Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

In Search Of The Red Cross' $500M In Haiti Relief (2015)

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 182 posts

Re: In Search Of The Red Cross' $500M In Haiti Relief (2015)

#71

Post by fencepost »

opportune wrote: post #52
finnh wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's up with Komen? I realize I could google it, forgive me, but it sounds like you're in a position to give me a quick precis =)

They actually only spend about 20% of their revenues on breast cancer research. They spend a lot of their money, about 40% of revenue, on "awareness companies" which have dubious real-world effectiveness, and can be considered a clever way for them to market themselves and fundraise without actually having to report it as such (they spend 10% on fundraising to begin with). They're also very litigious. Of course they…

They probably also haven't fully recovered from their brief attempt in 2011-2012 to stop working with Planned Parenthood [1][2], which is where a large number of women get medical care such as breast exams and cancer screenings. They had a huge drop in donations following that debacle.

For the curious, Karen Handel (now R-GA6) is believed to have been the driving force behind that.

[1] https://mobile.nytimes.com/2012/11/09/giving/komen-foundatio...

[2] http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-susan-g-kom...

Re: In Search Of The Red Cross' $500M In Haiti Relief (2015)

#72

Post by IncRnd »

maxerickson wrote: post #70
IncRnd wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's similar to the difference between opex and capex. You can call it a marketing gimmick, but 100% of the money put into capex is capex, at least according to the page you linked.

The hygienic accounting doesn't change whatever the overall efficiency is. (a sibling comment to yours points out that the separate accounting can help create good incentives, which could well be the case, but looking backward, there is still an efficiency that can be calculated and compared to other charities)

Hygenic accounting, marketing gimmick? It's really straightforward, so I don't see why you need to malign a charity that has found a way to separate overhead from assistance.

o=overhead donations (min of 25k)

a=assistance provided

donations received = o+a;

donated % used for charitable cause = a*100/(o+a)

Re: In Search Of The Red Cross' $500M In Haiti Relief (2015)

#73

Post by maxerickson »

IncRnd wrote: post #72
maxerickson wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The hygienic accounting doesn't change whatever the overall efficiency is. (a sibling comment to yours points out that the separate accounting can help create good incentives, which could well be the case, but looking backward, there is still an efficiency that can be calculated and compared to other charities)

Hygenic accounting, marketing gimmick? It's really straightforward, so I don't see why you need to malign a charity that has found a way to separate overhead from assistance. o=overhead donations (min of 25k) a=assistance provided donations received = o+a; donated % used for charitable cause = a*100/(o+a)

I don't see what is malign about hygienic accounting.

Marketing gimmick is certainly a cynical take.

Re: In Search Of The Red Cross' $500M In Haiti Relief (2015)

#75

Post by [deleted] »

bretthagler wrote: post #63
tlb wrote: post #13

A plug for New Story ( https://newstorycharity.org/ ), which has built 900+ homes in Haiti for $6000 in donations each. And they think a lot about building those homes into functional communities.

Thanks, Trevor. Hi all, I'm the ceo and co-founder at New Story. We're proud of the work we've done in Haiti as we've also used all local material and local labor to build the homes. What's more transparent than just the "100%" promise, is that we prove to donors via family profile pages and move-in videos the exact results of their donation. If someone donated $6k on our site now, 100% of that goes towards local mat…

[deleted]

Re: In Search Of The Red Cross' $500M In Haiti Relief (2015)

#76

Post by craftyguy »

siddboots wrote: post #61
pragone wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Care to expand on this? Edit: Based on the downvotes, I'm guessing I wasn't really clear what I was going for - I hadn't heard about the International Committee before, so I was looking for some more information about how they differ.

The structure of the international red cross movement is a bit confusing. There are completely independent national societies in most countries (E.g. The American Red Cross), as well international organisations based in Geneva (The ICRC and the IFCR). In the US, the phrase "Red Cross" often is used to refer to " American Red Cross ", which is the national society who deliver blood services and local disaster response…

> They've come under some criticism for apparent lack of transparency around how donations are spent, and for allegedly having very high overheads.

They are also borderline abusive with how often they will call you and harass you if you miss an opportunity to donate blood. They apparently have unlimited funds to pay phone operators.

Re: In Search Of The Red Cross' $500M In Haiti Relief (2015)

#77

Post by nowarninglabel »

oconnor663 wrote: post #57
tehwebguy wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It means everyone donating knows what their money is going to. If you want 100% of if to go to houses, it will.

That doesn't mean as much as it sounds like it does, though. Suppose an organization has $100 of "houses only" money, and another $100 of "general fund" money, $20 of which is also spent on houses. Now say I donate $5 of my own money to "houses only". There is absolutely nothing stopping the org from (and arguably nothing wrong with) reducing the "general fund" spending on houses by $5, so that the ultimate amount th…

That's not how it works with New Story as they are not putting their own operating funds towards funding houses. It'd be odd and a question in the auditing process if a non-profit operated the way you described.

Re: In Search Of The Red Cross' $500M In Haiti Relief (2015)

#78

Post by justin66 »

finnh wrote: post #48
opportune wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It could happen, it just couldn't come out of the blue. Someone would probably need to pay for a nation-wide awareness campaign (the irony) about the evils of corrupt charities such as The Red Cross or Susan G Komen.

What's up with Komen? I realize I could google it, forgive me, but it sounds like you're in a position to give me a quick precis =)

Their profile on charitynavigator.org is pretty benign:

https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summar...

They got involved in a political fight involving Planned Parenthood:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_G._Komen_for_the_Cure#Re...

Re: In Search Of The Red Cross' $500M In Haiti Relief (2015)

#79

Post by masters3d »

"The point is that the concern we should have is not just about the $500,000,000 donated for Haiti for which the good hearted donors received just six $400 shacks. The concern is about billions of donated dollars intended to help people all over the world. The Haiti data demonstrates that for each billion donated to the Red Cross we get a total of 12 each $400 shacks which we wouldn't put our lawn mower in.

The greatest mystery for me is why the major media outlets keep advising well intended Americans to give to the Red Cross. If any of us operated like the Red Cross has for years the media would be screaming for our prosecution as it should. Why not the Red Cross? And worse, why do they encourage hard working and generous Americans to give to an organization about whom there is public knowledge of extreme abuse of billions of donated dollars ?!" - Hotes Foundation

Reference:

https://hotesfoundation.org/500-million-for-6-shacks-in-hait...

https://hotesfoundation.org/red-cross-haiti-relief-scandal/

Re: In Search Of The Red Cross' $500M In Haiti Relief (2015)

#80

Post by astura »

craftyguy wrote: post #76
siddboots wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The structure of the international red cross movement is a bit confusing. There are completely independent national societies in most countries (E.g. The American Red Cross), as well international organisations based in Geneva (The ICRC and the IFCR). In the US, the phrase "Red Cross" often is used to refer to " American Red Cross ", which is the national society who deliver blood services and local disaster response…

> They've come under some criticism for apparent lack of transparency around how donations are spent, and for allegedly having very high overheads. They are also borderline abusive with how often they will call you and harass you if you miss an opportunity to donate blood. They apparently have unlimited funds to pay phone operators.

Not borderline abusive, they are straight up abusive with their phone calls. If you ever decide to give blood do NOT give them your phone number.

I tried to give blood ONCE and found out that I was ineligible. For the next five years or so they harassed me non stop about giving blood. I told them I was ineligible they just said "ok" but I still got phonecalls. I asked them to stop calling me but they didn't stop. After a while I would just hang up on them. I got the phonecalls to stop by emailing the ombudsman. Never got a reply but the phonecalls stopped shortly after.

Post reply on HN