I am/was aware of the admin/overheads debate and concerns regarding some of the bigger charities, been at this for years. One of my favourite charities is Oxfam, for personal reasons, but I continually get an ear bashing every time I mention supporting them, because of the perceived 'admin/top exec wages' thing.
In my case, the Red Cross was one of the first to get an appeal up and running, and in my experience they are widely known and respected, with no eg religious/political etc bias. We did what we could and when we could do it to help.
First, I have to declare an interest. My elder son started working for Oxfam as an unpaid volunteer on leaving university. Within a year he had been offered a paid job with Oxfam. Eventually he became Oxfam's deputy director of trading (the Oxfam shops) before moving to Oxfam International as their Director of Strategy. The bulk of his work was in streamlining procedures to minimise costs and to maximise the resources available to meet Oxfam's declared objectives. It would be fai to describe him as a "top executive. He stood down this year to become a freelance consultant and lecturer on charity administration.
If he has ever been paid anything other than a medium range salary I'm at a loss to know where the money has gone. He lives in a modest house in Oxford and the family holiday is typically two weeks camping in Brittany. Although the work entailed travelling the world, accommodation was with local Oxfam employees or volunteers. No first class or swish hotels for him or his colleagues. The work load put a strain on his health and personal life.
This may explain why get irritated by the ill-informed rhetoric of the "charity begins at home" brigade. Use of this tired old cliche always indicates someone who does not think very clearly or deeply about a complex and changing situation.
I would like to make the following points which are my own personal views and not those of Oxfam or any other charity or, indeed, my son:
Charities are highly regulated and subject to law and strict regulation. Their accounts and allocation of funds are readily available in the public domain.
Administration costs are inevitable and exist to ensure efficient use of resources.
Negative attitudes and ill-informed opinions actually cost charities money by increasing advertising necessary to refute mis-information and to compensate for the undermining of campaigns. The Daily Mail is a particular offender in this respect and some of the views it disseminates have percolated through to this thread. Such attitudes have a direct adverse effect on lives.
Charities are not only about raising and spending money on disaster relief. By campaigning for education for girls or regulation the arms trade, for example, they prevent or alleviate future problems. Much of my son's work entailed altering the views of politicians at home and abroad. Campaigning costs, but also saves, money.
Charities have to work with governments and other organisations. I know that my son has gained enormous respect for the armed forces and has deemed it a privilege to have worked with high ranking military officers of many nations as well as with the men on the ground. The work of the armed forces is evident in most news reports these days where the military is often the first responder.
The work of charities is changing and evolving as are the need of countries in the developing world. Yesterday's aid recipient with help can become tomorrows aid giver. Gone are the days of throwing money away on short term relief, for example. But the charities themselves have to run their own review and re-education programmes to ensure that they are up-to-date and efficient. This is not without its own cost implications.
Large charities are in a position to monitor the effectiveness of the of aid they supply. I know of one case where a large charity paid a local lawyer to sue his own country's government in order to enforce their own anti-corruption laws. The thousands this cost resulted in the saving of millions.
There is much more I could add, but this is a complex problem that is constantly changing. What remains is that crises will always occur and while we have been arguing, those poor bu**ers in the West Indies are still enduring a miserable time.
