JumbleDuck
Well-Known Member
Indeed, but I would also want to know a lot more detail before propping them up.
Jubilee Sailing Trust urgent appeal
- Thread starter AndrewfromFal
- Start date
Indeed, but I would also want to know a lot more detail before propping them up.
lw395
Well-Known Member
As a comparison I offer the Andrew Simpson Foundation, which raised £700k at acost of £17.8k, which is 2.5% cost compared to 12.2%.
https://beta.charitycommission.gov.uk/charity-details/?regid=1153060&subid=0
We have 168,000 charities in the UK, 23,576 with activities related to disability.
Bru
Well-Known Member
Well done them (and i do mean that)
However ...
They are a relatively new kid on the block currently benefiting from a) a high publicity profile, b) a group of willing and able volunteers with appropriate know how etc and c) a significant relatively well to do target audience for fund raising efforts
Come back in ten, twenty, thirty years time when Andrew Simpson is no longer fresh in people's minds and hearts and see how they're doing
Plus, raising £750k for a popular appeal is one thing, raising more than 5 times that, year in, year out, is a whole different ball game
We have far too many registered "charities" in the UK, many of which aren't really charities at all (and now, if newly started, would not be allowed to register as such - i do not include JST or ASSF in that number though)
But I'm not sure what the point is that your making?
It's great when charities can achieve their aims without employing staff, ideally that's what any responsible charity trustee would like to see, but whilst some can, some can't
In any case, I'm afraid you've misinterpreted the headline figures you linked to, you need to go to the annual report (and it helps to have been on the finance committee of a large charity for several years, i know where the money is buried
)The £17.8k spent on raising funds does not include any part of the wages and salaries for the full time staff members (currently five, may have been less in 2017). That's (a very creditable i must say) £82,000 in the last reporting year (2017)
I haven't time to work it out right now but i suspect you'll find the JST figures aren't all that different, certainly not proportionally
[70521]
Well-Known Member
I wish them well, but am concerned that they have set their sights to raise a huge amount of cash in a very short time-frame.
My loyalty is with another sailing organisation doing similar work otherwise I would have blown the cobwebs off my wallet and passed some cash over.
My loyalty is with another sailing organisation doing similar work otherwise I would have blown the cobwebs off my wallet and passed some cash over.
Bru
Well-Known Member
It's a known and often effective fund raising tactic. A dramatic crisis appeal for a one off headline grabbing amount of money gets more traction than repeatedly going back to handout well for more modest amounts
The JST situation may be an actual crisis of course but often these "crisis" appeals are really nothing of the sort
And it's a dog eat dog world when it comes to charity fund raising these days. Too many organisations chasing a finite pot of money
anoccasionalyachtsman
Well-Known Member
£650,000 now.
iLens
Well-Known Member
OK, you cynics...
They've raised the £1m, so the disabled can continue to enjoy the sea. (I'm sure they could still do with more donations, though)
They've raised the £1m, so the disabled can continue to enjoy the sea. (I'm sure they could still do with more donations, though)
JumbleDuck
Well-Known Member
Good for them. Now let's hope that they can find a sustainable business model so that the million quid isn't wasted.
PS Minor point ... "disabled people" or "people with disabilities", but not "the disabled", please.
FlyingGoose
Well-Known Member
:encouragement:
iLens
Well-Known Member
I refer you to "Riding for the disabled", "The disabled photographers' society" and "The disabled living society", among others.
Bru
Well-Known Member
Suspecting I may be included amongst the cynics I, for one, am pleased they've achieved their target. No mean feat to raise that sort of money for a relatively niche activity in today's competitive fund raising world. I genuinely hope that this is the end of the Trust's financial woes
I, for one, am pleased they've achieved their target. No mean feat to raise that sort of money for a relatively niche activity in today's competitive fund raising world. I genuinely hope that this is the end of the Trust's financial woes
JumbleDuck
Well-Known Member
Only the first of those refers to a group of people as "the disabled" and it's an out-of-date usage, probably because the organisation was founded fifty years ago. There's no harm in using modern, polite usage, is there?
By the way, avoid "wheelchair-bound" as well, if you're ever tempted. Most wheelchair users really don't like that.
JumbleDuck
Well-Known Member
Suspecting I may be included amongst the cynics
I don't for one instant believe that all that money was raised in a few days, particularly when you see the Gofundme page with lots of "Raised money on behalf of 8 others". It's much more likely that they knew they had a big donation coming in (half a million, say) as well as established fund raising events, so decided to invent a crisis which would (a) get them publicity (b) suggest that they have wide support and (c) pry a bit more money out of the public.
All of which is perfectly legal and not even particularly immoral, but I don't think anyone who has worked in the charitable sector has many illusions about how fundraising and PR are done.
Bru
Well-Known Member
I have no illusions at all after 20 plus years of involvement in charity management (all voluntary for what it's worth). Never again!
Tomahawk
Well-Known Member
After the loss of the Solomon Brown, the RNLI realised they only had two weeks worth of funding if people didn’t continue to donate ata steady pace. They then set about a serious fund raising campaign which has resulted in them being the richest charity in the UK.
DownWest
Well-Known Member
Where I used to live there was a 'Riding for the disabled' and we usually went to the smart yearly din/dance fundraiser.
But, it was universally known as the 'Disabled Horses Do'
FlyingGoose
Well-Known Member
I refer you to calling black people THE black people or Gay people THE Gay people , the use of the word THE to describe a particular group of people is now frowned upon, as a physically disabled person I like just to be called by my Name :encouragement:
anoccasionalyachtsman
Well-Known Member
If I were a past or future user of the JST I'd be happy to be called 'the disabled' - by a donor, and anything he liked if the gift were large enough. But I'd be tempted to use a far fruitier string of adjectives for someone who tells people what I ought to be called who's made it perfectly clear that he has no intention of giving a penny.
Speaking as one whose also spent a bit of time in the not-so-able camp you understand...
JumbleDuck
Well-Known Member
Talk me through this. Because you - correctly - assume that I'm not planning to donate to one particular charity working with disabled people, my views on courteous language are invalid? Right?