Pick this year's MSE Charities

MSE_Martin

Hi folks

I know what you mean about smaller charities - its why this year I divided them into two categories so that two small charities will definitely get money. Plus making www.Re-Cycle.org my special pick - it's a tiny charity that has had money for the last three years from the site and I know its a life line (plus i know the chap who founded it) so I thought to suddenly deprive it could cause real problems thus my 'special protetection'

martin

meher

It touched me to learn that several thousands of people visit the CAB a month out of helplessness and in their most vulnerable and desperate times for advice some of which could escape having to go to court and be put through all the added stress that would otherwise follow and advice on debt and money in times of misery. I was thinking perhaps scientific / clinical research should be the obligation of the State and wealthy private pharmaceutical companies who live on the profits no matter what the ethical or moral costs are to fund research. So although I appreciate all other nominations for the benefit of research and health care – I personally voted for the CAB.

boglin

I think it is worth mentioning that Cancer Research UK does a lot more more than simply research into the causes and possible cures for cancer. In my opinion it is a very well-rounded charity which uses its resources wisely and effectively - and with tremendous results.

With most of us affected in some way (either directly or through someone we know) by the disease we should continue to support the vital work being done by this charity.

Through their website CancerHelpUK and printed publications they provide a wealth of invaluable (and discreet) information for cancer sufferers, their relatives and friends.

They provide nurses to support those same groups of people. The nurses respond to around 10,000 enquiries per year by telephone, email and letter.

Two new support ventures are Online Diaries and E-befriending, where cancer patients can keep diaries and also make contact with others affected by cancer in the past.

Cancer Research UK works with politicians and policy-makers to make sure that cancer stays at the top of the health agenda. For example, they were heavily involved in pushing for all workplaces and enclosed public places in the UK to go smokefree, to protect non-smokers and encourage smokers to quit.

As far as the Money Saving aspect goes, the fact that it is a large charity is to its credit, meaning that time and money are being used wisely without duplication of resources. The charity encourages people to think of many and diverse ways to raise funds without it having to cost them much (if anything) - for example, a current scheme called "Give us 1 bag".

Throughout September their shops are running this "Give us..." campaign, to encourage supporters to give just one bag of donations or some time as a volunteer.

Sorry to go on - but as an avid supporter of this charity I just wanted people to know a little more about what they do beyond the obvious.

Thanks for reading!

d.ylan

it's interesting to see that Cancer Research is currently #1.. especially with the Cheif of Cancer Research taking home £140,000 pa for his role.

*source URL="http://society.guardian.co.uk/salarysurvey/table/0,,1042677,00.html"]http://society.guardian.co.uk/salarysurvey/table/0,,1042677,00.html[/URL

(now I know this isn't as obnoxious as the amount some private sector Chiefs can demand, but I still *personally* find it reprehensible for a charity, and would question the value for money for the donators who more-often-than-not I find are not aware of these facts... how much of the mse fund would be solely contributing to one mans financial gain for a passive advantage to the research company, not a perfect question but just a thought to add a little weight to any considerations..)

boglin

The table that you reference has another column, which puts it in perspective:

Amount in £s spent on chief exec's pay for every £1,000 of income

For Paul Nurse, Chief Executive of Cancer Research UK it was 46p per £1000 income to the charity. That is one of the lowest percentages on that list.

However, that information is 3 years out of date (2003) and the Chief Executive of CRUK is now Alex Markham. Professor Markham previously worked as the Director of the Molecular Medicines Unit at Leeds University. He has also been an Honorary Consultant Physician for the NHS in Yorkshire and a national advisor to the Department of Health on gene therapy.
He has held senior advisory roles for the Medical Research Council and the Wellcome Trust, and has extensive management experience in the pharmaceutical industry.

CRUK supports the work of over 3,000 scientists, doctors and nurses working across the UK.
These are the costs:

Paid staff at 31 March 2005
Below £ 50,000 3,237
£ 50,000 to £ 59,999 49
£ 60,000 to £ 69,999 26
£ 70,000 to £ 79,999 15
£ 80,000 to £ 89,999 11
£ 90,000 to £ 99,999 7
Over £ 100,000 9
Total staff costs in 2005 £94,651,000

It sounds like a massive amount of money - but that is for a massive amount of employees - and yes, a few are being paid high salaries but in order to attract the best in their field the charity must offer salaries that compare with similar work outside the charity field. After all, the scientists are not working as volunteers and neither should we expect them to! By employing the best in their field the charity is continuing to make ground breaking research at world class level.

Apart from all of their other projects and campaigns last year this is what the charity was able to spend:

Research expenditure increased to £217m (from £213m in 03/04), increasing both in-house and grant-funded spend, while reducing management and admin costs.

d.ylan

Thank you for your informative and unconfrontational response, I take your comments on board while still finding it somewhat reprehensible. In the interests of full disclosure can you advise of your relationship and interests with CRUK?

I am however interested in if you are aware of how much CRUK spend on purely on marketing each year? (not rhetorical, a question, I assue you!)

boglin

I am not employed by CRUK in any way; I am very committed to the charity having lost members of my family to cancer. For the past 4 years I have raised funds in a voluntary capacity, mostly as an individual and also through supporting various events such as Race for Life - raising altogether over £37,000 for the charity. I have attended conferences for volunteer fundraisers and receive financial reports and if I was in any way concerned about the organisation I would not spend so much of my spare time thinking of new ways to raise funds for them.

I am no accountant or financial expert - but here is a link to part of their financial report for 2005-2006 that may give you the answers you are seeking.

You are right to be concerned and interested in the running costs of charities. In my own very scaled-down way I sometimes wonder about 'spending money to accumulate' but I do think that creating a good image through advertising and marketing is important in encouraging would-be supporters to make the donations or to volunteer their help. In the relatively short time that Cancer Research UK has been operating they have, in my opinion, done an excellent job of 'branding' themselves and becoming known as 'the' cancer charity - the one that 'does what it says on the tin'.

These are all just my own personal thoughts and I thank you for your time spent reading them.

full-time-mum

boglin wrote:

You are right to be concerned and interested in the running costs of charities. In my own very scaled-down way I sometimes wonder about 'spending money to accumulate' but I do think that creating a good image through advertising and marketing is important in encouraging would-be supporters to make the donations or to volunteer their help.

I think that you have just hit the nail on the head here. Larger Charities have the cash flow to advertise and promote their image/cause and, therefore, attract even more donations. This is exactly why it is good, in this sort of situation, to support smaller, lesser known charities, not only are they getting an increase in revenue but they are also getting wide exposure.

Reading that, I think that I have just put the case for the website charity:)

Frozzy

I'm a newbie to this forum although I've been getting Martin's Money tips for a whie.

I've voted for Different Strokes - and really hope they get one of the donations - my husband had a stroke last year aged 54 and the help and support we've received from DS over the past year has been brilliant.

Froz

vicker

I registered with this site only a short while ago and received an email from my friend today urging me to vote for the small charity she works alongside in her job as they really need the money. I didn't know the moneysaving website had so many friends! Anyway, I won't say which charity she works for as they all do great things for people who need them, but they got my vote.

I'm so impressed that the moneysaving that happens on this site is ploughed back into those who need the savings we've all made.