Home / Charity Reviews /

Every Home for Christ

This is a review[1] in the series ‘Members of Missions Interlink’[2], Missions Interlink being ‘the Australian network for global mission’[3] (and a means for a Member to get income tax exemption when it might not otherwise be available[4]). 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).

Every Home for Christ’ is one such Member.

The website linked from the Missions Interlink membership goes to a website in the same name. Here they seek online donations.

Donors

Given what Missions Interlink does, ‘Every Home for Christ’ is probably a charity. The charities’ 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.
5.Find out more about how the charity says it uses donations.

Here’s the results for ‘Every Home for Christ’, with #5 supplemented by the essentials of the ACNC’sWhat should I consider when deciding which charity to support?’[5]

Question 1

A search on the ACNC Register of charities gives this result: Every Home Global Concern Limited. This is because it has the name ‘Every Home for Christ´ on the Register under ‘Also known as’.

So, despite the website (see above) there is no separate organisation ‘Every Home for Christ’.  This means that Every Home Global Concern Limited must be the Missions Interlink member.  So, a review on Every Home for Christ turns into a review on Every Home Global Concern Limited (Global Concern)..

It also means that, because Global Concern is a Member of Australian Council for International Development (ACFID)[6], this is a review in that series as well.

The two organisations

On the Global Concern website, it is still as if Every Home for Christ didn’t exist – there is one incidental reference[7]. Similarly, with the Every Home for Christ website: the only reference to Global Concern is to imply, in the footer, that the website is about Global Concern, not Every Home for Christ.[8]

Adding to the confusion is the continued use of multiple names for Global Concern. Although it has Every Home for Christ registered as a business name, it does not have a similar registration for Global Concern, or EHC Australia[9]. So, it shouldn’t be representing itself under those names.

Nor is Every Home Global Concern a registered name, so as Global Concern is lacking the necessary provisions in its governing document, it shouldn’t be omitting ‘Ltd’ or ‘Limited’ on the end of the name[10].

Question 2

There is nothing to suggest that Global Concern fundraises door-to-door or in the street.

Question 3

The Global Concern web address begins with a closed padlock symbol, so the website is secure [the ACNC article above]. The donate page says that your information is secured by GivingFuel.

Question 4

Global Concern’s ABN record (linked from its ACNC Register record) says that it is not entitled to receive tax-deductible gifts. But it has a fund, Every Home Global Concern Ltd Australia Overseas Aid Fund that can.

 Why is there is no mention of the Aid Fund on the website?
 Why is tax deductibility not mentioned?

The donation options on Every Home for Christ’s website are all, except for ‘Other’, marked ‘Tax deductible’.

Question 5

Context

Here’s what Every Home for Christ does under its own name:

It seems that Global Concern does the same:

So why the two websites? Especially as they are happy to have one annual report that covers both charities.

Activities in 2019-20

From Global Concern’s Notes to the Financial Statements [Financial Report 2020]:

How your donations are used

The audited account of how a charity uses donations is the Financial Report on the ACNC Register. Because Every Home for Christ is just a business name, there is just one Financial Report, the one for Global Concern.

But why no mention of Every Home for Christ in this Report?

The directors – ‘Persons responsible’, below – signed a declaration [Financial Report 2020] that

For this to be true the financial statements had to comply, at a minimum, with the Australian Accounting Standards (AASs) [www.aasb.gov.au]. In turn, this means that the directors must present you with sufficient information to understand the full situation and performance of Global Concern.

But there are material deviations from these Standards:

 Almost 100% of the revenue ($1.55 million) has been misclassified as ‘Other income’.
 76% of the total expenses are the unexplained item ‘Other expenses’ (see below).
 The value of the building is not shown separately to the value of the land, and buildings are not depreciated.
 Trade receivables are misclassified as ‘Other receivables’ [Note 7].
 Loans are misclassified as ‘Trade and Other Payables’ [Note 9].
 Employee benefits are split between ‘Trade and other payables’ and ‘Employee benefits’

So, no, the Report doesn’t present a ‘true and fair view’.

In addition,

 Are the interest free loans correctly classified as non-current? [Note 9].
 Is it true that a director was paid fees of $70K? [Note 15].
 Is it true that there are no non-current employee benefits?

The people responsible for the Financial Report

There’s no Directors’ Report (commonly included, but not compulsory), but the people below were on the board when the Annual Report was issued, so are likely to have been those people who approved the Financial Report:

Alexander Thomas

Darcy Watson

Davidson James

Ken Koh

Eric Leach

Setatow Befekadu

Richard Snellenburg

Laurel Siokos

John Ealand

The same people are shown on the ACNC Register, but the website has Roger Mackay instead of Laurel Siokos.

Normally directors are accountable to the members. But directors of Global Concern are not elected by the members, but by the directors themselves. Nine directors, nine members [Note 14, Financial Report 2020]. No accountability here.

The auditor who approved the disclosure is A F Gilbert CA, WSC Group.

Where the donations went

If you are still willing to rely on the financial statements, here, from the Statement of Profit or Loss and Other Comprehensive Income, is how the activities translated into expenses[11] (with last year’s figures in the second column):

That’s 76% of the total expenses in one line, ‘Other expenses’, with no direction to a Note for a breakup.

Although there is a Note giving more information on the expenses, it is a different classification of the expenses, so is not an explanation of the above figures:

 Why New Zealand?
 What is the difference between ‘overseas support’ and ‘aid and development’?
 We are not told how Global Concern ensures that the funds sent overseas [Note 30] (a) reach the intended recipient, and (b) were used for the purposes for which they were given.
 In Note 25 there’s $25K revenue included in the expenses for ‘Administration Fee – Overseas’. Why is a revenue item, the $20K, included in expenses?  Who is paying them a fee?

Impact

Everything Global Concern is doing may be being done ‘properly’[12], but unless the money is producing the change in people that the charity intends (i.e., an impact), the money would be better used elsewhere. And the same applies if the impact is less than is being achieved by another charity.

Nowhere does Global Concern acknowledge that the impact of efforts is a relevant question for donors. Consistent with this, there is nothing systematic on the website about the impact of Global Concern. Nor is any offered.

Charity response

Global Concern ‘welcomes any feedback’. We sent them a draft of this review. Although they responded to the previous review, this time they didn’t.

.

.

.

 .

.

  1. See here for the previous review.

  2. And members of the ACFID (see below).

  3. https://missionsinterlink.org.au/about/

  4. 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? [A section in the article, Donating and Volunteering].

  5. ACFID ‘is the peak body for Australian non government organisations (NGOs) involved in international development and humanitarian action.’ It requires Members to adhere to a Code of Conduct.

  6. .

  7. .

    .

  8. .

  9. Note 15 [Notes to the Financial Statements], says that Global Concern pays its directors, something that would stop it being able to use the shortened name anyway.

  10. There’s no obvious order to this list. Nor to the next list of expenses.

  11. The behaviour of its people, its use of money, and how it goes about its business. See here for our last review that covers much of this area. 

Share