questionable "sales" tactics
Posted by hollytom  |  November 9, 2009 9:17:17 AM

They are obnoxiously pushy about getting you to sponsor more children once you've signed up, even to the point of assuming that you have agreed to do so when you clearly haven't

Project Expenses
Posted by ichattha  |  August 28, 2009 5:40:59 AM

What needs to be understood is that project expenses includes employee salaries. So although they list over 91.7% of funding goes towards program expenses and 3.7% towards admin expenses, one quarter of the 91.7% of program expenses are made up of the salaries of those individuals carrying out the projects. All charities report income in this manner. It is a recognized and accepted accounting practice.

Of the $406 million in program activity expenses listed on the most recent audited financial report, $66,992,000 was spent on salaries and $23,099,000 on employee fringe benefits. This information can be accessed from the Save the Children website at: http://www.savethechildren.org/publications/annual-reports/stc-financial-statements-2008.pdf

Good samaritans
Posted by CJamesPope  |  August 4, 2009 5:55:21 AM

Dear Spoon,

I don't think that you quite understand what a ponzi scheme is, how non-profits operate, how Save the Children spends its money, or the challenges posed by the child sex trade. You give ZERO evidence to support ANY of your claims, and your logic is non-existent.

First of all, the cynicism toward charities as some sort of money-making venture is ridiculous. The whole purpose of a non-profit is that the focus of the enterprise is delivering services, NOT making money. However, the underinformed will be shocked at the operating budget of groups like Save the Children which tops out at almost four hundred million dollars. Do you look at that number and simply from that alone conclude that something is amiss? What you have to understand is that the problems this group tackles: poverty, HIV, lack of education and basic health care, are huge problems that require massive resources. Part of the resources required are monetary, others are human. If a charity wants a top flight program director delivering services successfully, they are going to have to pay them a decent wage. Most of these folks are experts in their field with years of experience turning their craft. However, you don't even list their salaries so how would anyone know if they are truly extreme. You should also know that STC hires 98% of its workers from within the countries it operates. Also, Save the Children gives 91.7% to programs. This percentage is higher than nearly every other group like STC. Also, it sounds like you are frustrated that STC has not singlehandedly broken up the child sex trade in Thailand. Are you also angry with INTERPOL, UNICEF, and every other human rights and children's rights groups in the world? Because they are all working to end this horrible practice with mixed results just like STC. The point is they ARE working to end the practice and ARE trying to improve the lives of children everywhere. They have been working to help kids since 1919; what have you done?

Seriously?
Posted by Erin15  |  July 30, 2009 12:35:34 PM

Spoon, you are just ranting without really saying anything with meaning. From what I understand, you are upset because some members of the Save the Children organization receive large salaries and because Save the Children has not ended the child sex trade in Thailand. Are you aware of how many children are exploited and forced into prostitution all over the world? A single organization cannot end this problem. Maybe you should complain about this to the Thai government. I'm sure they could be doing more. As for the high salaries, this upsets me a little bit too, but that's just how it is with most charities that operate at this level. Save the Children still uses over 90% of funds on its programs which is more than most charities. Referring to Save the Children as a ponzi scheme is just plain wrong. They are an excellent charity that helps millions of children. Your baseless accusations are hateful and most definitely incorrect.

Oversupply
Posted by spoon  |  July 30, 2009 5:46:31 AM

Save The Children are plundering the public's generosity. They are the Bernie Maddof of the charity biz. It is a crime. It is obvious children here (Thailand) have little or no real protection from paedophile predators in places like Pattaya, an ongoing horror story. But did you know that Save The Children finance four separate representative offices here in Bangkok, at least one of whom gets a huge allowance just to have their spouse here with them..

http://www.savethechildren.net/alliance ... mapTH.html

FOUR different reps on huge salary, accommodation and travel expense packages and what have they done to save the children of the provinces from being peddled as sex toys?

Take your pick. Ask your Save The Children rep from Denmark, the US, the UK or Sweden...if any are in town of course and not back at their respective head offices for 'consultations'. And they want our money?

Ask how many made it into Burma afer the catastrophic typhoon last year when thousands of children were maimed or hurt?

And how much vacation do they take with pay? Or trips to countries outside ther bailiwick?

When abuses are so obvious, only give to NGOs you know can truly make a difference. Expose the pretenders.

U.S. Sponsorships
Posted by Cyn  |  July 27, 2009 8:38:40 AM

Has anyone had any experience with sponsoring a U.S. child with Save the Children?

Unsupported Claims
Posted by CJamesPope  |  July 27, 2009 6:31:12 AM

Save The Children is the most open and transparent charity that I have ever researched. The group started after the First World War and has been helping children regardless of nationality, race and religion for ninety years. They have helped lift literally millions of lives out of poverty. The legitimacy of the group is unquestionable. Examine their board of trustees and donors. On these lists you will find the names of U.S. presidents past and present from both parties, corporate leaders, leaders in health care and global poverty relief, as well as activists and celebrities of all ages and backgrounds. These people show their support for Save the Children and put their reputations behind this organization for a reason: THEY ARE GREAT AT WHAT THEY DO.

The deep cynicism expressed by other posters on this page displays that they are either blindly ignorant of the groups accomplishments over many decades or posses an ulterior motive. The groups finances are not only internally audited regularly, but are audited independently by watchdog groups such as the Better Business Bureau and Charity Navigator. Across the board these watchdogs have given Save the Children the highest ratings possible.

Rather than attacking groups that actually provide hope and solutions to an ailing world, these cynical posters should be working to improve their communities, and the communities of our fellow human beings.

I encourage anyone who has the means, to research this group and if you like what you see, make a donation or find some way to lend a hand. If you don't like something about the group, send a letter expressing your concerns and see what reply they make. But please stop maligning this group based on empty suspicions and unsupported accusations.

Save the Children Commercial
Posted by Erin15  |  June 30, 2009 5:58:21 AM

ckols, are you sure you're talking about Save the Children? I've never seen a Save the Children commercial before. Maybe you're referring to a Christian Children's Fund, Plan USA, or a Children International commercial. Those are the only child sponsorship commercials that I have ever seen.

Suspicion
Posted by ckols  |  June 29, 2009 12:18:02 PM

Rule of thumb - the more emotional the appeal, the more likely it's a scam.

It's extremely difficult to distinguish between organizations that actually serve their targets and those that use those targets to enrich themselves and, given the recent United Way scandal, even legitimate fund raisers can become culturally corrupt. Access to large, unregulated piles of cash tends to draw flies.

Complicating the whole process is accounting: what are administrative costs; what are program costs; and how much of those fund raising costs include trips to the Bahamas?

Transparency would help but even the most transparent accounting rules can be clouded. So how can a potential contributor know that they aren't just lining some lowlife's pockets?

They can't, short of auditing the charity themselves by actually physically following the money.

That brings us back to rules of thumb and STCs television ads, which make me extremely suspicious: appealing to the heart strings while promising bucket loads of "gratitude" from the "sponsored" child. Sorry, but all I see is a boiler room full of fat adults pretending to be third world waifs.

I'm probably wrong about STC; I certainly hope so and, if I am, my suggestion would be for them to change their ad campaign to emphasis verifiable contributions to the welfare of those waifs and forget about stroking the egos of their donors.

RE: CEO Compensation
Posted by t.barnes  |  May 4, 2009 1:30:34 PM

In response to S. Ashley's comment, I think it is also important to consider the percentage of funding that is allocated for the CEO/President's compensation. Larger organizations will likely balance a larger compensation for their executives with a larger income. In this case, STC is spending a very small percentage of funding. Compare this with Plan USA who is spending almost 1 percent of funding for their CEO's salary alone. With greater responsibility should come greater compensation (to an extent).

Focusing on the wrong issues
Posted by S.Ashley  |  April 21, 2009 1:33:34 PM

Program expenses include some salaries because it is necessary to hire people in the implementation of programs, outside of administrative duties. This is no different from the way that other charities report their expenses. Compared to all other leading children's organizations operating internationally, Save the Children has remarkable advantages. It is independent and nonreligious, which means that it can help more children in countries that do not welcome religious or political organizations, it is financially the most efficient, and it is widely respected and trusted by the countries where it works. For example, STC was able to respond immediately to the recent conflict in Gaza because the organization has already been present there for over 30 years. Other organizations were forced to wait until the conflict ended to deliver aid, but STC was on the ground the entire time, delivering aid directly to people's homes. Save the Children is also unique in its efforts to reunite lost children with their families and to provide psychological support to rescued child soldiers. If you are interested in getting involved in international relief, and particularly if you are interested in a child sponsorship, Save the Children is exactly what you are looking for. I sponsor one child myself and have started giving gift sponsorships to my family members!

???
Posted by Erin15  |  April 21, 2009 9:06:36 AM

I don't understand why everyone is attacking Save the Children. They are an excellent charity that does excellent work. Why are so many people convinced that they somehow must be scamming everyone just because they handle their finances so well?

Incredible Financial Report in China
Posted by Milton  |  April 21, 2009 6:38:07 AM

First, I from China, and found STC Incredible Financial Report on March 1st, 2009. I found high salary who STC need to employ, 9 staff, is about RMB 1.2 million Yuan annual in China, but their 2007 annual report just listed Administrative Expenses 387,000 US Dollars or RMB 2,896,000 Yuan. Also I found in 2007 Revenue is rigorously EQUAL to Expenses.

Today, I found the article below: Who cares? the personal and professional problems of NGO fieldworkers in Bangladesh http://www.developmentinpractice.org/apc_ae-v12n2x524471.html

STC's alliance in Bangladesh, fieldworkers were living in a poor life.

Accounting Practices
Posted by billca42  |  April 14, 2009 5:57:21 AM

Save the Children has a great pie chart, but I think that they used accounting tricks to make them look efficient. In addition to their reported salaries, they also have a much larger set of salaries included in their program expenses. I contacted Save the Children about this. They said that this was a standard accounting practice.

CEO compensation
Posted by S.Ashley  |  February 23, 2009 6:40:15 AM

The CEO of Save the Children does earn more than the average nonprofit CEO, but Save the children operates with only 3.7% of its expenditures going towards administrative costs. When compared to other leading organizations like Christain Children's Fund, you can see that although CCF spent less money on their CEO, they spent the approximately the same amount of money on administrative expenses overall, despite being a smaller organization. Save the Children can only maintain its extremely high percentage of program expenditures because it has highly effective, efficient leadership.

Compensation
Posted by CharM  |  December 23, 2008 2:45:07 PM

I, too, have wondered about CEO compensation at this level. But it occurs to me that it may reflect the perceived need for the CEO to be paid more than subordinates. And even the subordinates who can manage their segments of really large organizations likely require large compensation, too. So I think it would be more useful if we could see, say, the compensation of the top five individuals in these organizations.

Not True
Posted by Erin15  |  October 20, 2008 5:46:05 AM

The CEO of Save the Children does not receive compensation that is over twice that of the CEO of Christian Children's Fund. Save the Children is a much better and more efficient charity. Plus, it's secular.

comparison of ceo compensation
Posted by reng  |  October 17, 2008 1:12:02 PM

Compensation of the ceo of seemingly similar nonprofits often varies much more greatly than one might have expected. For example, is there some reasonable justification why the ceo of Save The Children receives compensation that is over twice that of the ceo of Christian Childrens Fund or Christian Foundation For Children And Aging?

Number of Sponsorships??
Posted by Sponsorship  |  July 23, 2008 1:14:17 PM

Anyone know how many sponsorships this company had in 2007? 917,000?