CWCI International: mini-charity review

Mini charity review of CWCI International (CWCI), as an organisation that invites you, on its website, to donate to it. (Including the answers to the questions that the Australian charity regulator, the ACNC, suggests that you ask.)

Are they responsive to feedback?

  • When sent a draft of this review, on 10 February, they…did not respond.

Is CWCI registered?

  • No, not as a charity.
  • Nor is it incorporated.
  • It doesn’t even have an ABN.
  • Here’s their contact details.

What does CWCI do?

  • ‘The International Board’s primary ministry is to arrange the production of Know Your Bible (KYB) studies and their translation for use worldwide’ (emphasis in original) [http://www.cwci.org.au/about.php].
  • Donations are for ‘the current translation projects’.

Do they share the Gospel?

  • Not their mission.

What impact are they having?

  • No information found.

What do they spend outside the costs directly incurred in delivering the above impact, that is, on administration?

  • No financial information is available.
    • However, their Associate membership of Missions Interlink requires them to “have available for [their] members and supporters a clear and appropriate financial statement which has been approved by its auditor.” So just ask.

Can you get a tax deduction?

  • No

Is their online giving secure?

  • PayPal is used, so yes.

What choices do you have in how your donation is used?

  • None

Is their reporting up-to-date?

  • No information found.

Does their reporting comply with the regulator’s requirements?

  • They have no regulator.

What financial situation was shown in that Report?

  • NA

What did the auditor say about the last financial statements?

  • No audit report has been made public.

If a charity, is their page on the ACNC Register complete?

  • NA

Who are the people controlling the organisation?

To whom is CWCI accountable?

  • To Missions Interlink, because it’s an Associate member.
    • You might ask them whether it’s acceptable for one of their members to not be registered as a charity.

Adelaide College of Ministries (ACM): mini-charity review

N.B. The following appears on the website of this ministry:

The board of Adelaide College of Ministries have made the difficult decision to close the College at the end of 2016 due to a number of significant factors. The finances have reached a stage where it is impossible to continue without going into debt, the search for a new Principal has been unsuccessful, and student numbers have become dangerously low.

The ministry is still a member of Missions Interlink (‘the Australian network for global mission’), and it intends to continue to pursue its mission:

The continuing mission of ACM is to teach the Word of God by training and equipping leaders for the Kingdom. The ACM board believes that scholarships and assistance in such a way will fulfil the wishes of the many donors and supporters we have had over the years. This Fund will be administered by godly men who have a deep commitment to the foundational principles of ACM. Further details will be available in the days ahead, but we feel confident that this is God’s direction for us.

A review in the series ‘Associate members of Missions Interlink’ is therefore still appropriate.

When sent a draft of this review, they…did not respond.

Is ACM registered?

  • Still registered as a charity.
  • Still registered as a South Australian incorporated association (A7728).

What does ACM do?

Until the end of 2016 it was a bible college. It is now reorganising as a fund to provide scholarships and assistance to ‘leaders for the Kingdom’ (see the introduction, above).

Do they share the Gospel?

  • NA – either in the past or their intended future.

What impact are they having?

  • Now irrelevant for the College; no activity yet for the fund.

What do they spend outside the costs directly incurred in delivering the above impact, that is, on administration?

  • Now irrelevant for the College; no activity yet for the fund.

Can you get a tax deduction?

  • They are not calling for donations at the moment, but if they do, then it won’t be for either of the tax-deductible funds (one for building, the other for the library).

Is their online giving secure?

  • NA at the moment.

What choices do you have in how your donation is used?

  • NA

Is their reporting up-to-date?

  • Yes (six months after year end, the day before the last day).

Does their reporting comply with the regulator’s requirements?

  • AIS 2015: Except for the lack of outcomes, yes.
  • Financial Report 2015: Yes
    • The audit report is unsigned.
    • There is no related parties’ disclosure.

What financial situation was shown in that Report?

  • Past performance is largely irrelevant now, but at 31 December 2015 they had net assets of $3.05 m at going concern values. Land and buildings were $2.75 m of this, with buildings valued at cost and the land ‘at board’s valuation’ (undated).

What did the auditor say about the last financial statements?

  • He gave a ‘clean’ opinion[1].

If a charity, is their page on the ACNC Register complete?

  • Almost – ‘Phone’ and ‘Website’ are blank.

Who are the people controlling the organisation?

To whom is ACM accountable?

  • To Missions Interlink, because it’s an Associate member.
  • ACM is also accountable to the ACNC, and the South Australian regulator of associations.

 

 

  1. To take the right amount of comfort from a ‘clean opinion’, please read here and here.

Reformed Theological College: mini-charity review

Mini charity review of Reformed Theological College (RTC) as an organisation that invites you, on its website, to donate to it.

Is it responsive to feedback?

  • When sent a draft of this review, they…did not respond.

Is RTC registered?

  • As a charity, yes.
  • Other registrations:
    • ITA is a public company, a company limited by guarantee.
      • Its name: It is permitted to omit ‘Ltd/Limited’ at the end.
    • It operates, per the ACNC Register, in all states. No fundraising licences are held[1].

What does RTC do?

  • It is a “reformed, evangelical theological college”.
  • Or as they say in the Annual Information Statement 2015 (AIS 2015):
    • The Reformed Theological College is committed to training people to serve God in the whole of life.

Do they share the Gospel?

  • NA – students would have already heard it.

What impact are they having?

  • No information found.

What do they spend outside the costs directly incurred in delivering the above impact, that is, on administration?

  • The expenses are not classified to allow this calculation.

Can you get a tax deduction?

  • Yes

Is their online giving secure?

  • Security is not mentioned.

What choices do you have in how your donation is used?

  • None

Is their reporting up-to-date?

  • Yes (five and a half months after year end).

Does their reporting comply with the regulator’s requirements?

  • AIS 2015: No
    • A number of the financial figures do not match those in the Income Statement.
    • No outcomes reported.
  • Financial Report 2015: No
    • Why not consolidated reports? Both Pigdons Road Pty Ltd and The Trustee for the Reformed Theological College Foundation are subsidiaries.
    • Other comprehensive income is not shown.
    • The item ‘Other expenses…’ is 35% of expenses, yet there is no breakup.
    • There is no related parties’ disclosure.
    • RTC says that the financial statement are general purpose; the auditor says they are special purpose.
    • Why are the two ‘Non-Operating Activities’ any less part of the College’s operations than the ones under ‘Operating Activities’? (This is not a distinction used by the ACNC.)
    • Buildings and the library are not depreciated. (The surplus is therefore overstated.)
    • $116,966 in Note 2 is not ‘Net cash provided by from (sic) investing activities’.
    • The land and buildings valuation is long out-of-date.
    • How does an ‘Overseas student assist (sic) fund’ meet the definition of a liability? Likewise, the ‘Other’ provisions?

What financial situation was shown in that Report?

  • With the knowledge that
    • the Report, because it omits RTC’s two subsidiaries, shows an incomplete picture, and
    • adjustments to the figures and disclosures are needed (see just above) –
      • The deficit was again approximately 1% of revenue.
      • Current assets are 1.8 times current liabilities.
      • Longer term financial structure is sound.

What did the auditor say about the last financial statements?

  • He gave a ‘clean’ opinion[2].
    • However, he says he audited ‘a special purpose financial report’ when Note 1 to the accounts says that the report is a general purpose financial report.
  • The inclusion of an Auditor’s Compilation Report implies that he also produced the financial statements.

If a charity, is their page on the ACNC Register complete?

  • No
    • One business name is missing
    • ‘Phone’ and ‘Website’ are blank.

Who are the people controlling the organisation?

  • The composition of the board is given on the website, but no names.
  • From ‘Responsible Persons’ on the ACNC Register:
    • John Barkley
    • Johannes Berends
    • John Bylsma
    • Anthony Deenick
    • John Hoogenhout
    • Peter Van Der Schoor
    • Cornelis Van Garderen
    • Dirk Van Garderen
    • Dawid Van Vuuren
    • Harry Westendorp

To whom is RTC accountable?

 

 

  1. The law in this area is not straightforward – is an internet invitation ‘fundraising’ for instance? – and advice varies, so check with the charity before drawing any conclusions.
  2. To take the right amount of comfort from a ‘clean opinion’, please read here and here.

Intercultural Training Australia Limited: mini-charity review

Mini charity review of Intercultural Training Australia Limited (ITA) as an Associate member of Missions Interlink, ‘the Australian network for global mission’.

Is it responsive to feedback?

  • When sent a draft of this review, they replied quickly. One addition was made to the review as a result.

Is ITA registered?

  • As a charity, yes.
  • Other registrations:
    • ITA is a public company, a company limited by guarantee.
      • Its name: It does not appear to have the provisions in its constitution to allow it to omit ‘Ltd/Limited’ at the end.
    • Registered to fundraise in the two states in which, per the ACNC Register, it operates.

What do they do?

  • See here.
  • More specifically, this, from the AIS 2015, is what they did in 2015:
    • Conducted TESOL training courses in 3 states of Australia, in Montana USA, Cambodia and Thailand. Also ran TESOL workshops in Australia and Thailand

Do they share the Gospel?

  • No, not unless they present the Gospel as part of the training.

What impact are they having?

  • No information found.

What do they spend outside the costs directly incurred in delivering the above impact, that is, on administration?

  • The expenses in the AIS 2015 – ITA is not required to lodge accounts, and hasn’t – are not classified to allow this calculation.

Can you get a tax deduction?

  • No

Is their online giving secure?

  • NA – donations are not sought.

What choices do you have in how your donation is used?

  • NA

Is their reporting up-to-date?

  • Yes (three months after year end).

Does their reporting comply with the regulator’s requirements?

  • AIS 2015: Except for the absence of outcomes, yes.
  • Financial Report 2015: Yes – none required
    • They could have lodged this voluntarily, but they chose not to.
    • But their Associate membership of Missions Interlink requires them to “have available for [their] members and supporters a clear and appropriate financial statement which has been approved by its auditor.”
    • Their constitution requires them to submit an audited financial report to the members.
    • And their enabling legislation has financial reporting obligations.

What financial situation was shown in that Report?

  • A deficit of 14% of Income/Receipts.
  • No donations.
  • $32K ‘Employee expenses/payments’ for one part-time and two casuals.
    • This was 36% of expenses.
  • Grants made: $1K
  • $7K of liabilities were covered by assets of $61K.

What did the auditor say about the last financial statements?

  • The audit report, if there is one, is not publicly available.

If a charity, is their page on the ACNC Register complete?

  • Yes

Who are the people controlling the organisation?

  • Not mentioned on the website, but
  • From ‘Responsible Persons’ on the ACNC Register:
    • John Anderson
      • There are 34 directorships recorded for this name.  The ACNC Register has only charities, so if, after eliminating the entries in the Register that don’t belong to ITA’s John Anderson, you are left with his total being more than a handful, it would be legitimate for you to question whether his ability to discharge his fiduciary responsibilities is threatened.
    • Juanita Anderson
    • Kim Hood
      • Is this the Kim Hood?
    • Frederik Kamst
    • Peter Romanowski

To whom is ITA accountable?

  • To Missions Interlink, because it’s an Associate member.
  • ITA is also accountable to the ACNC.
  • And to the Queensland associations regulator.

Uniting Church in Australia – Geraldton Parish: mini-charity review

Mini charity review of Uniting Church in Australia – Geraldton Parish (UCG) as an organisation that seeks donations online. (Including the answers to the questions that the Australian charity regulator, the ACNC, suggests that you ask.)

Are they responsive to feedback?

  • When sent a draft of this review, they…did not respond.

Is UCG registered?

  • Yes, as a charity.
  • But not incorporated.
  • Trading under the name Lighthouse Church, but this name is not registered (or at least, not to them).
  • UCG does not have a fundraising licence in the state in which it operates[1].
  • It controls another charity, Lighthouse Church Community Services (LCCS).
    • This charity has reported separately – UCG have not taken advantage of the ACNC’s group reporting concession.

What does UCG do?

  • Their latest newsletter will give you a good idea.
  • LCCS is not mentioned on the website, but here’s how they described their 2015 activities (AIS 2015):
    • To provide practical and compassionate assistance, financial and other support to people affected by illness, homelessness, unemployment, disability, poverty or other distress in need of care or emergency assistance in the local community.

Do they share the Gospel?

  • Yes
  • LCCS: since their constitution says that they are a Deductible Gift Recipient, probably not.

What impact are they having?

  • No information found (for either charity).

What do they spend outside the costs directly incurred in delivering the above impact, that is, on administration?

  • No financial information is published, so it is not possible to make this calculation.
  • UCCS: The information presented does not allow this calculation.

Can you get a tax deduction?

  • No, not with either charity. (This is despite the LCCS constitution saying that LCCS is a Deductible Gift Recipient.)

Is their online giving secure?

  • NA – not offered

What choices do you have in how your donation is used?

  • ‘Please indicate clearly the purpose of your deposit. (Tithe, Missions, Specific Gift etc)’
    • UCCS not specifically mentioned.

Is their reporting up-to-date?

  • Yes (six months after their year-end, a day after the last day for submission).
  • UCCS: the same.

Does their reporting comply with the regulator’s requirements?

  • AIS 2015: With the small exception of the inclusion of a name that is not registered, yes.
    • They took advantage of their status as a Basic Religious Charity and didn’t submit any financial information.
      • Their subsidiary, because its Subtype is not ‘Advancing Religion’, is not a basic religious charity.
    • UCCS: Except for the omission of their business name, their AIS complies.
  • Financial Report 2015: Yes. (None was required).
    • Whatever they do with the ACNC, their Associate membership of Missions Interlink requires them to “have available for [their] members and supporters a clear and appropriate financial statement which has been approved by its auditor.” So just ask.
    • UCCS: None required.

What financial situation was shown in that Report?

  • NA
  • UCCS: Income $273, Net surplus/deficit $223, Total assets $1,362, Total liabilities $0.

What did the auditor say about the last financial statements?

  • NA (Both charities)

If a charity, is their page on the ACNC Register complete?

  • No
    • There are only two names under ‘Responsible Persons’. It is highly unlikely that would be only two people on the Parish Council.
  • UCCS: No
    • There are at least five names missing under ‘Responsible Persons’, and
    • ‘Phone’ and ‘Website’ are blank.

Who are the people controlling the organisation?

  • Not shown on the website.
  • Two of them are listed under ‘Responsible Persons’ on the ACNC Register:
  • UCCS: Only Garth De Kock shown. At least five names missing.

To whom is UCG accountable?

 

 

  1. The law in this area is not straightforward – is an internet invitation ‘fundraising’ for instance? – and advice varies, so check with the charity before drawing any conclusions.
  2. For one opinion on the strength of that accountability, see the section Activities in this review.

Friends of Indian Evangelical Mission Australia: mini-charity review

Mini-charity review of Friends of Indian Evangelical Mission Australia (FIEMA), an organisation that invites the public, on its website, to donate to it. (Including the answers to the questions that the Australian charity regulator, the ACNC, suggests that you ask.)

Are they responsive to feedback?

  • When sent a draft of this review, they…did not respond.

Is FIEMA registered?

  • Not as a charity.
    • This means that they are not entitled to any charity tax concessions.
  • Not incorporated.
    • This means that the members are personally liable for the actions of FIEMA.
  • It has an ABN.
  • But is not registered for GST.

What does FIEMA do?

  • ‘FIEMA seeks to promote the interests of the Indian Evangelical Mission by informing Australian Christians about the work done by IEM missionaries, and raising financial and prayer support for the Mission.’
    • But the ‘Mission’, on the same page, is the mission of the Indian organization, not FIEMA.

Do they share the Gospel?

  • No

What impact are they having?

  • No information found.

What do they spend outside the costs directly incurred in delivering the above impact, that is, on administration?

  • No financial information is published, so it is not possible to make this calculation.

Can you get a tax deduction?

  • No

Is their online giving secure?

  • NA – not offered.

What choices do you have in how your donation is used?

  • None shown on the website.

Is their reporting up-to-date?

  • No reporting by regulatory authorities is required.
  • However, their Associate membership of Missions Interlink requires them to “have available for [their] members and supporters a clear and appropriate financial statement which has been approved by its auditor.”  It’s not offered on the website, so just ask.

Does their reporting comply with the regulator’s requirements?

  • NA

What financial situation was shown in that Report?

  • NA

What did the auditor say about the last financial statements?

  • NA

If a charity, is their page on the ACNC Register complete?

  • NA

Who are the people controlling the organisation?

  • On the website:
    • National Director : Vincent Devasahayam – 0424 396 096 devasahayam@hotmail.com
    • National Secretary – Mr Dev Daniel
      • Is it this Dev Daniel?
    • National Treasurer – Mr Rex Christopher
      • Is it this Rex Christopher?
    • National Prayer Co-ordinator – Mr Vincent Devasahayam
    • National Promotions Co-ordinator – no name; presumably vacant
    • National Outreach Co-ordinator– no name; presumably vacant

To whom is FIEMA accountable?

  • To Missions Interlink[1] via its Associate membership.
    • You might ask them whether it is acceptable for a member not to be a registered charity.

 

  1. For one opinion on the strength of that accountability, see the section Activities in this review.

Right Track Services Inc.: mini-charity review

Mini charity review of Right Track Services (RTS) as an Associate member of Missions Link, ‘the Australian network for global mission’.

Is it responsive to feedback?

  • When sent a draft of this review, they responded the next day with the following general comment, plus comments within the review (included, where appropriate, below).
    • ‘Right Track Services is a not-for-profit association of (Christian) IT people committed to helping smaller Christian mission & aid agencies with their IT needs, primarily in administrative processes.

RTS is a not-for-profit primarily to protect intellectual and other assets and to ensure that they benefit the mission community should the organisation be wound up.  And RTS is an association to aid the natural turn-over of personnel as time goes by without jeopardizing the organisation’s long-term sustainability.  Presently our members consist essentially of those you list below.

We do not solicit donations but are primarily self-funded through discounted customer fee-for-service charges and software license fees.  The sole purpose of these charges is to maintain a sustainable service.  Having said that, very occasionally people may give us grants for specific purposes.

Is RTS registered?

  • As a charity, yes.
  • Other registrations:
    • As a Victorian incorporated association (VIC A0049755G).
    • RTS operates, per the ACNC Register, interstate. However, it does not have the necessary ARBN registration to do this.
    • It has no fundraising licences[1].

What do they do?

Do they share the Gospel?

  • No – services are provided to Christ-centred organisations.

What impact are they having?

  • Nothing found.
    • Ministry comment: ‘We provide supporter management software to 42+ Christian missions & aid-agencies – primarily in Australia and New Zealand.  Last financial year these organisations used our main software product to communicate with 230,000 supporters and process 209,000 donations worth about $55,000,000.  (Missions Interlink was one of them.)’

What do they spend outside the costs directly incurred in delivering the above impact, that is, on administration?

  • No information is available that allows this calculation.
    • Ministry comment: ‘It is in the Financial report.  “Development fees” pay for software programming so are directly incurred.  The rest is mostly administration.  (But it isn’t much as what little there is is done voluntarily by the members.)
      • Reviewer response:  No ‘Financial report’ is published.

Can you get a tax deduction?

  • No

Is their online giving secure?

  • NA – they do not solicit donations online.

What choices do you have in how your donation is used?

  • NA

Is their reporting up-to-date?

  • Yes (lodged five months after their year-end).

Does their reporting comply with the regulator’s requirements?

  • AIS 2015: Almost – no outcomes are reported.
  • Financial Report 2015: NA – because of RTS’s size, one isn’t required.
    • However, their Associate membership of Missions Interlink requires them to “have available for [their] members and supporters a clear and appropriate financial statement which has been approved by its auditor.”
    • RTS lodged a Financial Report voluntarily last year, but not this year.
      • That Report consisted only of a Statement of Financial Performance.

What financial situation was shown in that Report?

  • No Report (see above), but the ‘Financial Information’ section of the AIS 2016 shows:
    • They recorded a deficit, a deficit that was 19% of revenue.
    • There were no donations, just ‘fees’.
    • ‘Employee benefits’ for the one part-time employee (AIS 2015) were zero.

What did the auditor say about the last financial statements?

  • NA (see above).

If a charity, is their page on the ACNC Register complete?

  • Not quite – ‘Phone’ and ‘Website’ are blank.

Who are the people controlling the organisation?

  • Not shown on the website, but from ‘Responsible Persons’ on the ACNC Register:
    • Stephen Andrews
    • Harley Beck
      • Is it this Harley Beck?
        • Ministry comment: ‘Yes’
    • Ronald Clough
      • Is it this Ronald Clough?
        • Ministry comment: ‘Possibly, if this one is/has been involved with Australian missions.’
    • Nigel Leed
    • Andrew Smith
      • There are 34 directorships recorded for this name.  The ACNC Register has only charities, so if, after eliminating the entries in the Register that don’t belong to RTS’s Andrew Smith, you are left with his total being more than a handful, it would be legitimate for you to question whether his ability to discharge his fiduciary responsibilities is threatened.
        • Ministry comment: ‘Andrew is a New Zealander and is therefore probably not any of the above mentioned directors.  (But I can ask him if it is important.)’
    • James Stanhope

To whom is RTS accountable?

 

 

  1. The law in this area is not straightforward – is an internet invitation ‘fundraising’ for instance? – and advice varies, so check with the charity before drawing any conclusions.
  2. For one opinion on the strength of that accountability, see the section Activities in this review.

Living Child Inc.: mini-charity review

Mini charity review of Living Child Inc. (LC) as an organisation that has an internet invitation to you to give to it.

Is it responsive to feedback?

  • When sent a draft of this review, they responded within two days. Their comments, where appropriate, have been included below.

Is LC registered?

  • As a charity, yes.
  • Other registrations:
    • As a Western Australian incorporated association (A1016829Y).
    • A fundraising licence (21738) in its home state (the only state in which, per the ACNC Register, it operates).
      • Ministry comment: ‘Auditor report submitted annually.’
        • Reviewer response: Unfortunately, the audit report lodged in WA is not readily accessible to the public.
      • LC would only need a licence in the other six states that have a licensing regime if a state thought that an internet invitation was ‘fundraising’.
    • ‘Gross income’ is under the threshold for compulsory GST registration.

What do they do?

  • They are working towards this vision, in this way (see the second heading), in these places.
  • And this is how it all came together in 2016:
    • ‘1. Developed an official partnership with the East Sepik Provincial Government and the Angoram District Administration to provide midwifery training and support to village health volunteers and qualified health centre/hospital staff providing maternity services. This includes training related to the insertion of contraceptive implants. 2. Provided 4 days training to 6 remote Health Centre staff members in Yamen, Keram River local government area. All 6 were certified to insert implants. Upskilling training was conducted using a state of the art obstetric model. 3. 5 day training course for village health volunteers in the Keram area. 76 attendees. Clean Birth Kits were delivered, data sheets received and a trial of Days for Girls menstruation kits distributed. 4. Discussions were held with community leaders from the villages in the Keram about our proposal to start a pilot study using the Care Group Model www.caregroupsinfo.org. This has been accepted and we are not (Ministry comment: ‘now’) working towards implementing this system of health education and referral. 5. Community Development Consultants, Jim and Robyn Nottingham, visited Wewak and Angoram in October 2016. Their findings and report are informing our strategic plan priorities for the next 2 years. 6. Mr Jerry Yabru, Director of Melanesian Evangelical Churches of Christ [MECOC] the group that have invited Living Child into the remote area, visited Perth in October. He is now on our Board of Directors as a PNG advisor and was part of the team to put together our strategic plan.’ [AIS 2016].
      • Ministry comment: ‘Jim and Robyn have been contracted as our Living Child Community Development coordinators based in Wewak. They will volunteer 3 months on, 1 month off, supervising our projects and liaising with the government.’

Do they share the Gospel?

  • ‘Gospel’, ‘Christ’ and ‘Jesus’ do not appear on the website. This is consistent with objects in the constitution that do not mention Christianity.

What impact are they having?

  • Nothing systematic found.
  • Ministry comment:
    • ‘Since 2013, 8 health workers have been certified to insert contraceptive implants, over 1000 implants have been inserted in the Keram area, over 3000 in Wewak and 1600 in Maprik District
    • over 1500 clean birth kits have been distributed to village health volunteers in the Keram area, data forms are being completed for every birth in the village where a kit is used.
    • Between 60- 80 village health volunteers have attended safe motherhood training at each remote village outreach (6 in total), from 40 different villages.
    • Bunam Health Centre which was closed for over 10 years has now been open since 2015 and services provided due to training and leadership support and encouragement Living Child has given.
    • 10 sets of teaching materials and obstetric models have been distributed to village health volunteers displaying leadership potential.
    • 5 sets of teaching resources including stethoscopes, BP machines and fetal dopplers have been given to the maternity unit at Wewak Hospital.
    • A 20 foot sea container full of medical supplies and equipment was delivered and distributed through Wewak in 2015.
    • A portable ultrasound machine, 2 fetal dopplers, BP machine, theatre suction unit and oxygen saturation machines are currently being delivered to Wewak Hospital.  
    • 5 midwives from East Sepik Province were sponsored to attend the inaugural Midwifery Conference in Port Moresby in Nov 2015
  • Some anecdotal evidence in this blog post.

What do they spend outside the costs directly incurred in delivering the above impact, that is, on administration?

  • No claim by LC on the website, and no financial statements available to allow a calculation.
    • Ministry comment:
      • ‘Board members are all volunteers.
      • CEO is paid a stipend $1000 per month
      • First time professional volunteers have to pay their own airfares. Living Child pays for accommodation, food and insurances’

Can you get a tax deduction?

  • No

Is their online giving secure?

  • They don’t offer online giving themselves, but direct donors to GiveNow.com.au.

What choices do you have in how your donation is used?

  • None offered on the website.
    • Ministry comment: ‘We are in need of upgrading our website J but through newsletters there is an opportunity to direct funds donated to supporting our newly appointed on the ground volunteers, Jim and Robyn Nottingham, towards our insurances and auditing fees’

Is their reporting up-to-date?

  • Yes (lodged six and a half months after their year-end).

Does their reporting comply with the regulator’s requirements?

  • AIS 2016: Almost – no outcomes are reported.
  • Financial Report 2016: NA – because of LC’s size, one isn’t required.
    • However, their Associate membership of Missions Interlink requires them to “have available for [their] members and supporters a clear and appropriate financial statement which has been approved by its auditor.”
    • LC lodged a Financial Report voluntarily last year, but not this year.
      • That Report included a qualified audit report. (And there is an argument for asking the auditor why it wasn’t adverse opinion rather than just a qualified opinion.)
        • Ministry comment: ‘An audited report was submitted to the Charitables Collections WA department 31/12/16. We didn’t submit this to ACNC but it is easily forwarded.’
          • Reviewer response: Unfortunately, unlike some states, WA doesn’t make this available on their register; I suggested they lodge the report with the ACNC. I was offered a copy.

What financial situation was shown in that Report?

  • No Report (see above), but the ‘Financial Information’ section of the AIS 2016 shows:
    • They recorded a deficit, a deficit that was 48% of revenue.
    • Donations were 52% of revenue.
    • The one full-time employee (AIS 2016) cost $9K.
    • They made $5K of overseas grants.
    • No liabilities.

What did the auditor say about the last financial statements?

  • NA (see above).

If a charity, is their page on the ACNC Register complete?

  • Yes

Who are the people controlling the organisation?

  • The ‘team’ is shown on the website. Six are identified as board members.
  • From ‘Responsible Persons’ on the ACNC Register:
    • Michael Bullard
      • Is it this Michael Bullard?
        • Ministry comment: ‘Yes’.
    • Sara David
      • Ministry comment: ‘founder and CEO, also Registered Midwife, Global Midwifery educator’
    • Heather Inglis
    • Barbara Jamieson
    • Naomi Major
    • Lynette Scott
    • Alicia Tearle
    • Jerry Yabru
    • Trevor Young
      • Is it this Trevor Young?
        • Ministry comment: ‘Yes’
    • Ministry comment: ‘Other volunteers who play a significant role in the organisation are: Jim and Robyn Nottingham – Community Development Coordinators based in PNG now’

To whom is LC accountable?

  • To Missions Interlink[1] via their Associate membership.
  • To the Western Australian associations regulator.
  • And, as an Australian registered charity, to the ACNC.

 

  1. For one opinion on the strength of that accountability, see the section Activities in this review.

Power to Change: mini-charity review

Mini charity review of Power to Change (PTC) as an organisation that invites you, on the internet, to give to it. (Including the answers to the questions that the Australian charity regulator, the ACNC, suggests that you ask.)

Is it responsive to feedback?

  • When sent a draft of this review, they…did not respond.

Is PTC registered?

  • As a charity, yes.
    • You may know it as Campus Crusade for Christ. They changed the name in 2015. This was their reasoning, including why they took ‘Christ’ out of the name.
    • Another charity, Foundation In Religious Education, says it has the same name, but this is a mistake.
      • This charity has the same phone number and email address as PTC, and has lodged PTC’s financial statements as its own, yet there is no mention of it on the PTC website nor in the financial statements.
    • A third charity, Great Commission Foundation, has the same responsible persons as PTC. It has been registered since April 2016, but again there is no mention of it on the PTC website.
    • PTC has not taken advantage of the ACNC’s group reporting concession. This means that these two subsidiaries must report separately to PTC.
  • Other registrations:
    • As a public company, a company limited by guarantee.
      • Not, as it says on the ABN record, an ‘Other Incorporated Entity’.
      • PTC operates, per the ACNC Register, in five states, all of which have a licensing regime for fundraisers. It has no fundraising licences anywhere i.

What do they do?

Do they share the Gospel?

  • Yes

What impact are they having?

  • Nothing found.
  • There are 109 missionary singles or couples, and 15 projects listed on the website. No report of activities or results was found.

What do they spend outside the costs directly incurred in delivering the above impact, that is, on administration?

  • The expenses are not classified to allow this calculation (or even an estimate).
    • For instance, 76% of the expenses are for ‘Personnel’ but without any breakup.

Can you get a tax deduction?

  • Not to PTC (nor Great Commission Foundation), but you can for a donation to Foundation in Religious Education.
    • But this is not offered on the PTC site, and the Foundation doesn’t appear to have a website.

Is their online giving secure?

What choices do you have in how your donation is used?

  • ‘Supporting a Missionary or a Ministry
    • This does not match the disclosure in the Notes to the financial statements:
      • ‘Donations received’ $4.47m
      • ‘Local contributions for ministries $432K
      • ‘Overseas contributions for missionaries and ministries’ $959K

Is their reporting up-to-date?

  • Yes (lodged five months after their year-end).

Does their reporting comply with the regulator’s requirements?

  • AIS 2015: No
    • The figures are for an entity said to be a consolidated entity, not for PTC.
    • Two of the figures under ‘Gross Income’ do not match those in the financial statements.
    • Four business names are missing
    • No outcomes are reported
  • AIS 2015 of the subsidiary, Foundation in Religious Education: ‘Other name…’ is incorrect and the financial figures are for the consolidated entity.
  • Financial Report 2015: No
    • Note 1 says that the financial statements are for ‘Power to Change as a consolidated entity consisting of Power to Change and the entities it controlled, yet
      • The statements are not labelled as consolidated statements
      • The audit report is not on consolidated statements.
      • There is mention of the subsidiaries in the Report.
      • There is no Note giving the parent’s financial figures.

What financial situation was shown in that Report?

  • The surplus as a percentage of revenue declined from 5% to 3%.
  • 15% of the expenses are for ‘Other operating costs’, without breakup.
  • Working capital (current assets less current liabilities) is strongly positive.
  • No long-term liabilities.

What did the auditor say about the last financial statements?

He gave a ‘clean’ opinioni

  • But see ‘Does their reporting…?’, above.

If a charity, is their page on the ACNC Register complete?

  • Almost – some business names are missing.
  • The subsidiaries:
    • Foundation in Religious Education:
      • No ‘Responsible Persons’
      • ‘Website’ is blank, there’s postal address instead of a street address, and ‘Other Name(s) is incorrect
    • Great Commission Foundation: ‘Email’ and ‘Website’ are blank.

Who are the people controlling the organisation?

  • Not shown on the website, but from ‘Responsible Persons’ on the ACNC Register:
    • Peter Brook
      • Is it this Peter Brook?
    • Rex Campbell
    • Allan Gibson
    • David Harvey
    • Robert Rawson

To whom is PTC accountable?

  • To Missions Interlink[1] via their Associate membership.
  • To ASIC, as a company,
  • And, as an Australian registered charity, to the ACNC.

 

  1. For one opinion on the strength of that accountability, see the section Activities in this review.

International Village Care Ministry: mini-charity review

Mini-charity review of International Village Care Ministry (IVCM), an organisation that invites the public, on its website, to donate to it.

Are they responsive to feedback?

  • When sent a draft of this review, they…responded the next day. Their responses, where appropriate, have been incorporated below.

Is IVCM registered?

  • Not as a charity.
    • This means that they are not entitled to any charity tax concessions.
  • Not incorporated.
    • This means that the members are personally liable for the actions of IVCM.
  • But it has an ABN.

What does IVCM do?

  • Projects in India (three), and Cambodia (one).
    • Ministry comment: ‘We are a relatively small group looking after around 180 children either in the homes in India or thru the Daycare Training centre in Cambodia.’
    • There is no record of an organisation called IVCM declaring the receipt of money in the year to 31 March 2015 in the districts in which the Indian projects are located. Perhaps those visiting from Australia delivered the (net) donations?
      • Ministry comment: The work we do in India is run thru Global Developments…We have a FCRA under Eagle Trust our main trust in India that overseas our work. In Cambodia we have a MOU with the Government under IVCM for the work we do there.
        • Reviewer response: I could find no record for ‘Eagle Trust’; IVCM did not explain why they needed Global Developments if they had an entity of their own (‘Eagle Trust’).

Do they share the Gospel?

  • The members are Christians, they don’t offer a tax deduction, so, despite the absence of any reference to it on the website, I expect so.
    • Ministry comment: ‘We certainly are Christian operated and run and it underlies all that we do. Sharing the Love of God and His word is paramount but we do it with the children & people we are working with and looking after, not out on the streets.’

What impact are they having?

  • No information found.

What do they spend outside the costs directly incurred in delivering the above impact, that is, on administration?

  • No financial information is published, so it is not possible to make this calculation.
    • Ministry comment: ‘All admin costs etc are picked up by the Directors and any shortfall in monies received to what is expended are also picked up by the Directors.’

Can you get a tax deduction?

  • No

Is their online giving secure?

  • There is a PayPal-like button, but the next page is ‘under construction’.

What choices do you have in how your donation is used?

  • None shown on the website.

Is their reporting up-to-date?

  • No reporting by regulatory authorities is required.
  • However, their Associate membership of Missions Interlink requires them to “have available for [their] members and supporters a clear and appropriate financial statement which has been approved by its auditor.”  It’s not offered on the website, so just ask.

Does their reporting comply with the regulator’s requirements?

  • NA

What financial situation was shown in that Report?

  • NA

What did the auditor say about the last financial statements?

  • NA

If a charity, is their page on the ACNC Register complete?

  • NA

Who are the people controlling the organisation?

  • The directors, three couples, are shown at the bottom here.

To whom is IVCM accountable?

  • To Missions Interlink[1] via its an Associate membership.
    • You might ask them whether it is acceptable for a member not to be a charity.

 

 

  1. For one opinion on the strength of that accountability, see the section Activities in this review.