1. In a very short time, their focus turns inwards. To the survival and aggrandisement of the organisation itself. To devise new projects, obtain more funds and to increase in scope and influence is the main goal of all such organisations because, think about it, if by some miracle you actually achieved your targets and delivered as you promised, then you would also eliminate the reason for your own continued existence. This was always to be expected if we weren’t all so naive (extend that logic to the many organizations and agencies that have spawned in the last decade and you can also predict how likely they are to willingly eliminate their own jobs).

2. They very cynically exploit guilt and good intentions alike. They milk public sympathy and they bully corporate CSR for donations but they divert the funds to their own uses.

3. At the lower levels, the field workers and volunteers are often only in it to get the “brownie points” – i.e. something killer to put on their resumes so they look like caring human beings when they apply for their high-paying corporate jobs. I’ve seen volunteers in 3rd world countries acting like prima donnas or visiting heads of state. They will go to visit a family that has lost its home to some disaster and it is clear they think that even showing up in this hot, filthy, muddy place was a great sacrifice and kind deed on their part. They will ask a few inane and insensitive questions, all the more insulting because they are not even well thought out. And they will come back and snipe about the ingratitude of the victims if perchance the family was not obsequiously grateful for their interest and did not kill their last chicken to cook the honored guest a fitting meal.

4. At the other end, leaving our few high-minded altruists aside, most founders of charities and the management committees of ngos learn very quickly what a gravy train they have on their hands and, well let’s just say it turns their head a little. I know of the founder of a charity ngo. He always wears very humble, homespun fabric clothing to show how he identifies with the poor. Its almost his trademark uniform. He also wears a Cartier watch and $1500 crocodile shoes which he thinks people won’t notice or perhaps, cotton on to. Actually I saw him at an airport once when we were boarding the same flight. We walked on to the aircraft and as I turned right to go to my seat in coach he turned left to find his in first class.

I know of another committee that, since they run a non-profit charity and cannot take profits or dividends or salaries, pay themselves $5000 in attendance fees for each committee meeting that they attend. There are a minimum of 12 meetings a month and more can be called anytime one or the other of them decides they need a little extra cash. Best of all, they can sign by remote and need not personally attend.

5. The worst are the micro-finance institutes (that’s small micro loans so someone can, for example, build a chicken coop or buy a bicycle to take their chickens to market). The financial engineering of these loans is pure evil. The lucky borrower has to pay processing fees, documentation fees and in some cases the first installment at the time of borrowing. The interest rates are anywhere from 2 – 4% PER MONTH. The reason for this is, since you are lending to the poorest of the poor, they have no security or collateral to give. Micro-finance models don’t even admit mortgage or collateral because then they would not look like charities, they would look like banks. But on the other hand they argue that since the loans are unsecured and the risk of default is high they have to charge higher interest rates. Sounds like a bank to me. But here’s the diabolical part. If you borrow $100, and they deduct $15 dollars as fees, costs and the first installment on the very day they give you the money, you only go home with $85. But you have to pay 4% a month on the $100 that is the official value of your loan. Effective interest rate: 40.8% per annum. Makes Shylock look like a stand-up guy. The amazing thing is these poor people are so honourable, that even though it ruins them, they sell everything and still manage to pay. In many societies, to default on a loan is like breaking your word and carries heavy social stigma. The micro-finance guys know this, that’s why they love the business. The real risk of default is low, they still charge high, high interest, and entire families and even villages are wiped out in their wake.

6. Now all the above points are about how they are run and arguably, that can be fixed. There’s one over-riding question that nobody can give a clear answer too and that is, “Does it work?” This is the development/dependency debate. A whole school of economic theory from Latin America in the 60s and 70s rejected development through aid, however well-intentioned, because they felt it taught people not how to become self sufficient (such as through employment, empowerment and private enterprise) but how to keep getting money from a charity.

ps: I am a dog walker. Yes, full time job. I am not in the non-profit industry except as a volunteer.

YOU GUYS ARE ALL WRONG. Yes, the United States Congress has fined and held herrings on tainted blood for which the Red Cross has dangerously incompetant management. // Most charities, problobly starting in the 1990’s are hiring high paid CEO’s from the private sector to 1) run optimally 2) tremendisly increase their fund raising abilities.

Small charities are usually efficient but need funding. They hire a million dollar CEO who then raises 10 million dollars each year.

Who’s complaining? If your gay, charity’s reflect society. Discrimination is still around.
Ask a female military general how she had handled discrimination. Yes, America has female generals.

[quote]rainman said: “Their logic is that male-male sexual activity makes a person terribly likely for HIV infection. Now the numbers don’t really show that, with many more HIV-positive heterosexual people than gay; if there’s a disparity it’s small.”[/quote]

This is simply not true, and the perpetuation of lies like this is why HIV has spread as quickly as it has. The risk of HIV transmission from anal intercourse is MUCH higher than for vaginal. Do some research before you spread myths, and please, be safe.

I was born a 3rd generation Jehovah’s Witness in 1957 and endured the Watchtower’s no blood commandment with longstanding bleeding Crohn’s disease.The Watchtower leadership expects followers to die for their dogma and many have.The medical staff get blamed and are ‘damned if they do damned if they don’t’.

In 20 years there will be artificial blood for anyone who chooses it,putting an end to this drama.

I am Danny Haszard a real lifelong JW with a scary 28 year chronic bleeding disease who “took his stand on blood” and refused it countless times

http://www.ajwrb.org/basics/abstain.shtml Jehovah Witness blood policy reform site

http://www.towertotruth.net/Articles/blood_transfusions.htm Will you die for a lie?

Jehovah’s Witnesses may take certain components of blood, such as hemophiliac preparations (Factor VIII and Factor IX),and have for many years.The greatest risk of AIDS infection comes from this procedure which is allowed by the Watchtower society,so this proves that this whole entire blood ban thing is totally made up and man made and NOT from the Bible.

http://www.ajwrb.org/basics/abstain.shtml