SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
A few days ago, I submitted the story about the article criticizing the Red Cross' use of funds in Haiti. Purely by coincidence, I just tripped across an interview on Reddit: the two authors of the article answering questions from the public. To make things even more interesting, Jonathan Garro from the Red Cross also jumped in to provide a counterpoint.
I have no axe to grind here: I donate to the local Red Cross, and am therefore interested to know whether the organization makes effective use of the money it receives.
Original Submission
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Black Eye for the Red Cross - Continued
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 17 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
If God had not given us sticky tape, it would have been necessary to invent it.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 17 2015, @06:52AM
Trust Us! We're the Red Cross!
CONTINUE GIVING MONEY
We're the Red Cross! We're here to help!
DO NOT STOP GIVING THE MONEY
(Score: 2, Interesting) by SDRefugee on Wednesday June 17 2015, @02:37PM
Disclaimer: I am a volunteer with the local Redcross chapter, and am on what is known as the "Disaster Action Team". We are the guys/gals who are called when a house/apartment fire happens in our local area, and we respond with immediate assistance (clothing/food/shelter) for the victims. A VERY large part of local Redcross donations go to providing this assistance to local victims. That being said, I don't have any inside knowledge about Redcross operations other than our local programs, and of course, all the help provided to victims of tornados, floods in the midwest.. We have a local public information officer who sends out press releases and social media updates whenever the DAT team is called out to a fire.. As far as I'm concerned, as a Redcross volunteer, the local assistance we provide is the most important function of the Redcross...
America should be proud of Edward Snowden, the hero, whether they know it or not..
(Score: 2) by edIII on Wednesday June 17 2015, @06:27PM
First, thank you for what do with your community.
Secondly, while that may be true, the higher ups in Red Cross already killed their organization for me with their shenanigans in 9/11 and Haiti. I would love to support you, but that 'VERY' large part of the funds makes me very skeptical. I can recall Red Cross admonishing everyone about how all the 9/11 money *could* go to places other than the victims and those suffering. It didn't help either knowing how large their fleet of private corporate jets *are*, and that it's basically used to shuttle executive butts in style.
The Red Cross is perceived as a charitable organization that his simply got to big, and that those at the top more or less use it as personal funds. If only there was a way to know that donating to the local Red Cross chapter actually keeps those funds local.
You ARE the most important function of the Red Cross, and its raison de' etre. Why Red Cross has such a black eye, and bad reputation, is that we think there is some sociopathic asshole behind you unjustly distributing funds and profiting from your hard work and dedication to helping those in need. While you go home exhausted, dirty, and tired, a Red Cross executive is living a pampered life style congratulating themselves on your work, and then thanking the stewardess for the champagne.
Take a guess if I want my money buying the champagne....
In other words, donating to the Red Cross is like to trying to feed the starving of Africa with Sally Struthers. Some of the food makes it there right? ;)
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 1) by SDRefugee on Wednesday June 17 2015, @11:17PM
Why Red Cross has such a black eye, and bad reputation, is that we think there is some sociopathic asshole behind you unjustly distributing funds and profiting from your hard work and dedication to helping those in need.
Unfortuantly, I believe you're 100% right, but as far as I know, there is NO other organization that does "boots-on-ground/first-responder-after-the-fire-dept" support for victims of house/apartment fires. In pretty much the majority of the calls I've responded to in the 2 years I've been a DAT volunteer, the people that I provide assistance to would have NOTHING... We are called by the fire department and in one particular case, the house was completely consumed, and the family barely got out with their lives, and by the time the DAT team arrived, about a half hour later, the people had blankets provided by the fire department. The Redcross provides victims (we call them clients) with a Mastercard/debit card which has funds for lodging/food/clothing loaded on it. And once the DAT team addresses their immediate needs post-fire, we also have professionally trained caseworkers who contact the clients the next day to address their longer-term needs. I'm retired and if I didn't volunteer for this, usually 2-3 days/week, I'd be bored out of my mind. To make a long story short, I *know* there's corruption in the higher levels of the organization, but it *still* does a VERY important job locally (and nationally, with hurricane/tornado/earthquake assistance)
America should be proud of Edward Snowden, the hero, whether they know it or not..
(Score: 3, Interesting) by c0lo on Wednesday June 17 2015, @07:05AM
Never use the Button label for encoding the action you intend: the "Reply to article" button in this case
op=Reply works for replying to the article.
the current buggy behaviour op=Reply+to+Article doesn't work.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by francois.barbier on Wednesday June 17 2015, @01:38PM
Don't use <input type="button|submit|reset">
Use <button type="button|submit|reset">
That way, you can use the value attribute AND write whatever you want in the button.
Example:
I find it way easier to add icons to buttons that way, or even to manage translations: you never rely on the button label, only on its value.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 17 2015, @07:07AM
So... two black eyes already? Only?
(Score: 5, Interesting) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Wednesday June 17 2015, @09:34AM
Having read most of that AMA, I have to say the authors of the report come across as dishonest and sensationalist. They strike me as a couple of first-world dickheads wandering around Haiti five years after the quake saying "Well I don't see how hard it is to build a bunch of houses here. Where's the receipt for that well?"
They keep banging on about how the Red Cross only built 6 houses with half a billion dollars, and utterly refuse to acknowledge that the RC actually provided 800000+ tarps, food, water, temporary shelters, repairs, training and more. Turns out you can't just roll up to an earthquake-smashed city in a notoriously corrupt third-world country and start building houses left and right. There are all kinds of legal, social and logistical obstacles to overcome. The RC quickly realised that attempting to do so would be a complete waste of donation money.
I have (very limited) experience trying to fix things in post-tsunami Sri Lanka, and all I can say is that disaster relief is by no means easy on any level, and in those sort of circumstances you can't expect to get things done and have a nice tidy pile of receipts for everything. I would be very wary of any criticism from anyone who hasn't had extensive first-hand experience of trying to organise disaster relief in similar circumstances.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 17 2015, @12:37PM
I wouldn't call them dickheads, in fact they made the same point that you just repeated, that it is very difficult to spend the kind of money the ARC solicited, collected and budgeted, in a cost-effective manner in such a backward country with a government rife with corruption.
Here's the link (embedded in the Reddit AMA) to the ARC's response:
http://www.redcross.org/news/article/The-Real-Story-of-the-6-Homes-Answering-Questions-about-Haiti [redcross.org]
At the bottom they provide this accounting:
The Red Cross reports annually how we spend donor dollars on our website and break it down according to sector. We raised $488 million for our work in Haiti and here is how our spent and committed funds have been allocated:
Emergency relief: $66 million
Shelter: $173 million
Health: $73 million
Water and sanitation: $47 million
Livelihoods: $48 million
Disaster preparedness: $56 million
Cholera prevention: $25 million
I didn't add up those numbers but I'm sure it comes up to $488 million. But that's not very satisfying, is it? How much of that money went to grease the palms of corrupt officials, were spent on expenses of officials or paid consultants flying around or holding stateside meetings ineffectively, were used on projects that didn't produce worthwhile results? That table still doesn't answer the question "Where did all the donated money go to?"
(Score: 2) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Wednesday June 17 2015, @01:29PM
Well, that's not the point they seemed to be making in the AMA. All I got from there was a repeated wail of "but only six houses were built", which seems to be dodging the issue entirely.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 17 2015, @01:23PM
Turns out you can't just roll up to an earthquake-smashed city in a notoriously corrupt third-world country and start building houses left and right.
This is very true. My church has been involved in that country for about 30 years now. In that time I think we managed to build 30 buildings (1-2 per year). The level of corruption is pretty intense. It got so bad we would just get a group of people together and go build them ourselves. If I remember correctly they stopped going because of the threats of violence if we didnt pay up. So they started building in local areas that needed it too.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 17 2015, @02:25PM
Maybe they shouldn't have made all the claims in their press release then, eh?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 18 2015, @07:21AM
I think you missed the part where Red Cross got half a billion and built 6. Whereas other organizations built 5,700 (or more?): http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/16/world/americas/years-after-haiti-quake-safe-housing-is-dream-for-multitudes.html [nytimes.com]
Perhaps Red Cross built most of the 125,000 temporary shelters in Haiti using the half a billion. In which case then perhaps it's not so bad. But if they didn't then it does look bad.
(Score: 2) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Thursday June 18 2015, @11:37AM
No, I think you missed the part where I specifically referenced those numbers in the post you replied to.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Thesis on Wednesday June 17 2015, @02:16PM
I was placed in an executive position at what I would call a "small-to-medium" sized chapter, through a special "government-funded" program many years ago. My job was to create a sustainability at the chapter through community outreach and grant proposals. I did my job very well, for donations and services increased at that chapter, which went direct to the community it served. I was a volunteer for many years prior to being placed into that position. I stopped volunteering after my stint was up. Let me explain why...
In my position there, I got to see the inner workings of ARC HQ, from a local chapter perspective. The organization is far too top heavy at the national level IMHO, and was becoming more so when I left. It struck me as being no different than corporate America, with the top few making massive salaries, while dismantling the simple things that worked well at the lower levels. It turned into a money grab by the few at the top of the food chain at national headquarters IMHO, and that took away from the services that the local chapters provided to many smaller communities.
Fast forward a few years: HQ completely took over the Health & Safety aspect, removing one of the best money making things that local chapters had (teaching first aid and CPR related classes). The majority of the money that was made there stayed local, and went back into the community. HQ didn't like that. They wanted the monies. Now HQ gets all the money direct from participants via online signups, and I have no idea how much of a cut the local chapters get, if any for providing the service, in my area anyway. I suspect they get very little, if anything at all.
Many local chapters are now closed in some states, and larger areas are served from what volunteers have termed "super-chapters" based in very large cities. They are expanding this practice nationwide. I had over 150 volunteers working under me when I was at my local chapter, and now there are none. That alone should tell you how disenfranchised that folks are, who helped to provide services to their local communities for free. It is not as efficient as it was, and is getting worse. Nobody wanted to drive over an hour away to the new "super-chapter" to teach classes, or to get supplies, so they stopped volunteering.
The only thing that the ARC is good at to this day, and have always been good at, is communication between service members and their families through AFES. The government will not let them fuck that up here in the US, for how that is done is tightly controlled, and ARC has to play by the rules set by the government and the Pentagon.
It was a good organization back in the day, but it has lost its way, and I personally do not think it will ever get back to what it was. There are too many bureaucrats at the top lining their pockets, IMHO.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Freeman on Wednesday June 17 2015, @06:34PM
This is what they are missing: http://www.habitat.org/support/annual-report [habitat.org]
Why? "You don't actually think they spend $20,000 on a hammer, $30,000 on a toilet seat, do you?"
Source: Independence Day http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0116629/quotes [imdb.com]
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 3, Insightful) by carguy on Thursday June 18 2015, @02:47AM
Earlier sentiments on the Red Cross...
Highly recommended: Mississippi Fred McDowell: Red Cross Store
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0ticJAbQNI [youtube.com]
Lyrics
http://lyrics.wikia.com/Mississippi_Fred_McDowell:Red_Cross_Store_Blues [wikia.com]
(somewhat different from recording above)
Well I ain't goin' back to that Red Cross store no more.
Well I ain't goin' back to that Red Cross store no more.
Lord I went to the merchant, asked him for some meal,
Lord, you go away from here now boy, you got boll weevils in your brain.
Lord I ain't goin' back to that Red Cross store no more.
Lord I ain't goin' back to that Red Cross store no more.
No sugar for my coffee, no flour for my bread,
Red Cross store wen't help me fix my ailing head.
I was on the floor a bleendin' I almost cought my death,
No Red Cross store gonna save my life when I'm down to my last breath.
Well I ain't goin' back to that Red Cross store no more.
Lord I ain't goin' back to that Red Cross store no more.
Don't talk to me 'bout no war, if you can't tell me what I'm fighting for.
I would go all the way to hell, before I give my Soul to that Red Cross store.
Lord I ain't goin' back to that Red Cross store no more.
Lord I ain't goin' back to that Red Cross store no more.
I told you once, I told you twice, a thousand times before,
If I could get a job, I wouldn't go to that store no more.
Lord I ain't goin' back to that Red Cross store no more.
Lord I ain't goin' back to that Red Cross store no more.