Re: [silk] the business of charity!?!
2009/3/26 > > > --- On Thu, 26/3/09, ashok _ wrote: > > > From: ashok _ > > Subject: Re: [silk] the business of charity!?! > > To: silklist@lists.hserus.net > > Date: Thursday, 26 March, 2009, 1:29 PM > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 8:42 AM, > > Bonobashi > > wrote: > > >There is also an unfortunate tendency to assume > > >that work here should be paid differently, on the > > >basis of voluntarism, thus scaring away young > > >people, most of whom are under enormous pressure > > >from their parents and family to show reasonable > > >social return on investment. It tends to become > > > > Its a bit difficult to justify equating salaries in NGOs > > with private > > sector jobs. > > Most NGOs i have seen carry huge administrative costs, so > > much so that > > the proportion of funds spent on administrative costs / vs > > / project > > implementation spending is sometimes ludicrous > > > > Secondly, if you have a private sector company -- if it > > isnt doing > > well it either goes bankrupt / closes down -- this is > > because there is > > a very clear definition in terms of what is the starting > > point (to > > manufacture / service a need etc..) and what is the ending > > point (not > > competitive, service not required anymore etc...). With > > NGOs, while > > there seems to be a clear starting point -- it is never > > clear when the > > ending point has been reached. > > > > Most NGOs start with a kind of charter - a statement > > describing why > > the organization has been started. What is perhaps needed > > is a clear > > identification of time-frames and goals -- and if those > > arent reached > > the organization is disbanded at that point because it > > clearly did not > > serve the purpose it was built for. > > From what I know of the social sector after a brief brush with it over a > period of slightly less than a year, what I have stated as a cause is what > you have re-stated as a result. > > Please consider: in a private sector organisation, there is a constant > paranoia about head-count; there is no encouragement to add numbers unless > the individuals concerned are able to add value to the efforts of the team > as a whole within a very short time of their joining the team. My experience > of NGOs has been that there are large numbers of incompetent and untrained > people milling around and getting in each other's way in the absence of > structures, processes and systems, and their salaries, pitiful though they > are, add to the disproportionate administrative costs that occur in this > sector. > > What I am advocating is a reduction in numbers of staff engaged, and an > increase in their competence and capability. > > In an ideal world, this increase in competence and capability would be > achieved by excellent training mechanisms and by the addition of hitherto > untrained or less-trained individuals to the work force. Instead large sums > of money are spent, and produce no result because they are going as salaries > of people who simply can't do what they are supposed to do. > > In a less than ideal world, therefore, the social sector is compelled > either to host these masses of non-performing people or to compete with the > private sector at salary levels which are frankly unaffordable, considering > that the social sector expressly does not set out to make money or to be > self-sufficient. > > This is still not the worst-case scenario. The social sector could be > drawing its personnel from the public sector. > > Therefore in this less than ideal world there is no short-term alternative > for hiring in competition with the private sector, at the salary levels > which will encourage talent to work in the social sector. In other words, at > salary levels which may not match, but which come close enough to give pause > to youngsters and make some of them take the pllnge; > A few clarifications: *1. Charity regulation and oversight* All registered charities, both public trusts and Section 25 not-for-profit companies) are subject to greater oversight and regulation than their corporate counterparts, These mechanisms include reporting to the regional Charities Commissioners and the Home Ministry under the Foreign Contributions Regulation Act (FCRA). All tax exemptions, on the charities own revenues as well as those extended to donors, are subject to review and oversight by the Finance Ministry. These are in addition to the reporting and compliance requirements of any commercial entity by way of Income Tax, Sales Tax, Octroi, Customs, ESIC, Provident Fund
Re: [silk] the business of charity!?!
--- On Thu, 26/3/09, ashok _ wrote: > From: ashok _ > Subject: Re: [silk] the business of charity!?! > To: silklist@lists.hserus.net > Date: Thursday, 26 March, 2009, 1:29 PM > On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 8:42 AM, > Bonobashi > wrote: > >There is also an unfortunate tendency to assume > >that work here should be paid differently, on the > >basis of voluntarism, thus scaring away young > >people, most of whom are under enormous pressure > >from their parents and family to show reasonable > >social return on investment. It tends to become > > Its a bit difficult to justify equating salaries in NGOs > with private > sector jobs. > Most NGOs i have seen carry huge administrative costs, so > much so that > the proportion of funds spent on administrative costs / vs > / project > implementation spending is sometimes ludicrous > > Secondly, if you have a private sector company -- if it > isnt doing > well it either goes bankrupt / closes down -- this is > because there is > a very clear definition in terms of what is the starting > point (to > manufacture / service a need etc..) and what is the ending > point (not > competitive, service not required anymore etc...). With > NGOs, while > there seems to be a clear starting point -- it is never > clear when the > ending point has been reached. > > Most NGOs start with a kind of charter - a statement > describing why > the organization has been started. What is perhaps needed > is a clear > identification of time-frames and goals -- and if those > arent reached > the organization is disbanded at that point because it > clearly did not > serve the purpose it was built for. From what I know of the social sector after a brief brush with it over a period of slightly less than a year, what I have stated as a cause is what you have re-stated as a result. Please consider: in a private sector organisation, there is a constant paranoia about head-count; there is no encouragement to add numbers unless the individuals concerned are able to add value to the efforts of the team as a whole within a very short time of their joining the team. My experience of NGOs has been that there are large numbers of incompetent and untrained people milling around and getting in each other's way in the absence of structures, processes and systems, and their salaries, pitiful though they are, add to the disproportionate administrative costs that occur in this sector. What I am advocating is a reduction in numbers of staff engaged, and an increase in their competence and capability. In an ideal world, this increase in competence and capability would be achieved by excellent training mechanisms and by the addition of hitherto untrained or less-trained individuals to the work force. Instead large sums of money are spent, and produce no result because they are going as salaries of people who simply can't do what they are supposed to do. In a less than ideal world, therefore, the social sector is compelled either to host these masses of non-performing people or to compete with the private sector at salary levels which are frankly unaffordable, considering that the social sector expressly does not set out to make money or to be self-sufficient. This is still not the worst-case scenario. The social sector could be drawing its personnel from the public sector. Therefore in this less than ideal world there is no short-term alternative for hiring in competition with the private sector, at the salary levels which will encourage talent to work in the social sector. In other words, at salary levels which may not match, but which come close enough to give pause to youngsters and make some of them take the pllnge; Cricket on your mind? Visit the ultimate cricket website. Enter http://beta.cricket.yahoo.com
Re: [silk] the business of charity!?!
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 8:42 AM, Bonobashi wrote: >There is also an unfortunate tendency to assume >that work here should be paid differently, on the >basis of voluntarism, thus scaring away young >people, most of whom are under enormous pressure >from their parents and family to show reasonable >social return on investment. It tends to become Its a bit difficult to justify equating salaries in NGOs with private sector jobs. Most NGOs i have seen carry huge administrative costs, so much so that the proportion of funds spent on administrative costs / vs / project implementation spending is sometimes ludicrous Secondly, if you have a private sector company -- if it isnt doing well it either goes bankrupt / closes down -- this is because there is a very clear definition in terms of what is the starting point (to manufacture / service a need etc..) and what is the ending point (not competitive, service not required anymore etc...). With NGOs, while there seems to be a clear starting point -- it is never clear when the ending point has been reached. Most NGOs start with a kind of charter - a statement describing why the organization has been started. What is perhaps needed is a clear identification of time-frames and goals -- and if those arent reached the organization is disbanded at that point because it clearly did not serve the purpose it was built for.
Re: [silk] the business of charity!?!
. [26/03/09 08:38 +0530]: aurobindo ashram etc (several of which have 100% tax exemption for social work projects they carry out, and which also have large, even grandiose building programs like that huge golden golfball at auroville, for example) ... isnt that the 5-star path to moksha (nirvana if you must). Auroville is about the only place you can get authentic croissants rather than the poor (soggy / overly chewy etc) imitations you get in most five star hotels, bakeries etc in India. So I am glad to let my wife believe all that while I check out croissants and apricot preserve.
Re: [silk] the business of charity!?!
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 10:30 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > > if he wanted to compare donation figures he could compare those to the > figures going into shirdi, puttaparthi, siddhivinayak temple, There was a media report on this some years ago but I dont remember the details. Apparently, Indian laws mandate all hindu temples (of certain size/earnings?) automatically fall under the purview of the Indian government. That means temples which want a tax-exempt status have to maintain a board which *has* to have government representative/s who make decisions on the temples behalf. All the funds collected (like hundi donations) and earned via sales get tax-exemption status, are public property (read, under government rules) and subject to govt directives. While the temple is a rich entity under the government control with 80G tax-exempt status, the temple priest gets a daily salary of Rupees 100 (this data is a few years old and needs to be verified). Under the RTI act, it *may* be possible to get information on how a (for example, mumbai's siddhivinayak) temple's funds educational institutions in Maharashtra's districts/villages. It would also be enlightening to check the antecedents and political affiliations of the management receiving the funds. You (read public) cannot ask a CSI, wakf board or a NGO/sec25 company, trust or society board for their annual financial data since all other religions are considered minorities, not covered by this legislation under Indian laws. Private entities are exempt from public purview/censure. The legal eagles on this list would know legalese better. Another example: A temple land can easily be encroached upon, not so with land belonging to other religious trust/boards who can go to court (a temple trust can too but its easier to stall that and the reader can use their imagination on "how"). The author could have researched a little bit more before penning his article. > aurobindo ashram etc (several of which have 100% tax exemption for social work > projects they carry out, and which also have large, even grandiose building > programs like that huge golden golfball at auroville, for example) ... isnt that the 5-star path to moksha (nirvana if you must). .
Re: [silk] the business of charity!?!
On Wednesday 25 Mar 2009 8:52:18 am Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Ah no. Not really. I simply believe in removing the root causes. > > That dimwitted and loudmouthed academic is - as you point out - simply an > example case. And my proposal to boot him out was prompted more by a > desire to see IIMs have actual quality in place rather than simply > punishing him. That dimwitted and loudmouthed academic is an acquaintance of mine and I have asked him if he would be interested in defending himself on this list so that "intelligent convesration" can occur. Perhaps. shiv
Re: [silk] the business of charity!?!
Ah no. Not really. I simply believe in removing the root causes. That dimwitted and loudmouthed academic is - as you point out - simply an example case. And my proposal to boot him out was prompted more by a desire to see IIMs have actual quality in place rather than simply punishing him. On the other hand, having the bjp voted out of power in all the states its currently dangerously active in (gujarat and karnataka now) would certainly go far to remove the threat of such ideologies being backed by state power ss [25/03/09 08:48 +0530]: On Wednesday 25 Mar 2009 7:08:38 am Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: getting the fellow thrown out of his comfortable tenure at iim-b might help, for a start. maybe a formal complaint to the dean of iim-b for whatever good it will do? This is pointless. There are a thousand others like him sending out information that you don't get to read. You read this guy only because it is your tendency to read a particular segment of the English media. He is expressing an opinion and your reaction, with respect, is reminiscent of the desire to personally punish people with contrarian opinions as shown by both the Taliban and the Ram Sene. voting out the bjp / other sangh parivar parties (whose ideologues seem to be the ones mainly behind these tirades) in the election would certainly help. This is the only option. Get political support for your view. Exactly what is being done about that? shiv
Re: [silk] the business of charity!?!
On Wednesday 25 Mar 2009 7:08:38 am Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > getting the fellow thrown out of his comfortable tenure at iim-b might > help, for a start. maybe a formal complaint to the dean of iim-b for > whatever good it will do? This is pointless. There are a thousand others like him sending out information that you don't get to read. You read this guy only because it is your tendency to read a particular segment of the English media. He is expressing an opinion and your reaction, with respect, is reminiscent of the desire to personally punish people with contrarian opinions as shown by both the Taliban and the Ram Sene. > > voting out the bjp / other sangh parivar parties (whose ideologues seem to > be the ones mainly behind these tirades) in the election would certainly > help. This is the only option. Get political support for your view. Exactly what is being done about that? shiv
Re: [silk] the business of charity!?!
ss [25/03/09 06:07 +0530]: Exactly what can be done about this - other than sarcasm and contempt? getting the fellow thrown out of his comfortable tenure at iim-b might help, for a start. maybe a formal complaint to the dean of iim-b for whatever good it will do? voting out the bjp / other sangh parivar parties (whose ideologues seem to be the ones mainly behind these tirades) in the election would certainly help.
Re: [silk] the business of charity!?!
On Tuesday 24 Mar 2009 11:12:07 am Bonobashi wrote: > The article itself is tendentious; Christian contributions bad and meant > for perverted priests and houses of worship where the innocent are > converted, Muslim contributions go to buy bullets and bandannas, Hindu > contributions are not Hindu contributions, they are morally committed > individuals doing their humble bit for the upliftment of Mother India. This > has never been stated in so many words, but the examples speak for > themselves. The individual author responsible also needs to be known and > identified in his political context for the article to make full sense. This is the point. NGOs in general are being seen as agents of the dying Church in the West seeking to harvest souls in India. Incredulity and contempt are the usual reactions to this - but remember that incredulity and contempt did nothing to either Osammy or Dubya - who both carried on with what they felt they had to do. There is a wide ad spreading feeling that NGOs are a front for both evangeilsm and jihad. Only one NGO needs to be shown to have even a remote conenction with such activities to tar the whole bunch. This is a very real thing - as real as the Ram Sene and Varun Gandhi. What will start happening is physical attacks against NGO.s If they use jeeps - guess what will burn first? Exactly what can be done about this - other than sarcasm and contempt? shiv
Re: [silk] the business of charity!?!
Bonobashi wrote: > India. This has never been stated in so many words, but the examples speak > for themselves. The individual author responsible also needs to be known and > identified in his political context for the article to make full sense. > > Well, it's a nice example to show how anybody can write anything without thinking. We need to let his students know so that they can keep away from him or sing that very famous Pink Floyd number (to him, in class) about education, derisions and fat wives beating the crap out of the teachers... what was that song now? That said, any amount of punning will not make me pan down 100s of lines to read what you have to say, however well it is composed. Come on, please take a moment and try to delete at least a few lines before sending. Does anybody know if "I sigh" will make for an awful pun in any language? Venkat
Re: [silk] the business of charity!?!
Nishant Shah [24/03/09 10:56 +0530]: On a different analogy, this reminds me of the Englit classes where old foggy professors who looked like they were chanelling the spirit of Chaucer, would come and sneer at authors who were 'successful' or 'rich' or 'both', and made snide remarks about artists 'who were appreciated in their own time!' The problem is that there IS a grain of truth in this, and several 'NGOs' do exist whose sole purpose in life is to receive funding and convert it into hefty salaries and foreign junkets, but little else. They are the sort that give 'civil society' such a bad name that I have seen people who actually DO a lot of public service, on their own time and through their workplace (both), emphatically resent it if they are labeled civil society. I've come across several characters of that type, running the fellowships program for a couple of asiapac / south asian conferences, and talking to people who provide fellowship funding for several conferences around the world. You know the type I'm talking about .. The sort who claim to work for NGOs in the field, and then once they have their ticket and hotel booked for them and your invitation letter has got them a visa, promptly turn up to collect their perdiem, and then go shopping / sightseeing. The time they sign the registration paperwork and collect their per diem will be the last you ever see of them. If they do turn up, well .. there's free wifi and they have a laptop so they spend more time downloading random stuff than they actually attend sessions. We do try to minimize this type of freeloader coming in, and we have a comprehensive evaluation program for fellows, but we cant avoid them totally given the number of fellowship applications that come in. suresh
Re: [silk] the business of charity!?!
--- On Tue, 24/3/09, Nishant Shah wrote: > From: Nishant Shah > Subject: Re: [silk] the business of charity!?! > To: silklist@lists.hserus.net > Date: Tuesday, 24 March, 2009, 10:56 AM > I think the basic problem with this > article is that it is grounded in an > archaic, romanticised imagination of an NGO as essentially > consisting of > 'jhola' carrying social workers who move in the > underdeveloped regions, in > their open shoes, caring for the people at a personal > level. It probably > also imagines all NGOs as necessarily in the domain of > 'voluntary extras' > where people have full time jobs and then spend their time > and money doing > this other important thing which needs to be attended to. > > The very headline suggests that the writer is hoping to > invoke derision from > like-minded people, by calling the NGO industry a > 'business'. Strangely, as > somebody who has worked with many NGOs in the past, and > indeed, as somebody > who runs an NGO now, the headline doesn't offend me. I > think it extremely > reasonable that the recruits from the Management institutes > shall put their > efforts into the development sector and help reap results > which have often > been elusive because the passion for a cause was not always > matched by a > head for practicalities or account books. > > I personally would feel hugely crippled in my work, if I > did not have an > efficient staff who specialise in different administrative > tasks so that > they run the office, take care of the finances and > co-ordinate logistics > where I can spend my efforts in what I am trained to do - > to work, think, > network and make interventions in the areas of my interest > and expertise - > rather than spending worrying time trying to figure out > Tally and audits and > management of resources et al. > > The only value that this article has for me, is to remind > me, of how the > development sector in the realist cinema imagined and > indeed crippled a > large part of the NGO movement in India because it forced > them to adhere to > some Khadi wearing Gandhian swayam-sevak, thus keeping the > best talents in > the country away from the field - most people preering to > opt for corporate > jobs. > > On a different analogy, this reminds me of the Englit > classes where old > foggy professors who looked like they were chanelling the > spirit of Chaucer, > would come and sneer at authors who were 'successful' or > 'rich' or 'both', > and made snide remarks about artists 'who were appreciated > in their own > time!' > > Nishant > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 10:27 AM, Mahesh Murthy > wrote: > > > I think it's a little silly. > > > > There are billions spent in India from sources like > the Bill & Melinda > > Gates > > Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the Michael Dell > Foundation and the like > > which go to NGOs that do a whole lot of good. > > > > I am not sure anything can be gained by shutting this > source of funds. > > > > Yes, some of this money does go to religious and > quasi-religious > > organisations. Including - let me say the dreaded > words - Jesuit > > organisations and madrassas. > > > > Just as loads of money comes from rich NRIs to fund > the VHP in India. > > > > How will you differentiate one from the other? > > > > And once the money comes in, dos it matter very much > that it came from a > > religious or a non religious source? > > > > And why does the author complain about buying jeeps > and renting offices? > > Can > > one be expected to work in rural or urban India > without a place of work or > > transportation? > > > > Mahesh > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 10:18 AM, . > wrote: > > > > > http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?newsid=1241042 > > > > > > It's time the government shut the foreign-funds > tap for NGOs > > > Prof R Vaidyanathan > > > Friday, March 20, 2009 23:59 IST > > > > > > Mumbai: A non-governmental organisation (NGO) is > any voluntary, > > > non-profit, citizens' group which is organised on > a local, national or > > > international level. It could be registered as a > society, trust or > > > under section 25 -- companies, even though some > cooperatives also > > > claim this label. > > > > > > There are two important criteria: the > organisation should not be for > > > makin
Re: [silk] the business of charity!?!
I think the basic problem with this article is that it is grounded in an archaic, romanticised imagination of an NGO as essentially consisting of 'jhola' carrying social workers who move in the underdeveloped regions, in their open shoes, caring for the people at a personal level. It probably also imagines all NGOs as necessarily in the domain of 'voluntary extras' where people have full time jobs and then spend their time and money doing this other important thing which needs to be attended to. The very headline suggests that the writer is hoping to invoke derision from like-minded people, by calling the NGO industry a 'business'. Strangely, as somebody who has worked with many NGOs in the past, and indeed, as somebody who runs an NGO now, the headline doesn't offend me. I think it extremely reasonable that the recruits from the Management institutes shall put their efforts into the development sector and help reap results which have often been elusive because the passion for a cause was not always matched by a head for practicalities or account books. I personally would feel hugely crippled in my work, if I did not have an efficient staff who specialise in different administrative tasks so that they run the office, take care of the finances and co-ordinate logistics where I can spend my efforts in what I am trained to do - to work, think, network and make interventions in the areas of my interest and expertise - rather than spending worrying time trying to figure out Tally and audits and management of resources et al. The only value that this article has for me, is to remind me, of how the development sector in the realist cinema imagined and indeed crippled a large part of the NGO movement in India because it forced them to adhere to some Khadi wearing Gandhian swayam-sevak, thus keeping the best talents in the country away from the field - most people preering to opt for corporate jobs. On a different analogy, this reminds me of the Englit classes where old foggy professors who looked like they were chanelling the spirit of Chaucer, would come and sneer at authors who were 'successful' or 'rich' or 'both', and made snide remarks about artists 'who were appreciated in their own time!' Nishant On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 10:27 AM, Mahesh Murthy wrote: > I think it's a little silly. > > There are billions spent in India from sources like the Bill & Melinda > Gates > Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the Michael Dell Foundation and the like > which go to NGOs that do a whole lot of good. > > I am not sure anything can be gained by shutting this source of funds. > > Yes, some of this money does go to religious and quasi-religious > organisations. Including - let me say the dreaded words - Jesuit > organisations and madrassas. > > Just as loads of money comes from rich NRIs to fund the VHP in India. > > How will you differentiate one from the other? > > And once the money comes in, dos it matter very much that it came from a > religious or a non religious source? > > And why does the author complain about buying jeeps and renting offices? > Can > one be expected to work in rural or urban India without a place of work or > transportation? > > Mahesh > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 10:18 AM, . wrote: > > > http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?newsid=1241042 > > > > It's time the government shut the foreign-funds tap for NGOs > > Prof R Vaidyanathan > > Friday, March 20, 2009 23:59 IST > > > > Mumbai: A non-governmental organisation (NGO) is any voluntary, > > non-profit, citizens' group which is organised on a local, national or > > international level. It could be registered as a society, trust or > > under section 25 -- companies, even though some cooperatives also > > claim this label. > > > > There are two important criteria: the organisation should not be for > > making profit and should be independent of the government. However, > > many NGOs get money from the government. > > > > NGOs are also expected to be value-based organisations. The range of > > activities they are involved in is mind-boggling and can extend from > > issues of ageing to waste management. > > > > The funding for these NGOs is substantially international. The > > international flow of funds is regulated by the Foreign Contributions > > Regulation Act (FCRA). Table-1 provides the trends in the number of > > reporting registered associations and the amount of money received > > under the Act. > > > > We find that the number of reporting associations has declined > > (percent wise) over the period and the numbers of those not complying > > with the laws have increased. For instance, the ministry has placed > > 8,673 associations under "prior permission" category in 2005 for > > failure to furnish annual returns for the three previous consecutive > > years. There exists substantial under-reporting. > > > > We also find that in the last three years, the amount received has > > shown a phenomenal increase and it was 56% more in 2006-
Re: [silk] the business of charity!?!
--- On Tue, 24/3/09, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > From: Suresh Ramasubramanian > Subject: Re: [silk] the business of charity!?! > To: silklist@lists.hserus.net > Date: Tuesday, 24 March, 2009, 10:30 AM > > -Inline Attachment Follows- > > . [24/03/09 10:18 +0530]: > >http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?newsid=1241042 > > > >It's time the government shut the foreign-funds tap for > NGOs > >Prof R Vaidyanathan > >Friday, March 20, 2009 23:59 IST > > where did the fool get his tenure? well, any indian > university is full of > idiots with tenure, so .. that's probably not relevant > here. > > he started out on a perfectly good angle - NGOs that treat > foreign + > government funding as a cash cow and do far more to line > their own pockets > than any kind of public service. > > then it went straight into a reprehensible rant that solely > targets > christian church type groups > > if he wanted to compare donation figures he could compare > those to the > figures going into shirdi, puttaparthi, siddhivinayak > temple, aurobindo > ashram etc (several of which have 100% tax exemption for > social work > projects they carry out, and which also have large, even > grandiose building > programs like that huge golden golfball at auroville, for > example) As Udhay pointed out this is publicly archived. Just don't waste time on such poisonous effusions. Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to http://messenger.yahoo.com/invite/
Re: [silk] the business of charity!?!
. [24/03/09 10:18 +0530]: http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?newsid=1241042 It's time the government shut the foreign-funds tap for NGOs Prof R Vaidyanathan Friday, March 20, 2009 23:59 IST where did the fool get his tenure? well, any indian university is full of idiots with tenure, so .. that's probably not relevant here. he started out on a perfectly good angle - NGOs that treat foreign + government funding as a cash cow and do far more to line their own pockets than any kind of public service. then it went straight into a reprehensible rant that solely targets christian church type groups if he wanted to compare donation figures he could compare those to the figures going into shirdi, puttaparthi, siddhivinayak temple, aurobindo ashram etc (several of which have 100% tax exemption for social work projects they carry out, and which also have large, even grandiose building programs like that huge golden golfball at auroville, for example)
Re: [silk] the business of charity!?!
I think it's a little silly. There are billions spent in India from sources like the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the Michael Dell Foundation and the like which go to NGOs that do a whole lot of good. I am not sure anything can be gained by shutting this source of funds. Yes, some of this money does go to religious and quasi-religious organisations. Including - let me say the dreaded words - Jesuit organisations and madrassas. Just as loads of money comes from rich NRIs to fund the VHP in India. How will you differentiate one from the other? And once the money comes in, dos it matter very much that it came from a religious or a non religious source? And why does the author complain about buying jeeps and renting offices? Can one be expected to work in rural or urban India without a place of work or transportation? Mahesh On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 10:18 AM, . wrote: > http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?newsid=1241042 > > It's time the government shut the foreign-funds tap for NGOs > Prof R Vaidyanathan > Friday, March 20, 2009 23:59 IST > > Mumbai: A non-governmental organisation (NGO) is any voluntary, > non-profit, citizens' group which is organised on a local, national or > international level. It could be registered as a society, trust or > under section 25 -- companies, even though some cooperatives also > claim this label. > > There are two important criteria: the organisation should not be for > making profit and should be independent of the government. However, > many NGOs get money from the government. > > NGOs are also expected to be value-based organisations. The range of > activities they are involved in is mind-boggling and can extend from > issues of ageing to waste management. > > The funding for these NGOs is substantially international. The > international flow of funds is regulated by the Foreign Contributions > Regulation Act (FCRA). Table-1 provides the trends in the number of > reporting registered associations and the amount of money received > under the Act. > > We find that the number of reporting associations has declined > (percent wise) over the period and the numbers of those not complying > with the laws have increased. For instance, the ministry has placed > 8,673 associations under "prior permission" category in 2005 for > failure to furnish annual returns for the three previous consecutive > years. There exists substantial under-reporting. > > We also find that in the last three years, the amount received has > shown a phenomenal increase and it was 56% more in 2006-2007 than in > the previous year. The report of the home ministry also provides other > information regarding the states receiving the largest amount and > purpose, etc pertaining to the year 2006-2007. > > It suggests that important states or union territories are Tamil Nadu > (Rs 2,244 crore), followed by Delhi (Rs 2,187 crore), Andhra Pradesh > (Rs 1,211 crore) and Maharashtra (Rs 1,195 crore). Among donor > countries, USA leads in the list of donor countries (Rs 2,972 crore), > followed by Germany (Rs 1,649 crore), UK (Rs 1,425 crore) and > Switzerland (Rs 605 crore). > > The leading donor agencies are Misereor Pastfach, Germany (Rs 1,244 > crore), World Vision International USA (Rs 469 crore), Foundation > Vicente Ferrer Spain (Rs 399 crore) and ASA Switzerland (Rs 302 > crore). > > The largest recipients are Ranchi Jesuits of Jharkhand (Rs 622 crore), > followed by the Santhome Trust of Kalyan, Maharashtra (Rs 333 crore), > Sovereign Order of Malta, Delhi (Rs 301 crore), World Vision of India, > Tamil Nadu (Rs 256 crore), Jesuit Educational and Charitable Society, > Karnataka (Rs 230 crore). > > Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh are some of the states with > a large number of NGOs. It is curious to note that the poorest states > like Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, etc do not have as many numbers. Among > the top 15 recipients, each with more than Rs 90 crore receipts from > abroad, at least 14 are easily identifiable as Christian charity > organisations from their names. > > The interesting information is regarding the purpose of the donations > (see Table-2). Establishment expenses top the list, followed by relief > and rehabilitation, rural development, child welfare and construction > and maintenance of schools and colleges. Substantial sums are spent on > construction of places of worship and maintenance of priests. > > Establishment expenses consist of buying land, buildings, jeeps, > setting up fancy offices, mobiles, laptops, expensive cameras, > salaries, consultancy fees, honorarium, and importantly, foreign > travel etc, which make up 35-70% of the expenses. This goes against > the grain of service motto where the ultimate recipient is supposed to > get the maximum. > > By definition, NGO activity is voluntary and hence one expects that > the overheads of the organisations are lean. In financial parlance, > the fixed cost is expected to be relatively small.
Re: [silk] the business of charity!?!
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 10:18 AM, . wrote: > It's time the government shut the foreign-funds tap for NGOs > Indian NGOs can and should access funds from domestic sources and > there are millions of charity minded Indians. It is not required for > Europeans or Americans to send money for our NGOs who spend it on > establishment expenses and conversion propaganda to fill up the > statistical "soul harvesting" exercise of foreign evangelical groups. This is silly. Just because most foreign donations are used for evangelical purposes does not imply all donations are used as such and it's ludicrous to ban all foreign donations on such grounds. A larger question is whether evangelical purposes are illegal, per our current legal setup - I don't think they are, and even if it is, whether it should be illegal - I don't think it should. Of course, this article only tracks the 'legal' inflow of money - so that's a dead end in itself... -- Please read our new blog at: http://blog.prathambooks.org
[silk] the business of charity!?!
http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?newsid=1241042 It's time the government shut the foreign-funds tap for NGOs Prof R Vaidyanathan Friday, March 20, 2009 23:59 IST Mumbai: A non-governmental organisation (NGO) is any voluntary, non-profit, citizens' group which is organised on a local, national or international level. It could be registered as a society, trust or under section 25 -- companies, even though some cooperatives also claim this label. There are two important criteria: the organisation should not be for making profit and should be independent of the government. However, many NGOs get money from the government. NGOs are also expected to be value-based organisations. The range of activities they are involved in is mind-boggling and can extend from issues of ageing to waste management. The funding for these NGOs is substantially international. The international flow of funds is regulated by the Foreign Contributions Regulation Act (FCRA). Table-1 provides the trends in the number of reporting registered associations and the amount of money received under the Act. We find that the number of reporting associations has declined (percent wise) over the period and the numbers of those not complying with the laws have increased. For instance, the ministry has placed 8,673 associations under "prior permission" category in 2005 for failure to furnish annual returns for the three previous consecutive years. There exists substantial under-reporting. We also find that in the last three years, the amount received has shown a phenomenal increase and it was 56% more in 2006-2007 than in the previous year. The report of the home ministry also provides other information regarding the states receiving the largest amount and purpose, etc pertaining to the year 2006-2007. It suggests that important states or union territories are Tamil Nadu (Rs 2,244 crore), followed by Delhi (Rs 2,187 crore), Andhra Pradesh (Rs 1,211 crore) and Maharashtra (Rs 1,195 crore). Among donor countries, USA leads in the list of donor countries (Rs 2,972 crore), followed by Germany (Rs 1,649 crore), UK (Rs 1,425 crore) and Switzerland (Rs 605 crore). The leading donor agencies are Misereor Pastfach, Germany (Rs 1,244 crore), World Vision International USA (Rs 469 crore), Foundation Vicente Ferrer Spain (Rs 399 crore) and ASA Switzerland (Rs 302 crore). The largest recipients are Ranchi Jesuits of Jharkhand (Rs 622 crore), followed by the Santhome Trust of Kalyan, Maharashtra (Rs 333 crore), Sovereign Order of Malta, Delhi (Rs 301 crore), World Vision of India, Tamil Nadu (Rs 256 crore), Jesuit Educational and Charitable Society, Karnataka (Rs 230 crore). Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh are some of the states with a large number of NGOs. It is curious to note that the poorest states like Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, etc do not have as many numbers. Among the top 15 recipients, each with more than Rs 90 crore receipts from abroad, at least 14 are easily identifiable as Christian charity organisations from their names. The interesting information is regarding the purpose of the donations (see Table-2). Establishment expenses top the list, followed by relief and rehabilitation, rural development, child welfare and construction and maintenance of schools and colleges. Substantial sums are spent on construction of places of worship and maintenance of priests. Establishment expenses consist of buying land, buildings, jeeps, setting up fancy offices, mobiles, laptops, expensive cameras, salaries, consultancy fees, honorarium, and importantly, foreign travel etc, which make up 35-70% of the expenses. This goes against the grain of service motto where the ultimate recipient is supposed to get the maximum. By definition, NGO activity is voluntary and hence one expects that the overheads of the organisations are lean. In financial parlance, the fixed cost is expected to be relatively small. Contrary to this belief, we find that the establishment expenses are the major reasons for receiving donations from abroad. In other words, NGOs are perhaps becoming like top-heavy government departments wherein a substantial portion of developmental expenses is spent on salary wages and other expenses such as telephone, travel (both domestic and international), etc. Nowadays, they even recruit "executives" from management institutions. NGOs are active in pointing out the deficiencies in the functioning of the government, be they on human rights or the Right to Information or Tribes Act or dam oustees. Hence, it is all the more important that their activities are transparent, particularly from the point of view of their sources and uses of funds. I have tried unsuccessfully to get the annual reports including annual accounts from the website of the top 25 recipients, many of whom are often mentioned or quoted in newspapers and TV channels and stress the importance of "transparency" in the functioning of the government. Many do not have any inf
