Care: At least some of the information about this charity is no longer current. Use the ‘Search charity names’ box to see if there is a later review. If the latest review has a message like this, you are welcome to make your case for an updated review via email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
This is a review in the series ‘Members of Missions Interlink’, Missions Interlink being the Australian Evangelical Alliance Inc‘s ‘network for global mission‘. Members must sign up to a set of standards, and this, at least on paper, makes them a better bet for your donations (or other involvement).
No general statement, but donations (see above) and prayer are sought.
The charity regulator, the ACNC, in their article, Donating to Legitimate Charities, gives “some things to consider to help you make sure your donation is going where it is intended”:
1. Check the charity’s name.
2. Ask for identification from anyone seeking a donation.
3. Be careful of online requests for donations.
4. No tax deduction doesn’t mean the charity is not a legitimate one, and
5. Find out more about how the charity says it uses donations.
1. A search on the ACNC Register for ‘Empart’ gives a charity in the name Empart Inc (Empart).
2. There is nothing in Empart’s material to suggest that they use either door-to-door or street collectors.
3. The Empart website is secure.
But on the page where you enter your information, there is no assurance of the security of that information.
4. Empart’s ABN record (via the ACNC Register) says that a tax deduction is not available.
It still manages to give one though:
For another organisation to legitimately give a receipt they would have to receive the money. Empart offer no explanation for why you should give to another organisation (especially one in a different name), or how you get accountability for this donation.
5. The use of your donations
‘What We Do’ on the website has the same information as ‘What We Do’ on the UK website. This, plus the nature of the expenses in the Financial Report 2019 and the fact that the 74% of the expenses were in an item called ‘Field Country Projects’, strongly suggests that Empart is principally a fundraiser rather than the organisation described on the website.
Whatever the answer, the quality of the directors’ decision-making should give you pause before donating:
- The organisation for which they are collecting donations, ‘’Empower Australia OAF’, is a charity, Empower Australia Overseas Aid Fund Inc. (Empower). The evidence is that Empart controls Empower. But not only has it not consolidated the balances and transactions of the two charities, there is no mention of Empower in Empart’s Financial Report 2019.
- The lack of disclosure on the donation page (see above).
- The directors signed the accounts well after the pandemic began, but they don’t mention it.
- The auditor tells us that the directors had decided ‘it is not practicable for the company to maintain control over cash receipts prior to their being received and receipted by officers.’ This means that the audit gives no comfort that all the money that was paid to Empart made it into their bank account.
- The directors make no comment on the fact that the auditor had to give a qualified, rather than a ‘clean’, audit opinion.
- The directors believe that all the stakeholders of Empart, including hundreds of donors, can command Empart to tailor a financial report to suit their information needs.
- This means that, if you are reading this, it is likely that the financial statements are the wrong kind for you.
- The directors incorrectly classify ‘Designated to field country projects’ $299K as a liability. Similarly with ‘Provision for Future Expenses’ and ‘Funds to be transferred’.
- The directors do not disclose where the ‘Donations to Field Country Projects’ were sent, how they ensure that (a) the money is received, and (b) used for the purpose for which it was sent.
- The Statement of Changes in Equity does not comply with the Accounting Standards.
- The directors include material expenses without explaining them.
These were the people responsible for the Financial Report:
Is it this Brian Holmes?
The directors are responsible to the members. The number of members is not disclosed, so it is not possible to assess this accountability.
Nothing systematic found. Maybe this is because, on the ‘Accountability’ page, Empart make this offer:
ON REQUEST, Empart will gladly send you the latest Partnership Impact Report, free of charge.
The introduction to the Mission Interlink standards (see above) includes this statement:
We sent the member a draft of this review. They received it but chose not to respond.
- See here for the previous review. ↑
- We review these charities for two reasons: one, because Missions Interlink promise high standards for their members, and somebody should hold them to account, and two, because ↑
- A section in the article, Donating and Volunteering: ↑◦ Focus on the nature of the charity’s work, its beneficiaries and the impact the charity is having in the community.◦ Is it clear what the charity is trying to achieve and how its activities work towards its objectives?◦ Would you like to spend your money, or time if volunteering, to support these objectives?
◦ Is the charity being transparent about its activities? ↑
- The website should have the full name, not just ‘Empart’. ↑
- Except for one person, its directors are the same as the directors of Empart. The two charities share an office. Their accounts were signed on the same day by the same person. They have the same auditor. ↑