Another one bites the dust. This was the last of a long line and I will be making no further donations to street appeals or to box rattlers outside the supermarket. They have used emotional claptrap for years to wrangle funds out of people. The money is not getting to where it was intended.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/4216284/Row-over-pink-lottery-lossesRow over 'pink' lottery losses
Last updated 05:00 10/10/2010
We just hit what couldn't have been a worse time,' says Patricia Wright of the NZ Breast Cancer Foundation.
The Breast Cancer Foundation paid more than $70,000 to a company one of its own trustees was a partner in, to set up a "pink ribbon lottery" that ended up losing money.
That loss contributed to a bad financial year, with cost blowouts leading to a $163,000 loss just two years after the foundation recorded an $875,000 surplus.
Heather Shotter, who presided over the cost increases as chief executive, has since left for a new role as chief executive of lobby group Committee for Auckland.
The foundation, which ran its annual street appeal on Friday, has been criticised within the breast cancer community for the way it raises and spends money.
It dominates the cancer charity market – last year raising $4.2 million – but critics say it has helped create a breast cancer "industry" in which big corporates boost their bottom lines through the sale of pink products, an activity known as "pink-washing". They say the foundation raises a lot of money, but spends much of it on fundraising, administration and marketing.
The foundation's financial statements, filed with the Charities Commission, show that in 2009 it paid $73,000 to CPJ Group for "project management services" around the lottery. The foundation's vice-chair, Patricia Wright, was a partner in the firm with her sister at the time, but resigned from the company last year.
The 2010 accounts show the lottery – for an Audi car and a Vietnam trip – cost $499,732, but raised only $454,507, a loss of $45,225. Ticket sales were far below what the organisation anticipated.
Wright, who is also a trustee of the Starship Foundation and the NZ Telepaediatric Service, said the lottery was launched during the financial crisis. "We just hit what couldn't have been a worse time."
She felt bad about the loss, but the lottery was a "complex and difficult project" and the foundation had come out of it with a large donor database it could use in the future.
Charity industry sources questioned the $73,000 payment, but foundation chair Justine Smyth said the conflict of interest was declared in the accounts and Wright had been chosen for her expertise.
"Pat does an enormous amount of pro-bono work. She was paid for a specific job that took an enormous amount of time. She was working fulltime for that period."
Smyth confirmed that the foundation had paid another $47,000 to CPJ Group this year.
The foundation also paid $193,000 to an advertising agency associated with another of its trustees, Kevin Malloy. Smyth said Malloy's company did not benefit from that, placing ads with media outlets and donating its commission back to the foundation.
Breast cancer educator Sue McLeod, who runs information website breast.co.nz, was scathing of the payments, saying it would breach charity rules if trustees associated with the companies were involved in board discussions over the contracts.
She said the foundation had a "corporate-type attitude" and the amount it spent on marketing and advertising was "ridiculous".
The foundation's financial statements show it increased its revenue from $3.5m to $4.3m, a 24% increase, but its total expenses rose by $1.3m or 29%, while administration, wages, and fundraising costs rose 160% over the past two years. The amount the foundation spends in that area has risen from 43% of total revenue to 47%.
Smyth said the foundation had met all its commitments for the year – increasing spending on its awareness programmes by $266,000 and grants – and had a healthy bottom line, with more than $3m in reserve.
She said one of the reasons the administration figures looked so "stark" was that the foundation included the costs of its educators in its salaries and wages column, which other charities did not.
Smyth was confident the foundation would stabilise costs in the next year and record a surplus, and that Friday's fine weather would help turn around the street appeal, which raised less than normal last year.
The foundation has been criticised for spending the bulk of its money on pushing early detection and mammograms, at the expense of prevention campaigns and support for sufferers.
Smyth said the foundation was focused on becoming an umbrella to other groups and that early detection was critical. "Still 50% of breast cancers that are found are found post-lumps. That means people are dying because they're still not getting mammograms. It's fundamental."