres a bunch of thick and crooked and self righteous people running that show… has anyone seen Bongo…