View Full Version : How much money is actually lost?
Whether it's the Red Cross, the local homeless person or the guy outside Albertsons market raising money for some unknown cause, it has become increasingly difficult for me to give money to charities. It's almost inconceivable the amount of money which is loss through graft and corruption and simple stupidity. This fund has spent over $10 billion since 2002, "But the levels of corruption in the grants they have audited so far are astonishing." If it's true that 2/3 has been eaten up by corruption that's a loss of $14 billion.
It's ridiculous.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jBNgIu-Vg-_pAVtF6PcN9eSYPfiA?docId=eccd6da0cec34b489a67dfdf8 0cb933b
AP Enterprise: Fraud plagues global health fund
(AP) – Jan 23, 2011
GENEVA (AP) — A $21.7 billion development fund backed by celebrities and hailed as an alternative to the bureaucracy of the United Nations sees as much as two-thirds of some grants eaten up by corruption, The Associated Press has learned.
Much of the money is accounted for with forged documents or improper bookkeeping, indicating it was pocketed, investigators for the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria say. Donated prescription drugs wind up being sold on the black market.
The fund's newly reinforced inspector general's office, which uncovered the corruption, can't give an overall accounting because it has examined only a tiny fraction of the $10 billion that the fund has spent since its creation in 2002. But the levels of corruption in the grants they have audited so far are astonishing.
A full 67 percent of money spent on an anti-AIDS program in Mauritania was misspent, the investigators told the fund's board of directors. So did 36 percent of the money spent on a program in Mali to fight tuberculosis and malaria, and 30 percent of grants to Djibouti.
In Zambia, where $3.5 million in spending was undocumented and one accountant pilfered $104,130, the fund decided the nation's health ministry simply couldn't manage the grants and put the United Nations in charge of them. The fund is trying to recover $7 million in "unsupported and ineligible costs" from the ministry(end of excerpt)......
Buffalobob
01-30-2011, 11:56
Power and money corrupts and that is as old as sin.
I was saddened by the recent revelations of coverup of rapes in the Peace Corp. I always held them in high esteem, but it appears that they have turned into a bureaucracy whose primary function is self preservation.
I recently sat on the board of a sizable non-profit for a two year term - it was an eye opener. Although I sat on many committees and rose to vice-chair - I politely declined an invitation for another two year term.
Upwards of 95% of the funding for this organization was from federal sources - to the tune of $27 million+ dollars per year - who knows what it is now - this was a few years ago.
IMO, the waste and conflicts of interest were astounding. Not many on the board (bank presidents, partners in accounting firms, CEO of local United Way, CEO of high tech firms, etc. etc.,) wanted to ask tough questions - go along to get along seemed to be the mantra - along with a fair amount of political posturing.
The Executive Director was taking in 6 figures annually - some raises for cronies were on the order of 25% annually. This was during the same period of time that private sector folks were receiving 3% on average and state government folks were getting zero.
The travel expenses (in state) for this Executive Director were approaching 6 figures annually.
Many of the longer term directors had (at the time) undisclosed contracts with the not-for-profit.
I, too, was approached by the Executive Director to perform some "consulting" for a sum that was less than the amount that required disclosure to the board - but was not exactly chump change. I declined.
This Executive Director "retired" shortly after my two year term ended - and after some tough questions were asked.
It was astonishing to me how this organization saw fit to spend other peoples money.
You are welcome to come to our Chapter and look
at our books at any time. The American Red Cross is
totally transparent.
In fact, I suggest you explore becoming a member of the
Board of Directors of your local Red Cross Chapter.
We can always use smart, honest, hard working men and women
in leadership roles.
What does it pay? Zero.
Zero, minus, actually. You will be asked to "set the pace" with
donations for disaster relief, support of the Armed Forces, blood
drives, and Health and Safety. You will know exactly how much
goes to programs and services, and how much goes into
overhead, because you will develop, approve, and audit the budget.
I have heard good things about the Red Cross.
It certainly is true that not all non-profits are the same.
Transparency can be a good thing.
A government grant parable to ponder:
The government recently announced a new program, a grant to build housing for midgets and subsidizing their rent.
Accordingly, based on the demographics from the last official government census, we should have had six midgets living here.
Based on that, we applied for, and received enough money to finance the building of the first home and also allow the "vertically challenged" to pay less than the going rate for rent.
Turns out, however, that there was only one such person living in our town. As a result, we didn't need any more homes and had enough funding so he won't have to pay anything for the only house we built - the government grant and subsidy covered everything.
The city council has aptly named it our "Stay Free Mini Pad."
And so it goes...
Richard :munchin
alright4u
01-31-2011, 04:30
Whether it's the Red Cross, the local homeless person or the guy outside Albertsons market raising money for some unknown cause, it has become increasingly difficult for me to give money to charities. It's almost inconceivable the amount of money which is loss through graft and corruption and simple stupidity. This fund has spent over $10 billion since 2002, "But the levels of corruption in the grants they have audited so far are astonishing." If it's true that 2/3 has been eaten up by corruption that's a loss of $14 billion.
It's ridiculous.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jBNgIu-Vg-_pAVtF6PcN9eSYPfiA?docId=eccd6da0cec34b489a67dfdf8 0cb933b
AP Enterprise: Fraud plagues global health fund
(AP) – Jan 23, 2011
GENEVA (AP) — A $21.7 billion development fund backed by celebrities and hailed as an alternative to the bureaucracy of the United Nations sees as much as two-thirds of some grants eaten up by corruption, The Associated Press has learned.
Much of the money is accounted for with forged documents or improper bookkeeping, indicating it was pocketed, investigators for the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria say. Donated prescription drugs wind up being sold on the black market.
The fund's newly reinforced inspector general's office, which uncovered the corruption, can't give an overall accounting because it has examined only a tiny fraction of the $10 billion that the fund has spent since its creation in 2002. But the levels of corruption in the grants they have audited so far are astonishing.
A full 67 percent of money spent on an anti-AIDS program in Mauritania was misspent, the investigators told the fund's board of directors. So did 36 percent of the money spent on a program in Mali to fight tuberculosis and malaria, and 30 percent of grants to Djibouti.
In Zambia, where $3.5 million in spending was undocumented and one accountant pilfered $104,130, the fund decided the nation's health ministry simply couldn't manage the grants and put the United Nations in charge of them. The fund is trying to recover $7 million in "unsupported and ineligible costs" from the ministry(end of excerpt)......
No study was needed.
greenberetTFS
01-31-2011, 07:25
No study was needed.
It's truly a sad day!............:(
Big Teddy :munchin
You are welcome to come to our Chapter and look
at our books at any time. The American Red Cross is
totally transparent.
In fact, I suggest you explore becoming a member of the
Board of Directors of your local Red Cross Chapter.
We can always use smart, honest, hard working men and women
in leadership roles.
What does it pay? Zero.
Zero, minus, actually. You will be asked to "set the pace" with
donations for disaster relief, support of the Armed Forces, blood
drives, and Health and Safety. You will know exactly how much
goes to programs and services, and how much goes into
overhead, because you will develop, approve, and audit the budget.
CBS,
I'm not sure if your chapter is the exception to the rule or if the Red Cross has tightened up their system since September 11, 2001. Your story appears to be contrary to the article linked below which references the problems which existed at that time. It doesn't appear to be a problem of loss of funds or malfeasance, rather it appears to have been a problem where the local chapters did not properly earmark the funds and/ or did not have proper budgetary/reporting systems in place. However the end result was unsatisfactory. It would be quite disappointing to contribute to the 911 fund only to have the local Red Cross chapter dump your contribution into their general fund.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/07/30/eveningnews/main516886.shtml
This is probably beyond the scope of a post on a thread, but here goes:
It is not and never has been the role of the Red Cross to pay college tuition for orphans whose fathers were killed in 911. Or pay off the mortgages or car notes of the widows. Or reimburse business owners for loss of business or property damaged or destroyed. The big mistake that was made by Mrs. Bush (the President's wife) and others (including, I regret to say, the former Chair of the American Red Cross) was to EVER tie donations to a specific disaster.
There never should have been -- and never will be again -- a "911 Fund" --emergency appeal. Funds are solicited for ALL disasters, and are distributed based on needs of people under the first fundamental principle of the Red Cross: "Humanity."
The role of the Red Cross is to assist victims of ALL disasters
with humanitarian needs:
Food,
Clothing,
Shelter,
Medical Attention.
That's about as basic as it gets.
And somehow that got way out of whack when over one billion dollars (that's $1,000,000,000.00) was contributed.
Because whenever Red Cross contributions exceed needs, the rest is saved for the next disaster, whether it be an earthquake, or wild fires, or a tornado.
=====
So consider the situation of a stock broker widow from 911:
"Ma'am, do you have a place to stay?
"Why yes, I have our house on Long Island, and the summer place in Florida."
"Do you have food to eat?"
"Well of course silly, our pantry is full, and I've got American Express, VISA and Mastercard with some of the finest resturants in the world within blocks of here."
"Do you need clothing?"
(Gives interviewer a scathing look) "Do I look like I need clothing?"
"Are you in need of medical attention?"
"Well, I'm going to need some time with my therapist over this, and even
after my health insurance, my co-pay will easily be $1,000 for the next year."
"Ma'am, here's $1,000 for your mental health co-pay." ... "Next."
=====
Or a Pentagon servicemember who was burned:
"Sir, do you have a place to stay?"
"I'm a Sergeant, don't call me sir, I work for a living. Of course I have a place to stay. I've got a house, paid for by BAQ that won't stop just because I'm here at the San Antonio Burn Center."
"Do you need clothing?"
"Yeah, the Claims Judge Advocate only approved about half of my claim for my Class B's that they cut off of me. Said something about "depreciation." That's easily $150 loss right there."
"Do you need food?"
"Hell no, I don't need food. You think they don't feed me here?"
"Do you need medical attention?"
"Are you f-cking blind, I'm getting free medical care at the best medical facility in the world, all while still drawing full pay and allowances."
"Yes sir, I mean, yes Sergeant. Here's $150 to help you get a new uniform."
=====
Now that's two claimants, with a total expense of $1,150.00. But (do the math): One Billion Dollars divided by 3,000 victims = $333,000 per person.
[By the way, there were billions more dollars voted by the Congress that went to the victim's families and were used to pay for college tuition, paid off mortgages, and so on.]
The blunt fact is: Probably less than one tenth of the billion dollars donated was properly payable to the victims of the 911 attacks under the standards long established by the Red Cross for disaster relief. Many of the victims and the survivors of the deceased simply did not qualify for any financial assistance under Red Cross disaster funding formulas. They were not homeless, hungry, without proper clothing or in need of medical attention.
But there we were, with more money than necessary, and some Chapters -- rightly or wrongly -- put donations into local funds for victims of house fires, or tornados. After all, it's hard to tell a truly homeless family standing outside their burning house wrapped in a blanket that the Red Cross donations at the chapter office are on their way to New York to pay off the car payment on some orphan's BMW. The money should go to those with the greatest and most immediate need.
But as a result of the uproar over payments to the "911 Fund" going to tornado victims in Oklahoma, Red Cross declared that ALL 911 funding would be given out solely to victims and survivors of that specific disaster, leaving the rest of our country short. As a result, in my personal opinion, we (the Red Cross) then wasted the donations by making payments from the 911 Fund that should not have been made.
=====
The key issue with respect to this thread: NONE of the 911 donations, or any other donations, were pocketed by Red Cross workers, or used to pay bribes to any government officials, or used for First Class Airline tickets and four star hotels, or limo rentals. Most of the assistance, even when given to those who did not have bona fide needs under Red Cross standards, was administered by ... ready for this ... unpaid volunteers.
CBS,
Interesting recount of the history of the 911 situation. Thanks for taking the time to write and post this.
My understanding of the reasoning behind the payments to the families was always a little hazy. You haver provided a bit of sunlight on the subject.
Again, thanks for the info.
Whether it's the Red Cross, the local homeless person or the guy outside Albertsons market raising money for some unknown cause, it has become increasingly difficult for me to give money to charities. It's almost inconceivable the amount of money which is loss through graft and corruption and simple stupidity. This fund has spent over $10 billion since 2002, "But the levels of corruption in the grants they have audited so far are astonishing." If it's true that 2/3 has been eaten up by corruption that's a loss of $14 billion.
It's ridiculous.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jBNgIu-Vg-_pAVtF6PcN9eSYPfiA?docId=eccd6da0cec34b489a67dfdf8 0cb933b
AP Enterprise: Fraud plagues global health fund
(AP) – Jan 23, 2011
GENEVA (AP) — A $21.7 billion development fund backed by celebrities and hailed as an alternative to the bureaucracy of the United Nations sees as much as two-thirds of some grants eaten up by corruption, The Associated Press has learned.
Much of the money is accounted for with forged documents or improper bookkeeping, indicating it was pocketed, investigators for the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria say. Donated prescription drugs wind up being sold on the black market.
The fund's newly reinforced inspector general's office, which uncovered the corruption, can't give an overall accounting because it has examined only a tiny fraction of the $10 billion that the fund has spent since its creation in 2002. But the levels of corruption in the grants they have audited so far are astonishing.
A full 67 percent of money spent on an anti-AIDS program in Mauritania was misspent, the investigators told the fund's board of directors. So did 36 percent of the money spent on a program in Mali to fight tuberculosis and malaria, and 30 percent of grants to Djibouti.
In Zambia, where $3.5 million in spending was undocumented and one accountant pilfered $104,130, the fund decided the nation's health ministry simply couldn't manage the grants and put the United Nations in charge of them. The fund is trying to recover $7 million in "unsupported and ineligible costs" from the ministry(end of excerpt)......
That breast cancer company, because thats what it is. The one that had the NFL Players wearing pink. Keeps 70% for themselves. The CEO makes 450,000 a year. So remember that when they ask for donations from you. Instead there are companies that put you in contact with sick people who need help. You give the money straight to them.