Donors' Money - Who Gets It?
- Details
- Published on Sunday, 04 December 2011 00:00
Where the money comes from and how that money is spent are like so many other questions in WIRES. The only body that can answer is the WIRES Board. The general public and donors are given little information. More concerning, the membership also has very limited access to these details. Although the membership owns the organisation they know little of what goes on. The Board, charged with running WIRES, does not encourage questions.
The only financial information available to members of WIRES and the public is the annual report. The problem for those who want to make their own enquiries is that the Board does not allow access to the records. reformWIRES has gained access to some of these records.
According to the General Manager in the 2010 annual report, the greatest concern WIRES has relates to income. This report claims WIRES’ income comes from 5000 to 6000 people who regularly donate, including 450 people who donate monthly and 154 people known to have made bequests. These people account for 98 percent of WIRES’ income.
According to an article recently published in The Daily Telegraph titled "Charities forced to show records in new my school website", WIRES gross fundraising revenue is $1,142,682. Its gross fundraising costs are reported to be $121,780. This means that 10.6% of fundraising income is attributable to associated costs, or put another way, 90% of the money raised goes to WIRES. It would appear from this figure that WIRES is a well run organisation. However, many charities employ people to canvass in shopping centres and the like, and the analysis used in the Telegraph simply compares how much is raised against how much was paid to raise it. WIRES does not canvass for donations in this way, making this measurement of value inappropriate. Furthermore, the amount of money going to directly assist animals in need, rather than being spent on administration, is far more significant.
The accounts statement for June 2011 shows fundraising income as $844,007, which includes $777,501 from bequests
The accounts statement for June 2011 shows fundraising income as $844,007, which includes $777,501 from bequests. Bequests account for 92% of stated revenue from fundraising. Curiously, there is an additional $870,000 in donations as disbursements from the WIRES Public Gift Fund (WPGF) that is formally segregated from fundraising revenue. It is suggested that not including the WPGF as “fundraising” means expenses, such as staff used to attract those donations, do not need to be included. When donations are added to fundraising the total combined revenue comes to $1,714,007. Fundraising costs are stated as $113,821. Staffing costs appear to be excluded from the calculations.
The WIRES Public Gift Fund has four independent directors. How they are appointed and who appoints them is uncertain. How often these appointments are reviewed, and by whom, is also unclear. It has been alleged that one is related to a former member of the WIRES State Management Committee.
WIRES often states that it receives only 2% of its income from government sources. This would appear to be accurate. Included under fundraising revenue is $35,500 from “Government Grants”. From information we have received at reformWIRES this money is automatically granted to WIRES each year without need of an application. No other wildlife rehabilitation service is given grants in this way. This only reinforces the idea that WIRES receives favourable treatment from government.
The above amounts represent only some of the revenue. WIRES has other sources of income, including memberships, interest on investments, and merchandise. The June 2011 financial statement declares WIRES’ total income from all sources to be $1.83 million. Once the direct stated costs of fundraising are removed from total revenue, the net amount is $1.72 million. How much of this remaining money is actually spent directly to assist animals and carers is not as flattering as the Telegraph article indicates.
Inverse Proportions - Members Overworked and Underpaid
There are three levels of WIRES at which money is collected and spent: Head Office, the branches, and the members.
In WIRES the ordinary member is the backbone of the organisation. They do the rescues and the rehabilitation. They pay for their own equipment and almost all the food, fuel and other costs associated with their work. This often amounts to thousands of dollars each year. They assist their branch in local fundraising and give their time to train others. The more a WIRES carer works the more it costs them in effort, time and money. Many would suspect that the money donated to WIRES would go to the carer to directly support their work saving the lives of sick and injured native animals.
There are approximately 2300 authorised members of WIRES currently registered. This is a gross figure and does not reflect the number of “active” members. Members can declare themselves “inactive” and it is WIRES branches that keep details of those members. Using an unnamed branch as a guide it would appear that only 70% of members are registered as “active” for duty. On speaking to several membership officers within WIRES, an estimate of the number who actually undertake rescues and foster caring is roughly 40%, and they suggest this estimate is generous. Applying these proportions means 1,610 members are officially “active”, with 920 members doing most of the work. A rude distribution of the $1.7 million across the membership would result in $745 per authorised member, $1,065 per officially “active” member, or $1,863 for each member who actively cares for wildlife.
Being generous, when one adds together all expenses that relate to members... the total spent directly on members is still only $117,500 per year, or 6.8%
However, according to the accounts of June 2011 the amount directly spent on members is very small. The often mentioned animal food subsidy only accounts for 1.86% of total income at $31,941. This is less than is spent in producing LiveWIRES magazine, which costs $33,520 or 1.95%, and four times more than is spent on Lyssavirus vaccinations at $8,091 or 0.47%. Members often don’t take advantage of the subsidies and assistance on offer because WIRES regularly claims to have no money. Being generous, when one adds together all expenses that relate to members including liveWIRES, the food subsidy and branch expenses, the total spent directly on members is still only $117,500 per year, or 6.8%. This leaves many members wondering what happens to the other 93%, totalling $1.6 million.
Once a WIRES volunteer rescues an injured or sick animal they are required to enter it into the WIRES database. Within weeks of entering the record, Head Office will send out a begging letter to the person who reported the animal to WIRES. Within WIRES these people are referred to as “MOPs” (Members Of the Public). The begging letters will continue to be sent periodically. The good work of the volunteer is a great marketing tool. The shame is that almost none of the donation the MOP gives will find its way back to the animal they have saved or the volunteer who will rehabilitate it.
Stuck in the Middle - Branches Paying the Bills
The next level in WIRES is the local branches. They are responsible for paying local expenses such veterinary bills, which can be significant. It is again the local branch members who are responsible for raising their own income to pay these. Although Head Office claims to support this task there is little evidence of it being overwhelming support.
The Chair said in 2009: “the call on our services is relentless and it is increasing, combined with an ever-shrinking number of active volunteers. We must find solutions to this problem in the next 12 months, or face a crisis”. The number of active members is decreasing. It seems that very little has been done to rectify this in the last two years. One suggested solution is for management to pass on more money to support the workers.
Lyssavirus vaccination... The animal food subsidy... The combined cost of both these projects is only $40,042 or 2.3%.
Lyssavirus vaccination protects volunteers from contracting the life threatening disease carried by some bats. There is only $10,000 budgeted for this per year for the whole of WIRES. The animal food subsidy only reduces the cost of milk replacer for marsupial joeys, and only by 25%. Although birds make up the overwhelming majority of WIRES’ work, with reptiles and adult animals claiming a significant proportion of the remainder, there is no financial support for their care. The combined cost of both these projects is only $40,042 or 2.3%.
The largest single amount allocated directly to branches is $35,266 for phone support. Total funds marked for direct distribution to the branches in the June 2011 accounts, even when both the Lyssavirus vaccinations and animal food subsidy are included, totals $81,245 or 4.7%. Branches are responsible for raising any shortfall.
It is often claimed that Head Office distributes to the branches the donations it receives. There is no policy document mandating this or setting out how these payments might be calculated. There is no item in the June 2011 statement distributing any money received from the WPGF, or any other source, to the branch accounts. On speaking to several branch treasurers it would appear that no distributions are received by the branches either.
Besides bequests, Head Office makes the bulk of its money from donations, a good proportion being online donations through the wires.org.au website. Branches do not have their own online donations facility because Head Office prevents them doing so. All online donations go through the WIRES main website. WIRES claims it distributes donations from the website to branches based on the postcode of the donor, but again there is no evidence of any distribution.
The WIRES website is populated with donation links. Every page asks for money. These links lead to a separate online donation facility run by ThankQ. The ThankQ database, used for fundraising, is listed under administrative expenses in the accounts statement, not under fundraising, and costs $5,855. Almost all the links on the WIRES site are for some type of “appeal” which changes periodically, usually with the season. It has been claimed that using “appeals” affects how the trustees of the WPGF distribute donations.
Head Office is the specified recipient of these “appeals”... It leads donors away from donating to the fund that would distribute to the branches, and forces the trustees to allocate the lot to Head Office
If a donor gives money for a specific purpose, the trustees must distribute that money to the specified cause. Since an “appeal” is a specific cause, the money must go to the specified recipient of the appeal. It is claimed Head Office is the specified recipient of these “appeals” and therefore does not have to distribute to the branches the donations it receives. It is further alleged that only donations received through the generic online form are distributed by postcode to the branches. The links to the “appeals” form are numerous and often prominently displayed as big orange buttons or colourful banners showing pictures of wildlife, whereas the links to the generic form are small and unobtrusive text. The difference is subtle but the outcome considerable. It leads donors away from donating to the fund that would distribute to the branches, and forces the trustees to allocate the lot to Head Office.
This rule of the trustees can work for the advantage of the branches if the donor specifies the branch to which they want the money to go. WIRES has claimed on many occasions that this action is possible on the WIRES website but, as explained above, this facility is not clearly marketed.
There is a postal form available for download on the site, in which a donor can specify to which branch they want their donation to go. Finding that form is not easy. It is not with all the other forms and links in the “donations” section of the website. In that section one can only donate to Head Office. The only link to the branch donation form is located in the middle of a paragraph found on the “regional branch contacts” section, under the “Emergency” tab. Not a logical place to have it, one could argue, unless the intention is to minimise its use.
The branches have significant expenses and are restricted in their ability to raise funds. Most of the branches’ income is generated by its members. The members already pay for most of the direct costs associated with wildlife rescue and rehabilitation. WIRES offers little support to either.
Money Goes to Their Head Office
WIRES pays nearly nine times more to a small group of employees than it does to directly support its entire membership
Of the $1.7 million left for WIRES to spend after official “fundraising” expenses are removed, $873,958 goes on weekly wages. This represents 50.8% of net revenue. Add to that figure all the associated costs, such as superannuation, annual leave, staff travel, etc. and the amount balloons to $995,953, or 58%. There are also consultancy fees of $55,875 representing 3.25%, which is 75% more than the total spent on the animal food subsidy. Staff and consultancy costs combined are $1,051,829, or 61.2% of net income. WIRES pays nearly nine times more to a small group of employees than it does to directly support its entire membership.
The cost of employing staff is substantial and includes personnel responsible for fundraising. It is alleged that other staff regularly participate in fundraising activities too. It would appear however that the work these employees undertake in raising funds is not included when declaring fundraising expenses.
The Chair commented in the 2009 annual report that WIRES had employed a fundraising manager, media officer, and put two rescue vans into service. He stated that as WIRES “have expanded operational staff, we have had to expand fundraising staff to generate more income to pay for the operational staff.” Fundraising has become a primary concern for WIRES management. It is understood that WIRES has contracted the services of a person who actively pursues bequests. Some feel there is an urgent need to review WIRES obsession with fundraising, its spending priorities, and the methods it undertakes to bring in money.
One expense for Head Office is the purchase and operation of the WIRES rescue vans. They operate as a service to members and the community, responding to wildlife emergencies across the Sydney metropolitan area. They are often held out as proof of responsible spending by management of donors’ funds, but there have been suggestions that the vans were paid for by a separate donation of $200,000 given specifically for this purpose.
The WIRES Board meets every month and has access to all the accounts and financial reports. The members of the WIRES State Council (WSC) however, only meet every second month, and are provided with financial statements for the preceding month only. The WSC is provided with the profit and loss statements which give details of sources of income and expenditure. The WSC however is not consulted on all financial decisions made and many, particularly on employment and consultancy engagements, are made by the Board alone. It is understood that there are no members on the Board who have accounting or financial management qualifications, however the Treasurer is hardworking and is always willing to give explanations of the records if asked.
In 2010, the Board proposed cost saving measures to stem the drain on savings. This was at the same meeting that allowed standards teams to vote. There was a need to deal with a substantial decline in funds and an increase to fixed overheads, particularly wages and amounts paid to contractors. The Board’s proposal was to cut costs, but they explicitly excluded reductions in staff and contractors. Proposed cuts included cancelling advocacy funding, reducing Lyssavirus vaccination subsidies, charging for RICC manuals, and limiting some Board expenses. Most of these cuts directly affected members but left the bureaucracy intact.
Up until this meeting WIRES basic training manual, or RICC manual, was free to new members. This essential service would now be billed to the branches and save Head Office $8,000 per annum. Of course this cost was passed on to the branches and to new members. This, at the same time as WIRES was experiencing a drop in membership. Cancelling advocacy saved $2,000. Eligibility for Lyssavirus vaccinations were cut from five members per branch per year to only three. This capped the subsidy at $10,000. The total amount budgeted for research in 2010-2011 was $25,000 or 1.46%. The actual amount spent was $0.00. Another vital service to wildlife not delivered.
the combined accommodation and travel costs for the Board, WSC and standards teams was $73,067... 228% (more than double) that spent annually on the animal food subsidy
The Board took some cuts too at this time. The WIRES Board and WSC members would now only be entitled to claim the equivalent of 35 cents per kilometre by road for their travel to meetings. Their accommodation costs were still covered by WIRES, but the meal subsidy was to be removed. It is unknown how much money this reduction saved. According to the June 2011 financial statement, the combined accommodation and travel costs for the Board, WSC and standards teams was $73,067. This is 4.25% of net income and 228% (more than double) that spent annually on the animal food subsidy.
In April this year the second round of cost cutting occurred. Unfortunately, a lack of financial planning and a dearth of necessary skills resulted in a rescue van being decommissioned in order to save money. The WSC and general membership were not consulted about this decision. The one remaining van driver was left to respond to rescues across the entire Sydney area. That driver resigned several months later. If things are so desperate, then why wasn’t someone in administration sacrificed rather than a rescue van, or life saving vaccinations, or essential training material, which is of far more help to volunteers and injured wildlife? Are the priorities of the WIRES administration sympathetic to those of the people who donate money to WIRES?
Then in June 2011 the General Manager alerted the WSC and Board that the WIRES Call Centre (WCC) could not cope with the amount of calls it received. The WCC could not allocate rescues to volunteers and there was only one van left to service all of Sydney. A substantial amount of WIRES volunteers did not renew their memberships in 2011. The WCC has also experienced considerable staff turnover.
In May this year at a NSW Wildlife Council (NWC) meeting it was reported that three other wildlife groups had been experiencing difficulties due to the WIRES rescue phone going unanswered. This was placing strain on their services. A letter that the NWC sent to WIRES was copied to the Office Environment and Heritage.
There have been suggestions made to the Board on how to save money without cutting vital services. Head Office is located in Forestville. The rent for the offices is $32,896 or 1.92%. The rents around Forestville are approximately a third more expensive than Parramatta, almost double the Blacktown area, and 130% more than rents in the Fairfield area. A move to one of these locations could save up to $18,800 per year. An added benefit of moving to one of these locations is that they are on a main train line and have good public transport. Forestville is a very difficult location for most people to attend. Another advantage is that the offices would be more centrally located, assisting the rescue vans and making it easier for members to attend. This could mean that volunteers might once again start manning the Call Centre. The money saved on WCC staff could be put back into improved services for members. More support for members might keep more members in WIRES and working to save wildlife. This idea was suggested to the board and rejected out of hand.
In 2010, the Board spent $20,000, possibly more, on a private investigator... then proceeded to hold a secret enquiry outside the provisions of the Constitution, without any legal authority or proper legal process
One expense that has epitomised the members’ sentiment in these matters has also been the subject of attention in The Sydney Morning Herald. In 2010, the Board spent $20,000, possibly more, on a private investigator. This person was hired to investigate a number of WIRES volunteers, including a previous employee. The Board could have passed this on to the RSPCA had they acted earlier. Their delay in taking action meant this option was lost to them. Rather than let the matter rest they pursued it. The Board then proceeded to hold a secret enquiry outside the provisions of the Constitution, without any legal authority or proper legal process. A report was submitted to the Board but it was never made public or made available to those members investigated. The findings were not serious enough to warrant referral to the authorities. This was seen as an expensive witch hunt by some in the organisation.
SMH article about private investigator
The 2011 Federal Budget announced reforms to Not for Profit organisations. This includes the establishment of a new independent statutory agency, the Australian Charities and Not for profits Commission (ACNC) scheduled to be operational by 1 July 2012. The Commissioner of the ACNC has already been appointed by the Government and was recently interviewed by the media. The Government will also negotiate with the States and Territories to establish national regulation and a new national regulator for the not for profit sector.
The setting up of the Charity Commission might finally result in an institution with power to investigate the internal workings of charities. It will publish an analysis of the percentage a charity spends on administration and marketing as compared to the spending on the aims of the charity.
Tim Costello, CEO of World Vision Australia, is quoted as saying: “Charities are built upon a "sacred trust" in which donors expect their hard-earned dollars to make a very real difference in the lives of those in need… Donors are right to expect greater transparency.” In the case of a charity like WIRES, where so much of the work is done by volunteers, and so much of the expense borne by them too, the volunteers also expect transparency.
Write the minister
Got Something to Say?
Don't Like Us?
FREE SPEECH says it all
WIRES won't let their members speak about what really goes on. FREE SPEECH is where you can say what you want anonymously without fear of reprisal.
Comments
The toxic behaviour continues....
Are you able to provide a link to the article or name the paper?
I understand there is a posting on WIRES facebook page relating to this item. You might like to follow the thread..if it is not removed.
Not surprising that it was taken down. If you put any negative comment on there they take it down. Instead of fixing problems when they become aware of them they ignor or delete and then the problems solved!
There is another comment FB about a country branch phone coordinator that told the MOP who rescued a cockatoo to knock it on the head.
"The call on our services is relentless and is increasing, combined with an ever-shrinking number of active volunteers. We must find solutions to this problem in the next 12 months, or face a crisis”.
Guess what STANLEY. “This is another fine mess that you have gotten us into”. Not to forget The BILL’S the rest of the Board and the Belligerent. (Sounds like a soapy.)
Could somebody please explain to the Board what a crisis is. I thought They were the crisis.
Or is that when you have received an extra $700,000 and lost even more active members and reduced the volunteer subsidy from 43 cents a day to 42 cents a day?.
What happened to the $700,000.? That amount could have raised the average subsidy to $1.42 per day. i.e. 250% more instead of 2% less.
In a few words the volunteers free heartfelt warm lap has been replaced with untrained expensive cold-hearted laptops.
$2.5 million could have bought and paid for a full-on medical clinic, offices and facilities. Instead it has (to be colloquially crude) been pissed up against the wall and cost animals their lives. No wonder this site is set up to gather evidence for prosecution. People have worked hard for that money and expect it to be of use for native animals specifically, not for SELF CENTERED BARSTOOLS, who may have to forfeit their homes to defend their ‘Indiscretion and responsibility to the dead benefactors.
THE BOARD HAVE NO RESPECT FOR THE DEAD. NO RESPECT FOR THE MEMBERS. NO RESPECT FOR SUFFERING ANIMALS. WE HAVE NO RESPECT FOR THE BOARD THE MANAGEMENT AND THE LOOSE LIPPED SLEEEAZY UNETHICAL,BACK STABBING FUNDRAISER. WE ARE LOWERING OUR GAME TO THEIR LEVEL. WE ARE SO BLOODY OFFENDED BY THE ABOVE AND THE WEAKNESS OF MEMBERS WHO COMPLAIN TO EACH OTHER AND NOT TO THE BOARD OR THE MEDIA AND WHO PUT THEIR PERSONAL FEELINGS BEFORE THE DYING BREATH OF DISTRESSED ANIMALS. AS THEY SAY IN APEX 'MAKE IT HAPPEN'.
looks like you have seen the books, why can't we see them?. I am disgusted with this spending, the call centre is providing a poor service with staff calling volunteers to find out what to do-give us the money instead
BASTARDS!!!!.
Members
Fundraise
Fund Expenses - aviaries,cages,food,equipment
Rescue animals
Care animals
Enter statistics
Train other members
Country Branches also man the phones
Head office
Fundrasing - website, Bequests, appeals
Accounts
Licensing
Media - stories, promotional
SRO - phones for Sydney branches
But I'm sure the commissioner of charities would be interested as would the donors.
Surely such financial arrangements should be approved by the members.
As the General Manager is involved in fund raising, her wages should be taken into account when calculating the percentage of funds spent on fundraising by the Commissioner for Charities.
It is alleged that those wishing to make a bequest are sent to a lawyer acting for Wires. That lawyer probably would not explain that gifts could also be made directly to a branch or for a purpose other than general administration, such as for the care of flying foxes. If it is correct ,then branches are deprived from any imput in gaining bequests for use by their members.
it would be good if Wires showed appreciation when it received a bequest rather than just expressing glee for receiving money.
The minutes of the July 2010 meeting of the MNC branch record, with respect to the will: “Stan had advised Megan [the Chair at the time] that $100,000 had just been received and more was expected. This makes Mid- North Coast the most profitable branch of WIRES”.
Apparently WIRES is regarded by some as a profit-making organisation.
In the WIRES Annual Report ending June 2010, whilst Stan was still Chair, the above ex-wife was listed as a Major Donor. No mention was made of the person who bequeathed the money.
Its not your busness. Thats why. If you think she did something wrong she probly have no problem showing police. You wuold make sure nobody donates or leaves to wires thats for sure.
“... likes to hurt people”: Isn’t it amazing how often people see their own characteristics in others, whether there or not? In psychology, it is referred to as “projection”.
I can’t find the name of the person who left this money mentioned in any annual report. RSPCA and other charities acknowlege bequests in their reports and so should wires.
Total revenues $175,931.00
Total expenditure $50,742
Net profit $125,189.00
Total Assets $170,573.00
Total Liabilities $(3209.00)
Net Assets $173,782.00
The Dept of Primary Industries also gives grants but not to other caring groups, apparently only to Wires.
There was also a grant given to Central West branch which is a branch of a previous Board member.
I resigned from Wires because my concern for animals was never responded to or addressed. I notified management that I was receiving complaints that animals were not being picked up and at times forgotten. This was becoming a problem. They were presented with details of a typical incidence. In hindsight it seems that management had too many volunteers and were prepared to lose myself and others. We were readily snapped up by a well run group who provided constitution and financial reports up to date and upfront before we were trained and enlisted as members.
12 months down the line . Now we find that every second phone call is to pick up an animal for Wires. We live South of Georges River and find ourselves being asked to pick up animals half way between us and the city because Wires do not have a volunteer or van to do the job.
If you draw a circle around those rescue sites on a radius touching my home you will observe that Wires has nobody available between Sutherland Bankstown and the Harbour Bridge. In excess of 300 sq kilometres of dense suburbs (BLACK SPOT?) and let’s say a million people. So what is happening with the 2 million dollars and more from donors grants and members personal financial input. That they have to Welch on other groups who manage to run on a shoe string and who treat their members as assets. My problem was that I choose my friends carefully and I did my job well. One does not have to be as silly as me to realise that there is no annual fiscal report because the dream is dying of a thousand cuts. (Cuts to animal care and carers.) If members do not get off of their ____ and show sum fortitude and combine as they should have 12 months ago Wires could fold. And that would be a disaster for our fine furred and feathers friends. And members. And the public. Let not you ask what wires can do for you. Because they will do what is now being done for "Poor Fella Our Country". I am weary with the complaining "Why doesn’t somebody do something?" Next we will hear from members is "why didn’t somebody do something."
SPARTACUS IS HERE FOR THE ANIMALS. HERE IS YOUR FORUM
MAKE IT HAPPEN.
SILLY Billy
Please extend the circulation of this web site to media and politicians so that reform can happen more quickly because the animals are suffering. THANK YOU SPARTACUS.
spent at branch level and see that they are going direct to pay for
animal food or to help the members. I’ve become wary about making donations to
other charities and am now looking carefully at the management of each
charity that I support and how the donations are spent. People should also do these checks
when considering making bequests in their wills. Happy with the RSPCA as
it appears to me to have very good governance, with a proper Constitution
and policies and all its members have the right to vote for the Board at
the AGM.
You could have registered phone ops all over the state rostered on at different times - maybe 30 or more on call. Someone rings a single number and the exchange/pabx then directs it to the next available PHONE OP (no need for them to leave home, be paid, or go to FORESTVILLE and they could run 24hrs a day and for FREEEEEEEE). Going direct to a carer with rescues, which are complicated, makes no sense at all.
So you could be in grafton, call one number and get a PHONE OP in fairy meadows, or bankstown, or tumut, or grafton - whoever is next available PHONE OP.
With a real proper database allocation system centralized AND MAINTAINED that phone op could arrange a rescue like phone ops in branches do right now.
How do they work out who can rescue what like bats and snaekes and if theyre home?
IF it was a real proper maintained database that would be recorded against the rescuers name - the phone op being trained and a trained carer would know that and how to arrange it.
Dose it go to next carer if not answered? What if goes to a answer service? Or carer is on holiday?
YOU get connected to a PHONE OP first - they arrange a rescue using a proper database that has updated availabilities - if that fails the phone op can talk to the local coordinator - just like they do now. The caller doesn’t go direct to the carer. and the phone op doesn’t need to be in Sydney.
Could it do all groups or will there be difrent numbers for difrent groups?
It would be one number. There is no need for different phone ops for different branches as the current system of paid people with no experience working the phones in that shit hole of forrestville proves.
How much is set up and running costs. Probably less that the over 1 MILLION we spend now for NOTHING but SHIT SERVICE. Talk to some professionals - they could probably cut a deal. You might need a few volunteers to keep the records up to date - add updates etc. The phone exchange is s a computer program.
With a decent online database this could all be made to work. God, you could get people who can’t rescue or fostercare - too old, injured, physically disabled, remote, etc. to volunteer for this. They could become members and only volunteer for phones as a way of contributing.
You make it sound like a hap-hazard nightmare. can’t be any worse than the expensive waste of money we have now. It can work if someone competent was running it - so that means your friends on the board will have to go first.
However, how donations are spent is not a straightfoward issue.
For example Call Centre costs could be viewed as vital, because if there is no-one to take the call and redirect-cordinate members to the rescue, then nothing has been achieved.
Other staffing costs, such recording financial information, entering rescue/release data are legal requirements and must be carried out. Further more - as a general statement - these tasks don’t work well if carried out by members on a voluntary basis.
It will aways be a balancing act.
The “WIRES Van” or is it Vans, to me, seem to be a very inefficient use or WIRES funds, the cost per animal assisted would be very high. However, there would be a substainial benefit via a Public relations and awareness which is very hard to quantify.
The old Constitution specified that donations and or bequests were to be directed to the Branch from which they orinated. This forced WIRES to be a very lean bureaucracy, perhaps a little bit too lean. The new Constitution removed these requirements. Without good Management the WIRES bureaucracy is in danger of becoming self-serving and self propagating. There certainly signs that this may occuting as alluded to in the discussions here.
Additionally the granting of Tax Deductible changes, meant WIRES had to establish a Public Gift Fund, along with all of the legal requirements that entailed. The wording of that Act, meant that the Trustees of the WPGF has ultimate say in how the money was to be used.
It is no where near as simple as it first seems.
But answer your initial question - “Donors’ Money - Who Gets It?”, not the greater majority of members, and much less directly to the Animals.
To change this will require a lot of consultation and work - not something that WIRES has shown to be good at so far.