Entrust Foundation: charity review

This is a review in the series ‘Members of Missions Interlink. Missions Interlink is ‘the Australian network for global mission’ and a means for a Member to get income tax exemption when it might not otherwise be available^[1].

‘Mission Enterprises (Victoria) Ltd’ is one such Member, and an organisation that, under the name Entrust Foundation^[2], seeks donations from the public on the internet^[3].

Charity response

Both Members and Associates have to accept a set of standards, the introduction to which includes this statement:

I sent them a draft of this review. They did not respond.

Donors

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

Here’s the results for ‘Mission Enterprises (Victoria) Ltd’^[4], with #5 supplemented by the essentials of the ACNC’s What should I consider when deciding which charity to support?^[5]

1.  There is a registered^[6] charity in that name.

Not to be confused with the charity Mission Enterprises Limited^[7].

Mission Enterprises (Victoria) Ltd has three business names registered: Entrust Philanthropy, Entrust Projects and Space Cafe^[8].

_ ________________________________________________________

2.  There is nothing to indicate that Mission Enterprises (Victoria) Ltd’ (Entrust) uses third-party (donation) collectors.

_________________________________________________________

3.  The web address does not begin with a closed padlock symbol, so the website is not secure [the ACNC article above^[9]]. It is not until the third page of the donation process that you see that PayPal is used (so your information should be secure). (There is no explanation given for why donations go to ‘M E Foundation for Aid and Relief’.)

_________________________________________________________

4.  Entrust’s ABN record says that it is not entitled to receive tax-deductible gifts. The website, however, does not match this:

What’s not explained in the giving process is that M E Foundation for Aid and Relief Ltd is a (registered) charity controlled by Entrust. And, because it is a Deductible Gift Recipient, a donation to it gives you a tax deduction.

Entrust says that most of its projects are tax deductible, and that ‘Where a project is not tax deductible, the project page will clearly mention this.’ None are so marked, so all donations are presently tax deductible.

Giving options

Many^[10].

Entrust does not explain why they are seeking donations when they hold $7.84 million of financial investments^[11].

Revenue from giving

The Financial Report 2018 says no donations were received:

All the information elsewhere says that this is a mistake, and that donations are most likely the first item, ‘Financial assets investment income’.

There is no further information on this figure, so it is not possible to see how much was given for each giving option, or even just for each of the four categories of giving.

_________________________________________________________

5.  The use of your donations

As context here’s Entrust’s objects from the constitution (there are no explicit objects, mission or purpose on the website):

The audited account of how donations are used is the Financial Report 2018 on the ACNC Register.  Do you provide or give things to, receive things from, or have oversight of, or review, of Entrust? Perhaps you intend to donate or are one of the donors responsible for the ‘fundraising’ figure of $1.25 million last year [Financial Report 2018]? If so, can you ring Entrust’s office and request that they prepare financial statements that answer the question or questions you have about the charity? I very much doubt it. You are therefore ‘potentially interested in the information provided in general purpose reports’^[12][x].

You are therefore in the wrong place – I only have access to the published accounts of Entrust, and the directors, with the agreement of the auditor, have again said that you don’t exist:

So, the financial statements have not been drawn up to suit you.  Use them with this knowledge^[13].

If the current directors are the same as those in office on 22 November when the accounts were signed, these are the people responsible for this decision^[14][xi]:

John Veith

Matthew Burns

Matthew Lemke

Natalia Teguhputri

Richard Beaumont

Stuart Brown

Here’s the accrual accounting picture of where the donations went^[15] (with last year in the second column):

There is no further information given on the destination of the $1.24 million.

There is no information on what Entrust does to ensure that (a) the money reaches the intended recipient, and (b) the money is used by that recipient for the purpose for which it was given.

Impact

‘Impact’ means the changes for the better in the beneficiaries as a result of Entrust’s activities.

Nothing systematic on impact was found. There is one short anecdotal report from 2016^[16].

1. ↑
2. This is business name registered to M E Foundation for Aid and Relief Ltd. As we will see later, this charity is controlled by Entrust. ↑
3. The ‘No’ to ‘Fundraising online:’ ,and the No to ‘Does the charity intend to fundraise in the next reporting period’, in its AIS 2018, are therefore incorrect. ↑
4. Previous reviews were in 2018 (Entrust Foundation) and 2017 (Mission Enterprises (Victoria) Limited. ↑
5. 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?

   ↑

6. The ACNC implies, therefore, that it is a ‘legitimate’ charity. But this is not correct – as the ACNC itself points out, registration is voluntary. ↑
7. Not helped by the fact that Entrust has the other charity’s website recorded as its own on its ACNC Register entry. And a Stuart Brown is on both boards. ↑
8. It has only included the first on its ABN record. ↑
9. The ACNC’s information (in its article above) is out-of-date. ↑
10. The inclusion of only Zimbabwe on the charity’s ACNC Register is therefore incorrect. ↑
11. Entrust classify the entire holding as a current asset. Is this correct? Here’s the Accounting Standards on the distinction between current and non-current (AASB 101, aasb.gov.au): ↑
12. [x] From Objective of General Purpose Financial Reporting (SAC2), www.aasb.gov.au ↑ ↑
13. They all do not include all subsidiaries. Entrust excuse this on the grounds that Entrust Capital was dormant, but this not supported by the information in its financial statements. ↑
14. [xi] The directors are not shown on the website. ↑
15. Entrust says that “it is able to ensure 100% of all donations are used for the project or cause selected”, but then immediately contradicts this by saying that a deduction will be made when a receipt to claim a tax deduction is required.  ↑
16. Search for ‘Impact Report’. ↑