Do you ever feel some big charities don't actually do anything?

[Cinderellaspumpkin]

Do you ever feel some big name charities don't actually do much more , when scratching under the surface, than signposting, ( often to other organisations that signpost), and "raise awareness," of the cause.

A lot of charities don’t do a lot. You need to look into admin fees. Many of them are mostly just an income for the ceo. There is a very popular men’s charity that is busy in November. Most of the money raised went to the man running it. It has improved, but never assume that a charity does much. You have to do your research.

MacMillan have been a fantastic support for my family as we continue to navigate a terminal illness. They are fabulous and we’d be lost without them.

What @thecatsthecats said.
Size isn't a measure of success or efficiency.

Charities are organisations run by people, and like any organisation that involves people some will be better than others, some individuals will take the piss but most will be decent hard workers, and the organisation will go through good patches and bad patches.

I've worked and volunteered for national, regional and local charities. They have different roles, and achieve different things. I now work for a medium sized local charity affiliated with a household name - the work I do is hugely different from that my national colleagues do but it's all very needed, and we're all underpaid and busting a gut for a cause we believe in. There was a very good review a while ago (maybe by Giving what we can.. ?) about how we need to start measuring charities by impact not crude %spent measures which tell us nothing useful and confuse the general public.

If you don't want to give to charity then don't, that's your choice. But don't try to pretend you're actually taking the moral high ground because you've decided to proclaim some ill-informed opinion to make yourself feel good!

Our local Mind throw money around on vanity projects that undermine better work being done by others, and constantly ask the community to 'chip in' rather than doing proper fundraising activity. And the local Mind boss is on 95k and is seen as some sort of martyr by some, it makes me

I have worked alongside McMillan, Admiral nurses and the MND society and can't fault them for the practical support they give to patients and the free training for health care workers.
By contrast The Alzheimers Society seem to promise a lot but deliver very little.

I think another issue is duplication. In bristol we have 72 charities aimed at helping the elderly in the city. There are a large number of charities working with the homeless too.
Just think how effective they could be if they joined forces!

It's normal, in fact vital, to signpost if there is a whole other charity best suited for your issue or that can see you sooner where time is of the essence.

Yanbu. Ever tried contacting the RSPCA to help an animal in distress? Don't bother

Agree with this too. There have been some fantastic social services and health care funded projects shelved or outsourced to charitable agencies who have then provided a shoddy service or stopped providing them altogether.
"Singing for the brain" I'm looking at you.

They have different agendas. Large MH ones lobby to the government for policy change, whilst delivering smaller projects that are different depending on locality and who wins the contracts.

It’s because charities have to compete with each other for funding off the commissioners so it’s all about the data in the end. The true mission can get lost due to how it’s structured in terms of funding. On the whole I don’t think they’re helpful for mental health issues but neither do I think statutory services are any good too

I don’t donate to charities that just do ‘awareness raising’.

But I mix my donations and give to both small and large charities. I think people can be very naive and rather stupid about how much it costs to deliver a specialized service in difficult circumstances and how much it costs to ensure a continued source of revenue for long term projects. The ‘best’ charity is not necessarily the one with the lowest overheads.

For those that are critical of charities and how they are run, would you prefer your money went to the state and for services to be provided by the state? And to those supportive of charities, same question.

Yes
I worked for one - as a contractor, good money - and they were actually reducing their involvement in the practical things, doing a lot of signposting. They seem to exist for the benefit of directors on six figures with big expense accounts. I was offered a second contract there but said no.

I am very careful about where my donations go. There's some good books on this.

Age Concern ( if that is what it is called this year) are exactly what the OP has described in my experience. They offer no practical help, and their advice is generally to contact another organisation for advice or information.Citizens Advice Bureau does a lot of the heavy lifting for many charities, though I think they are finding it much more difficult to recruit volunteers since Covid.

Cross post
I'm not critical of charities full stop, I think there's some operating in ways I dislike

I'd definitely like to see more hospice places funded by healthcare money, though the local hospice is the main place I support. Less money for NHS who have questionable procurement processes and processes per se.

A lot of good points already made, however on the point of ‘providing information’, that is a valuable and often costly service in itself:

Reading, interpreting and understanding the research;
Being aware of government policies and services;
Avoiding bias and commercial influence*;
Incorporating the views of practitioners and those with lived experience;
Presenting the information in a way that can be easily understood and is accessible to different groups of people;
Keeping said information up-to-date.

This is why charities employ researchers, participation specialists, librarians etc whose roles might appear to be ‘admin’ but who actually do a really important job.

*Yes, commercial organisations do try to influence charities to promote their products and they can be very devious about it!

Did the man at the top do a lot of the work, lead the team effectively etc? Then pay him. Certainly lots of people know this charity and it encourages them to raise money.

Yeah that's a fallacy I've seen played out time and time again in the development sector - charities squandering money on projects that don't work or stuff that isn't needed because they don't want to pay for the admin or staff that would allow them to put their money where its needed.

I only give to charities that pay their staff properly, and who put a good chunk into the administration of their affairs. All that safeguarding, auditing, training, accounting, monitoring, a robust complaints procedure- that's all overheads. If you don't want any of your money to go on overheads then that's what's cut and the result is that donors get a nice warm glow and recipient's get sweet fa.

I do get that but working in the field of ageing & knowing Bristol a bit I’d say

• most of them won’t be Bristol wide but work in a particular bit of Bristol e.g lockleaze, Southmead, knowle West
• some will be Bristol wide but have a narrow focus eg providing housing for older ppl or working on something specific eg dementia
• I do know that Age UK Bristol coordinates an ageing hub that tries to pull them all together so they work together but I suspect it’s a lot like herding cats! I do a similar job and it’s really hard to get them to work together mostly because working together requires time to build trust & relationships. Most small local charities are very focused - rightly - on the doing and so don’t have time to come to meetings to get to know & understand colleagues & so build trust. They just don’t see that as a priority compared to eg ensuring the lunch club at Easton community centre runs. It’s a difficult one to crack

Macmillan is absolutely a charity I wouldn't donate to.

They don't have to run or maintain any buildings - like for example your hospice does.

They pay for new posts, but only for 2 years after which the NHS picks up the bill. However all of those posts remain Macmillan branded for eternity - great for their brand awareness! Compared to your local hospice which has to fundraise for everything - usually only 1/3 max is paid for by the NHS.

So, what do they actually need so much money for?

You may have thought your Macmillan nurse was awesome but she doesn't work for Macmillan. She's awesome thanks to the NHS unit who train her.

Exactly. The big household name charities in the UK like the RNLI, Oxfam, Red Cross, British Heart Foundation, RSPCA are subject to so much criticism and scrutiny in the press and by the charities commission. Annual reports and published accounts for all the big charities are all online and you can easily see how much money they're taking in and what they are spending it on. And then use that information to make an informed decision about whether you wish to support them or not.

Small independent charities run by a husband and wife, or two siblings, often have no requirement to be as transparent. No independent oversight, no need to publish an annual report or accounts. Everything done on trust. Some might be doing an amazing jobs, others not so much. And you have no way of sorting the wheat from the chaff.

We have a large laboratory a mile down the road staffed by Cancer Research funded scientists. A friend's daughter is doing a PhD researching cell changes in heart disease funded by the British Heart Foundation. When my dad was terminally ill in hopsital (not with cancer) we were visited and supported by a McMillan funded palliative care nurse. The RNLI saved 408 lives in 2021. Oxfam sent 19 tonnes of aid to help people in Turkey get clean water after the February earthquake.

But yeah, they don't "do" anything. 🙄

He started the company, it’s successful and I imagine he works hard. But I prefer to bypass his pocket and have donated directly to other charities his charity supports rather than letting him take a cut. My money can do more that way.

Age UK (formerly Age concern - they changed the name in 2009) operate the same model as MIND ie a national charity that does campaigning, policy, research, information & provides advice & guidance to the local Age UKs who are all independent affiliated charities who deliver the direct services to older people.

Can you give some examples, please? Genuinely curious @tomfromloveislandsbeard