I find a lot of charity's to be nothing under the surface

[Jobseeker19]

I have contacted Shetler as a last resort about an issue I'm having and was just sent generic links to stuff I have already done that haven't worked. There was no actual help just information that is already out there.

Last year I had a mental health crisis and spoke to Mind online chat and was told about their Elefriends website which was a place to vent. But no actual help given.

If you look on the websites of many charities you will see they talk about how your donation will help someone desperately in need. But when you apply because you are that person in need there seems to be a barrier and are as helpful as uk.gov websites.

[Typo in title edited by MNHQ]

One issue is that the demand for help is too great. Charities like Shelter can only employ so many people who can only help so many people at a time. Therefore they try to get people to help themselves by providing links etc, you'd be surprised at how many people don't try anything before expecting someone else to do everything for then.
If you can, I would suggest calling Shelter's helpline and saying you need help that way, they can refer to local offices or a national hub for actual help from a person.

I found macmillan and Maggies centre to be very helpful when my Dad had cancer. They went through all the forms with us and we had a dedicated mammalian nurse we could ask questions to.

Having said this I am always intrigued by chuggers (who I believe are paid, although I can't imagine on a huge salary) I commute to a mainline station with a pedestrianised area immediately outside. Every day there are at least half a dozen chuggers milling about their ipads, but as far as I can see, take up from commuters seems to be minimal. They start with "I just want a minute of your time" which of course is not true. They wouldn't be interested if I stopped to have a chat about the weather for a minute and moved on. They obviously want people to set up a DD or make a donation. I get that, and I know its the regular donations that mean charities can forecast their spending and plan etc rather than rely on one offs but I'm dubious about what the "success rate " is.

While certain charities do waste money, a big part of charity work is unfortunately ‘unsexy’ and won’t attract public donations if stated front and centre.
Lobbying, for example. And getting government funding. The amount of expertise it takes to write grants, navigate layers of bureaucracy etc.
This is inherently a political problem.
Mental health, neuro diversity acceptance etc a lot of things that are ‘less’ stigmatised now is due to the tireless background work of raising awareness.

And again… it’s very hard to ensure service consistency because of the funding contracts as pp said.

Really the government should be funding it all and charities shouldn’t need to exist. The fact that we have a third sector is something to be ashamed of really (apart fe things like conservation trusts, but those aren’t the bulk).

Charity bashing will have become fashionable because there are problems with it!!
As amply explained in the posts surrounding yours!

I'm sorry to hear that GodSaveTheQueen2022. That was the first time I'd claimed benefits. Hopefully the last too.

The practical every day living help is thin on the ground, I agree. I got some disability aids from an occupational therapist via a referral from my GP, but outside that I was told to pay for a home help.

Have you tried your local Mind? They are independent charities under the Mind umbrella and they do provide direct support.

I’m sure it is charity dependent as much as the public perception of what each charity does.
I have not read all the thread.
macmillan is one charity that is very misunderstood- probably through advertising being fixed on nurses, which is not really what they primarily.
They find nurse training. I worked for them as a welfare benefits officer - so my role was to help people get the benefits they were entitled to. That didn’t stop people yelling at me because the hospital didn’t offer free parking (that’s hospital dependent), my role didn’t include or involve OT/physio or any medical help. I’m sure people were frustrated by having to ring a different number for other specific advice but it’s not unusual for people to have one specific role rather than being the saviour for every aspect of people’s lives when horrible things happen.
im now a treasurer and a trustee for a national, small charity. It is entirely run by volunteers and we fundraise to keep our events going. No IT, no offices etc. our expenses are petrol and hotel for the big annual event.
so very very different from Macmillan

I do think the public perception of Macmillan is that they pay for the Nurses though but they don't , there is no way they could. They fund certain new roles or projects for a year or so and then those Nurses or health care professionals have to bear the Macmillan name on their badges forever, so I think patients often feel the Nurses are employed by macmillan but it's actually the NHS trusts. It's misleading. I too did a similar role and I'm sure some patients actually thought that Macmillan paid the benefits rather than the government, so would have a go at us. the only direct help Macmillan actually gave financially were the grants which were an absolute lifeline to some people. I think Macmillan do a lot of good work but also a lot of wasted funds and a huge disparity between what the advisors were paid through partnerships and what they paid their own directly employed staff. I think they are trying to streamline things more so that if you ring the national helpline for benefits advice, then you get the option of being referred also for emotional support, energy advice etc, but this way of working did not extend to the partnerships as well so it could seem disjointed with me having to sort someone's benefits then signpost them to somewhere else for practical help with equipment or signposting for emotional support etc.

@lightand actually I think these posts have entirely proved the points I made.

People do not understand the role, remit or reach of charity. They expect charities to provide a global provision of essential and emergency services. But, as a PP said upthread this is simply not the role of (any) charity, it's not possible, not legal and not desirable. The GOVERNMENT is responsible for providing sufficient services and charities only exist because these services are insufficient - they are doing the best they can in an entirely imperfect system.

And Yes, there will be some that are better than others, and there may sometimes be organisational issues as there are in any sector, but that doesnt mean charities as a whole should be condemned as useless - they still achieve vast amounts of good and I am very grateful we have them.

Charities should be clearer on the services they do provide and state it plainly on their website and leaflets etc.

Not after clicking through to the end of the website or after being signposted.

Myself and others are complaining as they overstated help that they did not intend to deliver at all.

My local hospice has to find 70% of it's funding through fundraising and the NHS pays the other 30%. It provides all kinds of services , in patient, day services, complimentary therapy, Lymphoedema services, bereavement support. It is amazing. many local people want to die there or go in for symptom control. If it did not exist then the local NHS services would have to find provision for all these patients and I sometimes dread to think what that might look like. I'm not sure where we would be without places like this. Yet 7 million plus a year to run is an awful lot of money that has to be fundraised by local people.

I can't speak for the big charities, but when my DH was suffering with depression FCN (Farming Community Network) were amazing. I dread to think what would have happened without them.

Ivworked for a charity in The City, the offices were donated and we paid nothing in rent etc.We were paid adequately but the CEO wasnt on a huge wage

I never give to charity anymore...if I had any spare cash I'd rather hand it over directly to an individual. Never forget my friend doing a sponsored thing for a huge charity... I felt pressured to sponsor her. I was absolutely skint and a sahm to two children. I felt like I needed that tenner more than the charity. Imagine guilting your mate to hand over money she desperately needs and thinking that makes you a kind charitable person...oh the irony.

If you're stopped by a chugger working for a particular charity, ask them how they can help you? Shuts them right up.

MacMillan used to pump prime some NHS nursing posts, paying 50/30/20 % salary for 3 years. In return, the NHS had to agree to call them MacMillan Nurses in perpetuity. Thus most Mac nurses are no longer employed by Macmillan.

Some are good. Parkinsons UK were very helpful to me and to my OH during his last years - they funded a carer to sit with him so I could go out to my choir. They had specialist nurses at the end of a phone who gave good advice and support. Also they produce detailed leaflets about the disease and benefits info etc. I found all that very helpful. They also organised a seminar locally with PD experts talking about the latest research.

And CRUSE, the bereavement charity are good. I had 6 free counselling sessions after my OH died - by phone as covid was rife - but I could have had more if I had wanted, and I can go back to them any time.

Also, the local hospice, which is a charitable venture, were wonderful - provided respite care when things were really bad, and when he had appointments they would take me off and give me a massage - it was very welcome indeed as caring is very stressful.

I agree that some charities are a bit pointless. Or have to find something to do - eg Stonewall.

One thing I don't like is when you have multiple charities doing the same thing - an example would be Mama Academy and Count the Kicks. They really should merge and work together, it would be more efficient.

Charities often use agencies to hire "chuggers". The professional chuggers who stand on the high street are generally not directly employed by the charity they are collecting for.

Like others, I'm blown away by the work that my local hospice do. Again, they receive less than 30% of their funding from CCGs, and every single penny more has to be raised through donations.

I'm fundraising for them now because I'm so very grateful for the care they gave my mum - only possible because others had donated, probably because of their own very dark hours.

Please, those of you who say that you would never give to charity again - do you really think that our society would be better without the huge number of charity workers and volunteers doing their best to make things better for others? Really? Because that's exactly what would happen if we all followed that approach.

I have got breast cancer and have found Macmillan the only source of counselling available apart from Samaritans who try but not experts on cancer. Nothing from GP or hospital.

Lovely charity SomethingToLookForwardTo donated me night in hotel which was lovely esp with no income and hard to get ESA claim done. I would fundraise for them when well enough.

Mental health support is dire and really should be state provided imo.

The type of help that the Samaritans give is often misunderstood as well. They are what is termed a ‘listening service’ rather than therapeutic counselling or directive, practical assistance. Those who are accepted for the phone lines are made very aware of the limitations of their role and are warned not to take the place of, say, a paramedic or a doctor.

This might mean that they disappoint those who ring up because their mental health crisis service is understaffed. But the thinking is they still help a lot of people who ring them.

I think that Shelter is unfortunately named. It cannot, generally, find shelter for anyone at short notice. In my voluntary role, I had to help someone incredibly vulnerable, who'd become homeless and was hours away from sleeping in the streets. I phoned so many charities in her area (not local to me, and it was the height of lockdown) and no-one, including Shelter, could help. In the end it was a religious charity that had volunteers who were prepared to take people into their homes with no notice at all (positively saintly, imo, and I'm atheist) who stepped up and went to find her and put a roof over her head.

I have every respect for what the big organisations do, but when it comes to the crunch, it's often the smaller ones (and yes, very often the faith based ones) who actually have people standing by who can react quickly to individual situations.

I donate to local charities, where I can see the work they do. I am more hesitant with larger national ones.
I would rather, of course, that the government find a lot of this, but in reality they can't possibly fund everything, of course.

I agree too. And help should be available on the NHS for serious mental health problems. No one should be reliant on charity.