Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

> 淋冰捐錢背後的數字
Pearltea
發表於: Aug 28 2014, 20:19  
Quote Post


四品官
*********

發表數: 1,289
所屬群組: 太守
註冊日期: 9-22-2003

活躍:5
聲望:614


http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/financeestat...140828/18846930

user posted image

「冰淋城下」(Ice Bucket Challenge)近半個月在全球掀起一陣熱潮,有人「自淋」找數,有人選擇捐錢「算數」。今次淋冰活動的大贏家,肯定是肌萎縮性脊髓側索硬化症(ALS)的組織。截至上周五的一個月,ALS已收到逾5,000萬美元捐款,較去年全年收到的,還多七成。

捐款ALS 受助人落袋不足兩成
捐錢目的是希望自己所捐的金錢,盡可能全數落入有需要的人手上。以前若有睇東華、保良局等籌款活動,大家都聽到「所有善款扣除各項開支,會全數撥入社會服務」。包括股榮在內,大部份人對此不以為然,捐錢前後,都不會對有關機構點用善款深究。
淋冰活動夠Gimmick,玩玩無妨,但對於ALS是一個甚麼組織,善款如何運用,有需要起起底。每間慈善團體相當於一間公司,每年都要向公眾披露財政報告。網上年報顯示,ALS基地設在美國,截至2014年1月底止的最新年報,捐款及其他收入累計有2,910萬美元,總開支則為2,620萬美元。
開支分項中,支援患者及家屬僅510萬美元,佔比19%,資助相關研究及用於公共和專業教育,分別佔總開支28%及32%。另14%用於籌款活動,7%用於行政費用。簡單講,你捐100元給ALS,只有19元直接幫到患者及其家屬,反而籌款費用連同組織燈油火蠟、人工等行政管理開支,卻佔21元。
先旨聲明,股榮並非指ALS沒善用籌款,對比其他慈善機構,我希望有關金額能最快、最直接、幫到最多有需要的人,而非純粹捐左先。翻查五間本港主要慈善團體,開支有三部分:行政、籌款費用、救援及支援等項目。救急扶危的金額一般都佔總開支86%至95%,相當正路。
貴為全港最大慈善機構,公益金去年行政支出達2,158萬元,佔總開支比例達7%,其他只有約2至3%。籌款費用佔總開支較大的有無國界醫生及樂施會,比例介乎9至11%。
較早前魏力向股榮挑機淋冰,自淋找數後,也決定將原先打算捐予ALS的1,000元,轉為捐給無國界醫生。伊波拉病毒在非洲肆虐,疫情嚴峻前所未見。目前無國界醫生有超過1,200名救援人員在非洲治療不斷新增的病人,以身犯險,值得尊重。

_______________________________________________________
This is another news where I find pretty annoying. The expense allocation was based on last year's numbers. As we all know the revenue from donation was a lot lower in comparison to this year's with the ice bucket challenge campaign, thus costs like administrative and fundraising, which are fixed costs (maybe they are somewhat variable as the revenue increase but majority are fixed), represented greater allocations. Based on this year's donation from the campaign alone, it's obvious that the fixed costs would be lower, yielding higher % allocations to research, education and patients. The article created a false impression that such little amount goes to those needed by emphasizing only 20% of the revenue went to the patients, while neglecting that the spending on research and education has such significant yet passive impact to the future of controlling this disease.
PMEmail Poster
Top
mxpal
發表於: Aug 29 2014, 04:32  評價+1
Quote Post


九品官
****

發表數: 83
所屬群組: 一般
註冊日期: 3-21-2008

活躍:3
聲望:22


QUOTE (Pearltea @ Aug 29 2014, 04:19 )
This is another news where I find pretty annoying. The expense allocation was based on last year's numbers. As we all know the revenue from donation was a lot lower in comparison to this year's with the ice bucket challenge campaign, thus costs like administrative and fundraising, which are fixed costs (maybe they are somewhat variable as the revenue increase but majority are fixed), represented greater allocations. Based on this year's donation from the campaign alone, it's obvious that the fixed costs would be lower, yielding higher % allocations to research, education and patients. The article created a false impression that such little amount goes to those needed by emphasizing only 20% of the revenue went to the patients, while neglecting that the spending on research and education has such significant yet passive impact to the future of controlling this disease.

那是因為很多人覺得行政費用等同於貪污或低效率, 而忽視了其帶來的作用. 同時也像你說的, 人們太高估對病人直接捐款的效用. 這組數據根本代表不了甚麼, 恐怕此報導的目的又是給香港人滿足一下audit別人來提高自己道德水平的慾望吧.


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

另一篇異曲同工的報導:
Infographic Shows The Differences Between The Diseases We Donate To, And The Diseases That Kill Us


http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medic...iseases-kill-us
PMEmail Poster
Top
1 位使用者正在閱讀本主題 (1 位訪客及 0 位匿名使用者)
0 位會員:

Topic Options Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

 



[ Script Execution time: 0.0120 ]   [ 12 queries used ]   [ GZIP 啟用 ]