Pennies - Todays Charity for Review ....
Pennies - The Electronic Charity Box - http://www.pennies.org.uk/
Of course all methods of helping those in need are to be applauded - however, just for the moment let's stop and take a look at this one
We all know that charity is big business and this one has all the all the hallmarks of becomming one of the biggest in the time and potentially a 'nice little earner' for those involved. The roll call of supporters together those involved is impressive and that is what these things are all about !
Nevertheless, taking the stated aim as the goal of:
'.. 100 retail partners by the end of 2015 yielding as much as £43 million a year for UK charities ..'
'.. we will move to a self-sustaining model where we retain 5% of donations for Pennies' operational costs ..'
Yes, that is 5% of the take goes to Pennies for acting as middleman - i.e. £2,150,000 to operate - mmmm ..... So by 2015 is it going to be bumper salaries all round ?
(for those of us with long memories the business equivalent of this was termed 'salami-slicing', but essentially this has now been legitimised)
Starting with the charity commission
Accounts - y/e November 2009 - http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/Accounts/Ends89/0001122489_AC_20091130_E_C.PDF
Accounts - y/e November 2010 - http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/Accounts/Ends89/0001122489_ac_20101130_e_c.pdf
Have a look at the following:
Incoming resources £1,147,072 (say £971,792 after donated services)
Staff costs £205,491 (17.9% of incoming resources)
No employee earned more that £60,000 during the year (which means that someone does ear this; from previous year when £0 was reported)
Total funds carried forward £677,290
Now here is the interesting one - Charitable activities £508,864
Grants actually made = £10,138
Hang on - are we actually saying is that out of total income (all forms) of £1,147,072 they handed out £10,138 and the rest was either eaten up in costs or reserves
Could someone please explain how this fulfils the charity mandate by any known benchmarks
Of course this may have been incorrectly interpreted, however, if this is the situation then what is going on ?
One for the Charity Commission to investigate ?