Afternoon:
14°c
Harry charity's wage bill bigger than donations
Sri Carmichael06.04.09
PRINCE Harry's charity for African Aids orphans spent tens of thousands of pounds more on staff and fundraising than it received in donations.
Sentebale, which aims to help children in the southern African kingdom of Lesotho, spent a total of £279,000 on salaries for workers and the costs of fundraising, accounts published today disclosed.
But the charity's income was £231,000, with only £48,000 in direct donations to the fund. It spent £62,000 generating that income and £217,000 on staff costs during the 12 months to the end of last August.
The organisation faced criticism when last year's accounts showed it handed over only £84,000 to charity projects in its first year, while spending nearly £500,000 on staff salaries and set-up costs.
In the wake of the controversy, members of the public donated just £81,000 directly to Sentebale. A further £150,000 was raised through the Concert for Diana in 2007 and polo events. A separate £19,000 came from investments.
In an apparent bid to counter previous criticism, Sentebale issued a release with today's figures headlining the fact that £707,000 out of a total £791,000 expenditure last year went on "charitable activities", while just £22,000 was spent on "governance costs". But a closer analysis of the accounts reveals this obscures the £217,000 spent on staff salaries, pensions and social security mentioned towards the back of the report.
Reader views (4)
They should do the same as those running the Children in Need campaign. The money donated in November is banked and not used until the following year. They then use the interest for all the admin cost, thereby all the money donated actually goes to the charity.
- E Sullivan, London
Charity clearly begins at home here. An excuse to attend an event free of charge and for personal publicity if you are a "name". My solution would be that all Arrangers,Administrators,Managers,Event Organisers Et Al should also be donators for the common cause. In other words they should do it for little expense. Whereas it is reasonable that some costs have to be covered, these should come out of Lottery money and managed by them to ensure no advantages are taken. Additionally, there should be a minimum of 70% or 80% guaranteed for the Charity in question, otherwise, no deal.
- Jaime Gamell, Madrid, Spain
I am sure that you will find similar figures if you look at other well meaning charities. Too many charities with similar aims spending too much and all trying to target the same donors.
- Patrick, Dalston
Figures like these certainly don't encourage you to donate.
- Robin, Brentford, UK
