Save the kids collectors outside Dulwich station

[Chick Pea]

Good points reeko.

US Save The Kids does not claim to be a registered charity. It is a grassroots, not for profit, organisation. One of the reasons I imagine it has not opted for charitable status is because of the way that status would restrict it's activities. For example one of the ways it engages with young people is by showing them how to make a difference by engaging with politics through nonviolent, creative, protest.

The OP asked if save the kids was a registered charity, she did not say that it was passing itself off as one. A number of conclusions have been arrived at on this thread without any evidence to back them up. I just don't find kangaroo courts helpful and it would be good to have some facts as opposed to conjecture before writing this group off.

I remain open minded.

[Alec John Moore]

Interesting Chick Pea that you seem to dismiss my point about the unhelpful focus on executive pay but endorse reeko's points including about "pay of senior executives". To say that relatively high salary costs for charities diverts funds from the needy to the greedy sounds like conjecture rather than a balanced assessment of the facts taking into account broader context and organisational objectives and impact.

But this reinforces my earlier point about the need to educate donors to the complexity of organisations and how they connect donors to beneficiaries, in my view. Some organisations are better at it than others and some donors get it more than others.

[Voyageur]

giggirl Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Chick Pea Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> >

> > Secondly the link posted is the only web

> presence

> > for Save the Kids - it is not beyond the realms

> of

> > possibility that collections were being made

> here

> > for an overseas organisation is it?

> >

>

> Yes Chick Pea it is completely beyond the realms

> of possibility that a charity which works with

> kids in Los Angeles, Chicago and New York and has

> no presence whatsoever outside of the USA is

> fundraising at East Dulwich Station. It really

> isn't enough to Google things and then randomly

> post links without engaging your brain first.

> Posting links to a website of a bona fide charity,

> as you did, gives credence where non is due.

Posting the link is perfectly reasonable as the discussion is about the supposed charity - and to date there is no absolute evidence that they are dodgy (although that is quite possible). Clam down pepes.

[Voyageur]

And what's more - calm down too!

[Chick Pea]

Alec, reeko made some good points, as have you, we just have different views on exec pay.

Voyageur - I agree!

[giggirl]

Here are some facts about the people collecting in East Dulwich this week.

The person associated with Save the Kids and who organised the collection is a member of this forum.

Last week, three separate threads appeared looking to recruit fundraisers to collect money. The wage being offered was ?7 per hour + bonus on top.

A number of questions were put to the OP, asking for clarification on the status of the charity and asking for some transparency regarding where the money was going to be spent. The OP declined to answer questions about where the money would be spent.

Admin removed all three of the recruitment threads for Save the Kids.

As the OP of the original threads is a member of the Forum, he or she could come on here and comment if they desired to do so. Certainly if I myself was running a charity and someone questioned the legitimacy of my charity I would have something to say.

The link posted to the American charity of the same name was misleading and pointless. A link to a website for Dogs for the Blind or Save the Tiger would have been no less relevant.

[Voyageur]

giggirl Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Here are some facts about the people collecting in

> East Dulwich this week.

>

> The person associated with Save the Kids and who

> organised the collection is a member of this

> forum.

>

> Last week, three separate threads appeared looking

> to recruit fundraisers to collect money. The wage

> being offered was ?7 per hour + bonus on top.

>

> A number of questions were put to the OP, asking

> for clarification on the status of the charity and

> asking for some transparency regarding where the

> money was going to be spent. The OP declined to

> answer questions about where the money would be

> spent.

>

> Admin removed all three of the recruitment threads

> for Save the Kids.

>

> As the OP of the original threads is a member of

> the Forum, he or she could come on here and

> comment if they desired to do so. Certainly if I

> myself was running a charity and someone

> questioned the legitimacy of my charity I would

> have something to say.

>

> The link posted to the American charity of the

> same name was misleading and pointless. A link to

> a website for Dogs for the Blind or Save the Tiger

> would have been no less relevant.

The extra information is helpful g-girl, wish you had posted it sooner.

Chick-pea's google search and link was perfectly reasonable as that is the group's chosen name - that's what 99% of us do when faced with something we know little about. He/she didn't say they were promoting the charity or that they believed the local collecters were kosher.

[Chick Pea]

If a member if this forum was trying to pass a dodge organisation off as a charity I would imagine EDF would be the last they would advertise.

Giggirl has yet to provide a shred of evidence to prove that this group are not worth a donation. I find the tone of her posts hostile and arrogant and the use of insults weak.

Can anyone explain what this organisation is being accused of?

[giggirl]

Chick Pea Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If a member if this forum was trying to pass a

> dodge organisation off as a charity I would

> imagine EDF would be the last they would

> advertise.

>

> Giggirl has yet to provide a shred of evidence to

> prove that this group are not worth a donation. I

> find the tone of her posts hostile and arrogant

> and the use of insults weak.

>

> Can anyone explain what this organisation is being

> accused of?

If you're going to use a public forum then you might like to grow broader shoulders before taking offence at someone's tone. You might also pay attention to your own arrogant tone.

I did not realise that I was tasked with proving or disproving whether this group is worth a donation, I merely responded to the OP.

On balance, I think the group is being accused of a lack of transparency. The EDF was used to recruit fundraisers at ?7 per hour plus bonus, and our community has been targeted by street collectors. If you stick a charity label on a bucket and people put money into that bucket then there should be transparency about where the money is going.

On the threads last week the OP did not respond to questions asking what the charity was about and did not seem to know much about the registration process of the Charities Commission. Those threads have now been removed. The organiser is a forum-user and could contribute to this thread.

Maybe the money will be put to good use. Who knows? Perhaps the organiser may find that if s/he is forthcoming about the aims and objectives, and transparent about use of funds collected, then local people may be inclined to give input and get on board.

[Chick Pea]

GG you are quick to jump to assumptions. I said that the tone of your posts is hostile and arrogant, not that it offends me.

Thanks for setting out the background to this - I agree with your last point as I would like to know more about the work of this group, how it benefits young people and how to support it.

[giggirl]

Chick Pea Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> GG you are quick to jump to assumptions. I said

> that the tone of your posts is hostile and

> arrogant, not that it offends me.

>

Pedantic and passive aggressive. I'm guessing people normally let you get away with that crap.

[Chick Pea]

O dear.

[Voyageur]

giggirl Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Chick Pea Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > GG you are quick to jump to assumptions. I said

> > that the tone of your posts is hostile and

> > arrogant, not that it offends me.

> >

>

> Pedantic and passive aggressive. I'm guessing

> people normally let you get away with that crap.

And you too. Your behaviour on this thread stinks.

[ednewmy]

I saw them there on Wednesday too. Think there were three of them, none had any kind of name badge or I.D, no uniform or anything, and their collection tins/buckets almost looked to me like they'd had stickers ripped off them and then something else stuck over the top. They were being enormously over-earnest to the point of verging on intimidating. As far as I'm concerned it would have been clear to anyone that these guys were not genuine charity collectors, so I didn't give them anything.

[ianr]

Chick Pea Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I would like to know more about the work of this group, how it benefits young people and how to support it.

http://www.gumtree.com/p/jobs/dedicated-sales-individuals-vacancies-available-stk-charity-apply-now-50-a-day-bonus/1029855918

[buddug]

I'm sorry, but this just sounds like a total scam. Save the Kids? From what. And 'We save the kids every day'. No information about how they 'save' children, what they do...

[reeko]

Have to agree. No information on who they are or what they do. What exactly is a "charity based" organisation. No online presence outside Twitter. No way to track them down should they run off with the donations they seem to be working very hard to solicit. if this lot are legit, they are doing a really good job of appearing not to be.

[giggirl]

Very useful links ianr - thanks for digging around for them. It is either a scam or it is being run by people who don't know what they are doing and need to get input from experienced charity workers. Either way, the lack of transparency about what is happening with the money is alarming. When the forum was being used to recruit fundraisers last week, questions were put and remained unanswered.

[Chick Pea]

Yes thanks ianr. Curioser and curiouser. A charity based company would be registered with Companies House, did quick web check and found following:

http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk//compdetails

http://companycheck.co.uk/director/903891607

The twitter account is new, started in July and has over 2,000 followers but there is no facebook. So no web presence other than a two month old twitter account and some adds on Gumtree, no valid company or charitable registration.

Stk appears to be operating under the radar - wonder if HMRC have heard of them.

[reeko]

James Barber going to ask council trading standards to investigate.

[giggirl]

Thanks Reeko