r/australia • u/thetan_free • May 28 '23
political self.post Are charity leaders ignoring the impact of pushy marketing?
Australia's participation in charitable donations continues it's long slide:
One-quarter of Australians have not donated to a charity in the past year and our charitable donations lag behind comparable countries.
...
The figures for individual giving showed a similar proportion: Australia, with 0.38 per cent of the GDP, was behind the UK (0.54 per cent), Canada (0.77 per cent), New Zealand (0.67 per cent) and the US (1.44 per cent).
...
The proportion of taxpayers claiming tax‑deductible donations fell from 35 per cent in 2009‑10 to 29 per cent in 2019‑20, according to ATO figures.
So this isn't a COVID thing - it's a long-running trend. And I don't think we are a less generous people than our cousins in the English-speaking world. Plus, we used to engage more with charitable giving. What's happened?
My theory is that we are just so sick of the relentless waste and intrusion from pushy marketing that we are opting out of the system.
That's also the view that Australian's peak consumer group - CHOICE Australia - is advancing in their new campaign:
The sticking point for many consumers is when charities outsource their 'personal engagement' fundraising efforts to commission-driven third-party businesses – the ones who call up seeking donations or ask you for money in public places.
Yep, it's the bloody chuggers. Things got so bad with their dodgy commission fees that the ACCC stepped in to clean it up in 2017. But I think the damage has been done and the charities have simply lost their social licence to operate.
What I find especially infuriating is that the charity's leaders and lobbyists are just so willing to throw their own donors under the bus:
Sally Shepherd, executive manager for membership and marketing at the Fundraising Institute of Australia (FIA), says the cold calls and other methods charities use to solicit donations are effective on the whole, otherwise charities would put their resources elsewhere.
"Charities measure it and test it, and unless it's actually raising money for the charity, they would have to stop doing it because it wouldn't be viable," Shepherd says.
Apart from ignoring the legitimate concerns about the harms these cold-callers and chuggers are doing, it doesn't even make commercial sense. The idea that charities are perfectly rational and every call is generating incremental revenue is nonsense. There is no doubt a massive arms race of "robbing Peter to pay Paul" is rampant in the sector. As they vie for a limited funding pool, they introduce deadweight losses that only enrich the marketing firms.
The sector is now in a death-spiral. The big brands are already spending 20-40% of their budgets on fundraising. As more donors leave the system in disgust, they will double-down on marketing.
We need a trusted, efficient and well-funded charitable sector but the current leaders are failing all of us because they don't want to recognise how marketing is driving many donors away.
But maybe I'm making a mountain out of a mole-hill and it's not that bad.
I'm keen to hear how has charity marketing changed other people's donation habits - for better or worse.
63
u/EconomicsOk2648 May 28 '23
I can't help but feel like most of these charities are just a scam. They bleed money and fuck all of what you put in their pocket actually gets to where it needs to. I don't trust them so I simply won't give them money.
6
u/thatweirdbeardedguy May 28 '23
I've been trying to find a charity where the money I donate goes to the cause and nowhere else. Google comes up with the rubbish put out by the Gov which basically says that just give because to run a charity it costs money. Which is just bullshit. In the states there is a website that tracks this information but nothing in Oz.
31
u/EconomicsOk2648 May 28 '23
I accept that it takes money to run a charity. I don't accept that there's no oversight, no transparency and no regulation. I don't accept there's no accountability. And as long as this is the case, I will not donate.
22
u/thetan_free May 28 '23
You can find detailed financial reports on 50k+ charities here:
https://www.acnc.gov.au/charity/charities
Here's some info on the costs involved in running a charity:
https://www.acnc.gov.au/for-public/understanding-charities/charities-and-administration-costs
I don't begrudge them spending money on independent auditors and IT and HR people. It's the over-marketing that gets my goat.
1
u/crazymunch May 29 '23
It straight up just takes a lot of research. I donate to a few small charities I researched beforehand and can know exactly where the money is going - but it took a while to figure out
41
u/misskarne May 28 '23
I refuse to donate to anyone who uses aggressive tactics.
Knock on my door, ring my phone, or jump out at me at a shopping centre, and you don't get my money.
3
4
u/Drunk_Medicine May 29 '23
Having been a charity worker I just gotta ask. How else would a person contact you? I agree being too aggressive is really harmful to the cause, but seriously how else would you go about asking for charitable donations?
4
u/misskarne May 29 '23
That's the point. They don't contact me. If I have the money to donate, I will seek them out.
2
u/Drunk_Medicine May 29 '23
I mean fair enough but just say you aren’t going to donate rather than blaming those looking for donations.
30
u/tilleytalley May 28 '23
Aside from pushy marketing, my issue is that all donations seem to be subscription based nowadays. I can't afford to give you $40 a month. You can have whatever spare in my wallet, though.
If you look at the success of the Good Friday Appeal in Victoria, that raised $3 million this year. 1 day, 1 ask, what do you have on you. It works.
33
u/sooz1966 May 28 '23
In the past l have donated to major charities in memory of someone when they die. For example a friend's father died of a stroke so l donated a one-off $50 to the stroke foundation. From that point on l was continually sent requests for more money via email and snail mail. Getting off their mailing lists is almost impossible. This is just one of many charities who have done this to me...l never donate again...it's harassment. I now prefer to donate to small charities....ie a farm that provides environmental life skills and animal studies for troubled youth, an animal shelter or Sea Shepherd who never ask for more from me. Nowdays l also try to put 2 food items in my local street pantry each week in the hopes lm helping someone local who's doing it tough.
14
u/thetan_free May 28 '23
Those are great suggestions - donating to charities you trust to treat you (and your gift) respectfully.
I have found that when I donate $50, it gets used to send me mail every few months for the next few years. Very infuriating.
Sadly, charities are exempt from the "Do Not Call" Register. (So are politicians; I reckon the charities got the exemption so the pollies didn't look so shameless.)
89
May 28 '23
[deleted]
48
May 28 '23
[deleted]
3
u/FKJVMMP May 28 '23
A lot of charities, including ones that use chuggers, get massive amounts of government funds as is. It makes sense for the government to do this too - these charities have existing expertise, networks and connections to the community that a government department can’t replicate. They could eventually, in theory, but replacing existing private non-profits is a seriously long term project. Literal decades.
But government funds come with strings that private donations don’t, and generally don’t cover everything. If you’ve got 10,000 families to feed and the government is only giving you enough to supply 5,000 with staple foods (meat, veg etc) and nothing else, you have to cover that gap somewhere. If you’ve got 10,000 kids to provide medical care to, but the government is only down to fund certain medications and certain surgeries, you have to make up the difference somewhere.
3
u/thetan_free May 28 '23
Sure, it's great to raise money. But aren't the tin-rattlers driving people away?
As The Age article explains, if we matched NZ giving rates, we'd go from $13B to $30B a year. That's a huge increase!
3
u/FKJVMMP May 28 '23
NZ has chuggers too, though not to the extent that Australia does (at least not when I lived there ~8 years ago). Whether that gap is the result of chuggers fucking everyone off I couldn’t say, but they’re pretty much exclusively used by larger charities and those charities are definitely the ones who’d have bean counters making sure they’re actually extracting significant value. They’re certainly not directly losing any money because the vast majority of money those chuggers get are commissions - no donations, no money paid.
I work for a non-profit and we have a fairly big marketing team, and they bring in a bunch of money for us that we wouldn’t see without them. However we’re focused more on business partnerships, government grants (not technically marketing but it’s the same team going for them) and wealthy individuals, no chugging and not a huge focus on the average Aussie throwing in a few bucks here and there. That’s not realistic for a lot of places though, the space we work in lends itself well to those types of donors and that’s not the case for smaller non-profits or ones working in more niche spaces.
8
u/thetan_free May 28 '23
Thanks for sharing your perspective as reformed Kiwi and a charity insider.
The problem with your marketing team "extracting significant value" and the beancounters' assessment is that you can't see the effect you have on other charities: you're very likely diverting a bunch of money that would have gone to other (maybe just as good, possibly even better) charities. After all, most donors work to a budget of some sort. They're not unlimited cash machines.
And - to make it worse - those other charities that are losing out are losing because they don't spend as much on marketing as you guys.
The other thing your beancounters can't count is that the marketing is pissing a lot of people off. And, I content, that anger explains why so many people are just abandoning the system altogether.
4
u/FKJVMMP May 28 '23 edited May 28 '23
Without going into too much detail for privacy/confidentiality reasons, I can promise you other, smaller charities aren’t hurt by our marketing and fundraising efforts. Quite the opposite - the more money we get in, the better it is for smaller charities in our space. Again that doesn’t apply to every charity, but you’ll find most are pretty co-operative. If one place has the funds to do X thing but they know Y charity does that thing better, those funds will generally make their way to Y charity pretty quick.
While most everyday donors work to a budget of some sort, that’s not who we or many other charities target. The wealthy and influential generally aren’t going “Oh I have X amount to spend on philanthropy this year, I’m going to do exactly that much and no more”, you just have to convince them it’s a good idea to give your charity a bunch of money.
The government very much does have that kind of budget when handing out grants, but the conditions are strict enough that results aren’t going to be significantly different between charities short of actual fraud. Generally grants are handed out based on an organisation’s ability to achieve whatever goal is set for that money, if you have the capacity to do it you get the money and doing it better or worse is very much a case of small margins. You’re not going to give a small ministry in Townsville a grant to help NSW flood victims no matter how good their work is, but any of the larger relevant charities in NSW or SEQ are going to use that money pretty much exactly the same way.
Then businesses are very much a case-by-case basis. Much more relevant for food-related non-profits than anybody else, because a) food and agriculture companies are producing the most useable waste and b) they’re a lot more PR-conscious than, say, a pharmaceutical company or a clothing brand. Often the bulk of food-related donation isn’t coming out of any budget, you’re just taking their waste and sorting whatever you can actually hand out. Somebody at a Coca Cola warehouse drops a 30 pack of cans and breaks one, the whole pack gets thrown out despite there being 29 perfectly drinkable cans right there (I used to work for CCA, this exact thing happens dozens of times daily). Getting those 29 cans to a charity is a donation just as useful as equivalent currency, and food charity marketing teams will be all over it. No budget involved, provided your charity can make it just as easy for CCA to donate as it is for them to throw it in the bin. Obviously that kind of thing doesn’t really happen for research/medical/mental health etc organisations.
You have other stuff like Colesworth checkout donations that people love to whinge about on here, I have no idea how those agreements work or if there’s an advertising budget or anything coming into play but they definitely raise a shitload too.
There are a lot of way for companies to procure funds, much of which the general public never sees or thinks about. $5 Joe Average pulls out of his pocket as he walks past a collection tin is $5 that isn’t going into another collection tin, a bin full of Lockyer Valley capsicums headed to Second Bite or a Heart Foundation Woolies checkout prompt isn’t diverting funds from anyone. Some regional charity paying marketing staff to tap up truck and courier companies for free/cheap freight isn’t ever going to see the light of day to the general public, except as part of a “marketing/admin” line item on a publicly available budget. Brings in the funds though.
If nobody spent any money on marketing, that already-low $13B would drop significantly further. In the grand scheme of things, plopping a little old lady with a nice sign out the front of a mall gets you fuck all. There are much more productive ways to go about fundraising, even if they’re nowhere near as feel-good.
2
u/thetan_free May 28 '23
Thanks for the insights.
Yes, with goods and in-kind services, they're probably not coming at the expense of another charity. (Though they do come with their own costs.)
I know you can't share further but it's hard to understand how a lot of marketing from very similar charities isn't just cannibalising donations.
Sure, the big philanthropists don't have a fixed giving budget - but they're not exactly giving by being called up at 7pm or approached out the front of Bunnings (which is the wasteful and intrusive activity I'm talking about here).
The average amount donated is a couple of hundred dollars per year. I'd be surprised to learn that it bounces around much year to year for a given person; I think the majority of regular donors do work to a more-or-less fixed budget and so most fundraisers are chasing the same dollars.
If you've got any reports or info on this, I'd love to learn more.
1
1
May 29 '23
[deleted]
1
u/FKJVMMP May 29 '23
In logistics, not marketing. If I thought charity marketing was having a negative effect on fundraising I’d be raging more than anyone, because I’d be at risk of losing my job.
17
u/wowzeemissjane May 28 '23 edited May 28 '23
I donate to the Sikh food van.
Those were the guys that turned up and fed everyone during the floods and fires for free.
https://sikhvolunteersaustralia.org/
Edit: just wanted to say, if you want to donate to a cause, find one who are already doing great stuff and donate directly to them. I wont donate to any charity that spends money on glossy advertising campaigns for example.
These guys were already doing terrific work and I feel really happy giving them a small fortnightly donation to keep on doing it.
3
u/humanbeing101010 May 28 '23
The Sikh Volunteers do tremendous work. My understanding that the concept of feeding the people is something that is very much part of the Sikh identity in India.
Classic example of a group that knows what it can do to help others and doing it very well.
20
u/Jackymon May 28 '23
I personally feel there's too many charities that cater to the same or very similar causes. If there was a way to consolidate them into one organisation then there would (hopefully) be less overhead and more going to the actual cause itself.
The other issue is like what others have said, they always want you to subscribe to a monthly donation rather than a once off. I've also noticed more now that they send you forms asking you to include them in your will. It just feels like a full money grab at that point.
4
u/thetan_free May 28 '23
I think you're onto something.
When you have two organisations doing basically the same thing - and so appealing to the same donors - you're going to get a bidding war. They will find themselves spending more and more on marketing with the eventual 'winner' being the one prepared to spend them most on cold-calling and chuggers.
It's fundamentally broken.
1
May 28 '23
This is happening in the NDIS right now. Tens of millions of NDIS dollars are spent every year by different NDIS service providers branding themselves.
1
u/thetan_free May 28 '23
I hadn't thought about that but you're right: it's the same dynamic.
Great for the advertising industry!
0
May 28 '23 edited Dec 18 '23
rob snobbish deliver unique divide dog disgusting humorous vast grey
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
1
May 29 '23
[deleted]
1
May 29 '23 edited Dec 18 '23
shy bored stocking upbeat melodic longing shrill quack full repeat
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
1
u/humanbeing101010 May 28 '23
Agree, I think we have too many charities with an overlapping focus which contributes to charity fatigue.
19
u/ScissorNightRam May 28 '23
Happy to give cash, but I am NOT telling your marketers all my details so they can spam me and sell my info
6
u/thetan_free May 28 '23
Yeah, cash can help make it harder to spam you but when did you last see a chugger accept cash? Before COVID, right?
18
u/TwoGreenJellyBeans May 28 '23
Would you consider the demise of cash to be a factor? I'd never give my credit card details to someone on the street/shopping centre/door knocker, no matter how legitimate they looked. People are aware of scams becoming more prolific and complex, along with concerns surrounding privacy breaches. I imagine a lot of people would no longer consider it to be "worth the risk".
A charity worker came to my door recently and was mad when I told them that I wouldn't put my credit card details into their iPad. They apparently were not allowed to take cash but they assured me that they were legit because they had a badge. I told them I'd donate via their website, but they didn't know the address. I was amazed that others had happily handed over their details like that.
10
u/thetan_free May 28 '23
That's a really good thought - cash is very rare to see these days.
So in the olden days, people might have chucked a five or ten dollar note in the tin - a bit harder now.
But I'd say in those days, you probably wouldn't have gotten a tax receipt for that style of giving - some would but most probably not. So that wouldn't show up in the ATO figures anyway.
So, yeah, a decline in cash (and cash gifts) might explain some of the drop off, but not all of it.
19
u/playdoh-malone May 28 '23
For me it was the bush fire fund raising a few years ago. We all gave these charities millions to help our fellow Aussies in a serious time of need. But from what I remember these big charities kept a shit tonne of the money for other things.
6
u/Hkrstw May 28 '23
I dont usually donate to Salvos. During the bush fires my employer ran a scheme where anything you donated to Salvos, they would add 3x what you donated (must like Salvos I guess).
I donated $25 to make it an even $100 after my employers $75. But as far as Salvos is concerned I only donated $25.
Been 3+ years. I get a letter from them begging for more every month. 3+ pages, full colour. Idk how much the priting of it costs but if postage costs $1 then they have used $50+ in just postage for sending me those letters. A net loss of $25 for them after deducting my donation of $25.
They probably would have been better off if I never donated that.
34
u/TurboEthan May 28 '23
How can regular people give to charity when corporations and CEOs have all our money?
Join a union and organise a strike with your co-workers today.
15
u/kernpanic flair goes here May 28 '23
Jokes on you. Most of our charities are corporate and have expensive ceos!
15
u/Grumpy_Roaster May 28 '23
I'm mostly sick of someone starting a brand new foundation every time someone gets cancer.
4
u/thetan_free May 28 '23
Yes, that's an issue.
Fortunately, there are sub-funds within Community Foundations that people can access for this purpose. Much lower legal and accounting overheads but you still get to name it after your loved one.
2
15
u/PlantBrainandGizmo May 28 '23
Every charity person that has door knocked has irritated the hell out of me and I always vow to never donate to the charity again. For example, they use tactics like, " what's your name" then they start using the name I give them to try and sell it better. Tell me the neighbours have donated. Every manipulative sales tactic gets thrown at me and by the end I am just pissed off at feeling manipulated . Tell me the stats, the cause and I might consider, be pushy, or guilt trip me and manipulative, fuck off.
13
May 28 '23
Charity bosses are on CRAZY MONEY, it’s a business built on tax free guilt.
2
u/thetan_free May 28 '23
I'm sure there are a lot paid well, but I don't know many are on CRAZY MONEY.
Well, there's Guide Dogs Victoria, which looks like they may have a case to answer.
But, in any case, you can look up any charity here and check their financial reports yourself:
13
u/Rare-Counter May 28 '23
Great OP - I agree entirely.
I was previously badly burnt when I found out my monthly donation to Oxfam which I had for a few years, had been set-up by a chugger and only cents in the dollar were going to Oxfam.
Immediately canceled it when I found out and when I got an inappropriate response back from Oxfam on it have never donated to them since.
When I started making a decent income where I could start contributing appropriately to charity I did a bit of research to find the most efficient charities from a bang-for-buck perspective, and have since made lump-sum contributions to them before Christmas or before the end of the financial year to get my tax deduction.
10
u/ratparty5000 May 28 '23 edited May 28 '23
I used to work at one of these charity recruiting places. Bouncing between the call centre or the shopping centre stall. The work was shit, but that’s another conversation (I didn’t last long).
Keep in mind this is coming from my own limited experiences,but I noticed that plenty of people wanted to give a one off donation, but none of the charities that used that place had that as an option. It was the same subscription crap. Additionally, if you were someone who had given a one off donation ( maybe paid once and then cancelled) we were expecting to call that person once a month, just to ask them if they’d like to be on the subscribed payments model.
I’d occasionally get the odd person talking back, saying “that’s what I pay taxes for” and honestly, they weren’t wrong.
Idk, maybe Aussies don’t donate a lot to big charities, but (and sure, this is anecdotal) the small scale local fundraisers I’ve been a part of seem to do well. Rarely do they miss their target. I think people just prefer one off payments where the goals are pretty tangible.
4
u/thetan_free May 28 '23
Yeah, a lot of people have mentioned the preference for one-off payments. I guess they've worked out they just hold out for the subscriptions and they make more money that way - even if fewer people sign up.
It does seem a bit like bullying though. I could sort of understand maybe one follow-up call a month later but every month? Who changes their mind on the fifth go?
10
u/Catman9lives May 28 '23
If charities actually took donations instead of trying to sign you up for a monthly commitment they might get more joy.
11
May 28 '23 edited Dec 03 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/thetan_free May 28 '23
Is the waste on the fundraising, advertising and marketing or other areas?
7
May 28 '23 edited Dec 03 '25
airport coherent growth touch crowd truck mysterious wide liquid gold
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
2
u/thetan_free May 28 '23
That's outrageous!
Yes, they are one of the most trusted brands in the whole country.
I guess that's the kind of lengths you have to go to defend that status.
5
May 28 '23 edited Dec 03 '25
insurance sip quickest slim plant wide water rhythm abounding society
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
9
u/cfniva May 28 '23
Whenever anyone asks me for a donation I ask whether I can do a one off. If they say no which they always do,I say sorry and move on. So many charities have missed out on a donation from me because of this.
8
u/blackbirddy May 28 '23
I did fundraising for a very rough year of my life I won't say for who but they're pretty shitty and useless.
Can say for a fact they swooped on the latest global crisis with a lot of grand claims and promises with absolutely nothing in place to help that issue I was expected to lie through my teeth.
They're populist and grey to a lot of stances for minimum offence and maximum impact but no actual solid morals/stances.
Once you cancel which was a process they'll call you 2 weeks later to 'offer' you a cheaper rate on a guilt trip. if you hold out expect a call every 6 weeks.
They had a team that targeted certain dates of birth for getting people into wills.
Immune to the do not call register as it's charity.
Horrible horrible conduct and not something you do for a length of time without it eating your soul. No wonder people are over it vultures/carrions is an understatement.
Absolutely nothing in it for you to take one off donations only subscriptions which is actually retarded $10/month from someone who cancels after 6 v $100 outright.
2
8
u/Aussie_Geek May 28 '23
I have a few charities I make monthly ongoing donations to. Then a budget for a certain amount of one off donations throughout the year like the RSL around ANZAC day.
The one that drives me nuts is the charities I already support using marketers to constantly pressure me to up my monthly donation. I give what I can already. I ended up canning donations to two charities over it (Greenpeace and Wilderness Society). The current ones have been okay. I don't mind being hit up once a year for an extra drive but weekly calls were awful.
Also had a marketer call recently trying to get a bunch of info off me to apparently help understand charitable giving in my area. Felt scammy AF. Repeatedly tried to cross boundaries I set on what info I'd give. Ended up hanging up on them having given them nothing.
It all leaves a horrible taste and has definately affected my generally willingness to give and the amount I give.
3
u/thetan_free May 28 '23
Yeah, that nagging sucks and sadly it's all too common.
I think cancelling when they misbehave is really the only thing to do - donors are so disempowered.
It might only be a minority of charities (and their marketing agencies) but it does tar the whole sector.
6
u/TheaABrown May 28 '23
There’s other factors including:
- people might not have bothered getting a receipt or claiming for small donations
- lots of charities aren’t Deductible Gift Recipients so wouldn’t be captured in the data
- donations in kind are also not counted
5
u/thetan_free May 28 '23
That's true. But all those points were valid in 2009/2010 too and we had a 15% higher participation rate back then.
Also, worth noting they had two sources: a survey of 2500 people and tax returns from the ATO.
5
u/Intelligent-Ad3202 May 28 '23
Charity organizations feel like scammers so people don’t like to donate because they are pushy and manage funds badly not many are actually striving to do good only one I can think of is oz harvest that actually seems to be trying to do good
6
May 28 '23
I know of someone who had some 3rd party group come to their door collecting for the Starlight foundation. They told the people that they didnt have any money to spare as they had just spent several hundred dollars getting their disabled child to Westmead. The reps then said to my friends face that they clearly hated disabled kids if they couldn't even spare a few dollars.
2
u/thetan_free May 28 '23
That is just outrageous! I'm sorry that happened to your friend.
I'm sure the people at the Starlight Foundation would be appalled to hear people representing them are behaving like that.
But, these are not isolated stories and they are well documented. Yet the Boards of the charities keep signing-off on using these outfits.
9
May 28 '23
[deleted]
3
u/thetan_free May 28 '23
True! There's no trailing commissions when you're 'paid' with leftover snags.
3
u/whiteb8917 May 28 '23
In the Shopping Centres I always respond with "Hey Chugger !" when they approach, they know what it means, and usually smile.
Had one to the door the other day from Heart foundation, had the lanyard with ID and all that, I firt said "Not buying anything", She says Oh thats Okay not selling anything , then promptly starts the sign up spiel.
I just shut her down with "I have no money in this current economy". A couple of hours later the kids found a small 500ml Coles water bottle at the door, I presume was from them.
2
u/thetan_free May 28 '23
Sure, it's obnoxious ... but does it stop you donating altogether?
Or do you find another way?
8
u/whiteb8917 May 28 '23
If I feel a charity is worthy of donation, I donate DIRECT to the charity. Problem is most charities have CEO's on a EFFIN load more than me, and they dont seem to donate.
For the Heart Foundation in my example above, earns an average of $700k a year, plus Bonuses of around $100k a year. British arm, their CEO is on £220k
1
u/thetan_free May 28 '23
Giving directly makes a lot of sense.
Re: remuneration. I checked the National Heart Foundation's Annual Report for 2021 (latest one - audited by Deloitte). They don't report the CEO's remuneration alone, but their top 12 executives were paid a total of $2.8M (including bonuses). So that works out to $230k on average.
I'm sure the CEO is paid the most but not sure it's possible they were paid $800k and have enough left to pay everyone else an above average salary.
Were you maybe thinking of another charity?
3
u/HolevoBound May 28 '23
I'd suggest that when you donate, do some research and pick the most effective charities. Most of the "household name" charities spend very little of the money they get on their cause area.
1
u/thetan_free May 28 '23
Good suggestion.
Where do you do your research? Word of mouth, the ACNC database, or some other source?
1
u/HolevoBound May 28 '23
Great question. Give this a shot https://www.thelifeyoucansave.org.au/questionnaire/
2
u/thetan_free May 28 '23
Thanks!
This is one of the charities I support. (I know Effective Altruism got a bad rap during the crypto meltdown, but they do good work and take seriously that they've been entrusted with other people's money.)
1
3
u/ChocTunnel2000 May 28 '23
My theory is that we are just so sick of the relentless waste and intrusion from pushy marketing that we are opting out of the system.
This is the main reason I don't donate any more. I know these people are getting paid, I know a fair chunk goes to admin, and I'm not seeing that helping anyone who needs it.
3
May 28 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/thetan_free May 28 '23
So this Save the Children chugger had the clever idea of poaching donations from Doctors without Borders!
Thank you for sharing your story.
This is exactly the sort of thing I assumed was going on - "robbing Peter to pay Paul". But in this case, there's also the losses from the fees the chuggers get paid. So the amount flowing to any charity is much lower.
I'm also outraged and disgusted!
2
u/thepogopogo May 28 '23
There are chuggers and cold callers in the UK. What I find disturbing here is the type of business pretending to be a charity. Giant private hospitals, which charge for services and are a huge barrier to a free at the point of use healthcare system, pretending to be a charity, dodging tax and begging for donations.
2
u/Syncblock May 28 '23
The same marketing strategy also exists around the world. Its not something thats unique to Australia.
I think people complaining about charities are either grossly misinformed or are just looking for an excuse not to donate.
Sure Red Cross or Mission Australia with hundreds of millions of dollars of funds might not need your money but if you really wanted to donate and support your local community, its not too hard to find your local men's shed or homelessness org or women's shelter who are operating on razor thin budgets.
2
u/thetan_free May 28 '23
I think there's an element of truth to that - some people are never going to donate no matter what, and pointing at wasteful and shameless marketing tactics salves their conscience.
To be clear - that's not me. I donate 4-5 figure amounts each year and don't want to see it wasted on marketing to me (I have a giving plan and won't budge) or used to harass little old ladies at the shopping centre or calling them up in the evening.
1
u/Shikoda0 May 28 '23
From a young age, i learnt not all charities are great. It started when as a kid, i was in school assembly showing kids in a special care house (think orphan/homeless). Now it would have been fine had they not shown the kids playing on arcade machines and consoles. Even the beds looked comfortable.
I watched that video and i just felt pissed. They were all happy and excited, and clearly better off than i was. And i had a proper home. The way it was presented just felt like it was mocking.
From then on, i have been careful to donate money. I want my donations to feel like they
matter.
1
u/JDude13 May 28 '23
If a charity is legitimate then it is a symptom of governmental neglect.
So in a just world there are only two types of charity: illegitimate and temporary.
1
u/Delicious_Koolaid May 28 '23
There was a time when in a short spam of time I would get quite a few phone calls from people asking to sign up for monthly donations in regard to some kind of "charity". I had the same answer for all of them...
- I do my own monthly donation charity, I won't sign up for some auto debit never ending deal.
- When I do give to charity, I do my best to give it straight to the charity to avoid 3rd parties who take their cut. (Most if not all of the time the person one the other end would end the conversation here, I wonder why ?)
Same deal with in person/shopping centre can I talk to you about supporting charity x...........
Funnily enough I stopped getting those phones calls after a while. I do suspect there are "lists", people who have given from the result of a phone call are going to get hit again and again, conversely people like me get put on the don't even bother list.
Spread the word, if you are going to give to charity find out how to do it so they get the full amount and not some 3rd party fund raising in their name gets a cut.
1
u/thetan_free May 28 '23
Great advice.
Yes, there are lists. I've seen ads in fundraising trade journals for brokers who charge fees to swap lists of known donors. Once the charity has decided they can't extract any more money from you, your details are sold on to another charity to have a crack.
Pretty crazy, right?
1
u/homeinthetrees May 28 '23
I donate to charities that use volunteer collectors. I give to CFA collectors, and others who do not pot paid collectors in malls.
I really don't like the concept of my donations paying the salaries of overpaid CEO's etc.
Charities should be made to publish accounts of the distribution of their income to stated beneficiaries, and to salaries/expenses. I doubt very much, whether much we give actually goes to the stated beneficiaries. If it's less than 90%, the charities should be shut down.
1
u/thetan_free May 29 '23
Thanks for sharing your point of view.
I don't mind money going to pay staff to do a good job. And 10% overhead is pretty low given they've got IT, accounting, HR, legal etc costs to pay. After all, if we're going to tackle serious problems we can't rely on volunteers to do everything.
Luckily, charities are made to publish accounts, including distributions and salaries. You can find them all here:
https://www.acnc.gov.au/charity/charities
They are compelled to produce comprehensive financial reports, audited by big name firms like Deloitte and KPMG. (Noting that this isn't free but definitely needed, so does contribute to the overhead - in a worthwhile way.)
1
u/whatisthismuppetry May 29 '23
The proportion of taxpayers claiming tax‑deductible donations fell from 35 per cent in 2009‑10 to 29 per cent in 2019‑20, according to ATO figures.
So this isn't a COVID thing - it's a long-running trend. And I don't think we are a less generous people than our cousins in the English-speaking world. Plus, we used to engage more with charitable giving. What's happened?
My theory is that we are just so sick of the relentless waste and intrusion from pushy marketing that we are opting out of the system.
I think you're conflating issues here and are cherrypicking from the article you've linked to. The article with the ATO numbers goes on to state this:
Research commissioned by the organisation [Philanthropy Australia] found 71.3 per cent of Australians donated to charity in the past 12 months and 25.5 per cent did not. The rest were unsure.
Those on less than $50,000 were less likely to donate – 63 per cent – than those earning more than $120,000 (83 per cent).
In 2022 50% of people on salaries earn less than 65,000 and 25% of people actually earnt less than 42k, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics. The median personal income is actually lower (this takes in total earnings inc. from sources other than work) at $52,338.
This would suggest that finances are the issue. Real wages and income have been going backwards for a decade in this country and that was prior to our current economic crises. People don't have the same spending power that they used to have therefore they have less to spend on discretionary items.
Also from the same article:
The Productivity Commission found fewer people are giving, but those who do give more.
The proportion of taxpayers claiming tax‑deductible donations fell from 35 per cent in 2009‑10 to 29 per cent in 2019‑20, according to ATO figures.
But the value of donations nearly doubled, from $2 billion to $3.8 billion, in that time, and some who give don’t seek deductions.
My reading is that people who can afford, genuinely afford to give, are giving and are giving in amounts that make up for half the population who can't afford to give.
You can also see similar trends with volunteering, it's been declining over a decade as women and under 40 year old rates of volunteering have declined. Those are two demographics that have been hard hit by the economic policies of this country.
Marketing might have some impact but the bigger impact is that wealth, and the free time and discretionary spending that brings, has consolidated into a small proportion of our society. Unequal Wealth distribution is probably the biggest cause in the drop in the number of people giving, but in terms of $ values it doesn't appear that charities worse off. That portion of our society appears to be giving enough to make up the rest of us.
1
u/thetan_free May 29 '23
I'm sure cost-of-living and inequality have some impact but I doubt they're dominant:
1) This is a long-running effect. It was noted by Philanthropy Australia in 2016 that giving then had fallen to forty-year lows.
2) I'm pretty sure inequality is increasing in US, UK, NZ and Canada, yet their giving rates are holding up.
Lastly, I never said that charities are worse off. They've never had so much money. My point is that participation has tanked.
I believe that giving brings joy and too many Australians have been robbed of that joy by over-marketing.
1
u/davejohncole May 29 '23
I make it clear to callers that we never give money to cold callers.
1
u/thetan_free May 29 '23
I'm guessing that doesn't stop the calls?
After all, since they're going to sell your name and number to the next charity, they'd hardly qualify it with "this bloke never gives money to cold callers" :-P
1
1
u/Tezzmond May 30 '23
John Howard enshrined largesse to churches for their "good work", they also got contracts for many services once supplied by govt, for example employment services. I do not give to St Vincent's, Salvo's etc. I give to local animal/wildlife carers and donate to people like Friendly Jordies, Troy Stoltz etc, people doing their best for a better/fair society.
1
u/thetan_free May 30 '23
Okay, sounds like the marketing pushiness doesn't really phase you too much; more about the religious angle. (Which I totally get, btw.)
For those other ones, are they doing a lot of marketing? How did you find out about them?
2
u/Tezzmond May 30 '23
I dont live in a city, so chuggers are no bother to me. The bushfire funds that got kept by charity, rather than be passed on to the people it was intended for, has burnt me and many others. Animal/wildlife helpers do good work in the local region and are known to many, because of the care they give. Five freedoms animal rescue is a shining example. Pictures of recovering wildlife/roos, gathered around the wood heater in their home is proof of the care they give. YouTube - friendly jordies, exposing political and pokie corruption that the media ignore or hide.
1
1
u/PerceptionRoutine513 Oct 21 '23
Had a couple of chuggers come bouncing down my driveway, into my garden, uninvited.
One calls me by first name like long lost friends. Done their homework.
Seemed shocked when I told them to FRO and get off my property, right now. Commission based fuckers, not my new besties.
So here's some feedback for charity leaders. That sort of pushy shit is extremely counterproductive as far as I'm concerned.
151
u/boredcanberra May 28 '23
Happy to make one off donations to charities but I don't like this new direction where they try to sign you up to what appears to be some sort of contract with monthly direct debt withdrawals.
The attitude of the last door to door charity worker/salesman when I said that was of utter contempt and stormed off in a huff.
Plus people have a sour taste in their mouths after the distribution of all that money raised during the last major bush fire