I have until quite recently regularly donated to a couple of charities on a regular basis.
However, the salary of the CEO of one of the organisation I donated to exceeds that of the Prime Minister.
I am full of admiration for the volunteers of these organisations and the fund raising efforts of the people who generously give up time
and raise money for charity.
I now only donate to local charities on an ad-hoc basis.
Should I accept that these organisations require a highly competent CEO and continue to donate?
Or should I be more choosy as to which charity I donate too? ( Just for context, I don't donate thousands just a few £ here and there)
0
Comments
A better question is how well run is the charity? How much of what it raises goes to the causes it supports. A CEO on £40K a year might look good as a headline but if only 10% of funds raised goes on the cause, it doesn't look so good.
There are a huge amount of local charities that you can donate to that will see the pence per pound delivered to the end cause eclipse those of big charities.
The second I see a charity employ chuggers, I make a mental note to never give them another penny.
I have donated/raised money for Greenwich Foodbank, Greenwich Winter Night Shelter and South East London Mind over the past year or so.
There will be a local version of most (not all) charitiable causes that you care about.
Charities are complex organisations. The CEO of a charity works just as hard as the CEO of any other company - like it or not, charities are run as businesses.
Personally, aside from whichever corporate charity our company chooses to support each year, my charitable efforts always go towards something local, rather than national. We have a local children's hospice that we raise money for in cycling events, for instance - and I volunteer at a local food bank once a month.
2. If you have, in the past, supported a charity, and you now don't want to because the CEO takes a high salary, then consider whether you can make the same contributions via another route, to meet the aspirations of the charity in question. If there is a "better" way to get your contribution to the front line, then consider that route instead.
3. Charities require CEOs in order to run the charity to the greatest level of efficiency and to maximise donations. No decent CEO, used to managing large organisations would consider getting out of bed for less than the PM earns.
4. Small, local charities also have monies that are inefficiently dispersed. If anyone thinks that local charities are not wasteful, they ought to reconsider.
5. If you give money to a charity and you are concerned about where and how it's spent, it's a good idea to choose a charity that facilitates Gift Aid.
6. The cause you're supporting should be a bigger determining factor than the salary of the CEO. If you want to support a cause, choose a charity that most closely reflects your aspirations for that cause, no matter how big, small or local it is.
7. Giving money to charity is a good thing to do.
I think it is up to each individual to decide if a particular charity is doing good work worthy of their donation but I think it is unreasonable to say that staff shouldn't get a fair wage.
What is a "fair wage" is of course a matter of debate.
The current economic climate makes fundraising extremely challenging and requires many income streams. As mentioned by @Chizz, Gift Aid is very important and I would encourage everyone who is a tax payer, to enable your charitable donations to be Gift Aided. It allows charities to increase the value of donations made by taxpayers by claiming back the basic rate tax paid by the donor on the donation. We can claim 25p in the £ on every donation that is Gift Aided, so a £1.00 donation become £1.25 to the charity.
High rate taxpayers can reduce their own tax bill by Gift Aiding their donations https://www.goodtogive.co.uk/can-high-income-tax-payers-benefit-from-gift-aid-relief/
Tldr; if you want the maximum percentage of your donation to get to the actual good cause, then donate to smaller, local charities.
Theres a photo above the bar.
We simply got the money together, went up the QE and asked what they needed and purchased it.
You would be amazed at the price of those stands that hold drips/bloods.
Apart from the recent cancer one for Cardinals daughter, I would rather pass the money direct whenever possible.
The reality being, I would guess your chosen charity would do well to see 10% of your donation following admin fees
Generally I favour small charities for my donations. Ones run largely by volunteers who cover their own expenses and where at least 90% of what you donate will be going to the end aim with 10% going on costs. This is largely because I have personal connections to these charities - family members founded/run/are involved in them or my Dad as a retired chartered accountant sits on a number of boards of charities.
According to Oxfam GB’s 2023/24 Annual Report, for every £1 donated, 80p (80%) goes toward emergency response, development projects, and campaigning work. Specifically, 39p supports humanitarian emergencies, 39p funds longer-term development projects, and 2p is used for campaigning and advocacy. The remaining 20% is split evenly, with 10p covering running costs and 10p invested in fundraising to generate future income. These figures exclude Oxfam’s retail operations.