Archived: Heart for Kids Australia Ltd: mini-charity review

Mini-charity review of Heart for Kids Australia Ltd (HFK), an organisation that is an Associate member of Missions Interlink and which invites the public, via the website linked from that membership, to donate to it.

Are they responsive to feedback?

• After sending a draft of the review on 21 February, an email exchange with one of the ‘responsible persons’ led to an extension of the time to suggest corrections and offer comments to 10 March. I didn’t hear from him again.

Is HFK registered?

• Yes, as a charity.
  • It appears that it has taken over another charity, Chinaheart International Incorporated (CI):
    • ‘ChinaHeart has become part of our new organisation, Heart For Kids. This is in response to a call to begin serving children in India and Indonesia as well as China.’
      • But CI, per the ACNC Register, doesn’t work in India and Indonesia, only in China.
  • HFK has yet to take advantage of the ACNC’s group reporting concessions.
    • Independent of this, expect to see 2017’s financial statements combining the two charities.
  • CI itself has a wholly-owned subsidiary, ChinaHeart International Aid Fund.
    • Although I have not included information about this charity below, it would need to be considered if you were considering involvement with HFK.
  • HFK is also connected with a business, LST Group (a business name belonging to The Trustee for the David Ryan Trust).
• HFK is a public company, a company limited by guarantee.
  • CI is a New South Wales incorporated association (INC9884006).
• No fundraising licence in its home state – or in any other state^[1].
  • CI: the same.

What does HFK do?

• There is no one clear statement but all the information is here.
• An alternative way to get the answer to this question is to look at the ‘Donations’ page.
  • CI: the website address on the ACNC Register leads to the HFK website.

Do they share the Gospel?

• No

What impact are they having?

• No information found.

What do they spend outside the costs directly incurred in delivering the above impact, that is, on administration?

• The website talks about ‘ChinaHeart’, not HFK. It says that
  • ‘Our aim is to send 85% of your donation through to the children and families in our projects.  Traditionally we have been able to send 85% to 89% of donations.’
    • The 2016 Income Statement of ChinaHeart International Incorporated shows that ‘Project Payments’ were 76% of ‘Income’ other than ‘Miscellaneous Income’ and ‘Interest’. The previous year was 82%.

Can you get a tax deduction?

• Yes
  • CI: No

Is their online giving secure?

• eWay and PayPal are used, so yes.

What choices do you have in how your donation is used?

• ‘Sponsor a Child in Need’
• ‘Purchase an item’
• ‘Donate’
  • ‘where most needed’
  • ‘orphans’
  • ‘Doves Wing foster home’
  • ‘Morning Light Special Needs Centre’
  • ‘Christmas gifts for rural kids’

Is their reporting up-to-date?

• Yes (seven months after their year-end, eight days before the deadline)
  • CI: the same

Does their reporting comply with the regulator’s requirements?

• Annual Information Statement 2016 (AIS 2016): Yes
  • HFK was only established in May 2016, so I’m not sure why the ACNC required an AIS 2016.
  • CI: Not quite: Their business name is missing, no outcomes are given, and isn’t the proceeds of fundraising part of ‘Donations and bequests’?
• Financial Report 2016: Yes
  • One wasn’t required, either because of HFK’s small size, or because it was only established a month before its year-end.
    • The financial information in the AIS 2016 is all zeros.
  • Next year though, the combination of HFK and its subsidiary CI will mean that a Report will be required.
  • In addition, their Associate membership of Missions Interlink requires them to “have available for [their] members and supporters a clear and appropriate financial statement which has been approved by its auditor.”  So just ask.

What financial situation was shown in that Report?

• NA
  • CI:
    • A deficit of 7% of revenue last year was repeated this year.
    • No non-current assets.
    • Minimal liabilities.

What did the auditor say about the last financial statements?

• NA
  • CI: It was a review, and he gave a ‘clean’ opinion.

If a charity, is their page on the ACNC Register complete?

• Almost – ‘Operating State(s)’ is blank.
  • CI: No:
    • They are long overdue in selecting an ‘Entity Subtype’.
    • Their business name is missing.
    • They only show two ‘Responsible Persons’.

Who are the people controlling the organisation?

• The ‘leadership team’ is shown on the website, but the board members are not identified.
• From ‘Responsible Persons’ on the ACNC Register:
  • Poay Lee
  • David Ryan
  • Adam Tedja
    • Is it this Adam Tedja?
  • CI:
    • Ken Lee
    • David Ryan (as above)
      • Although there are nine directorships recorded for the name ‘David Ryan’, and the ACNC Register has only charities, three are in the HFK group, and he has no executive position outside HFK.

To whom is HFK accountable?

• To Missions Interlink[2] via its an Associate membership.
• HFK is also accountable to the ACNC.
• And, as a company, to ASIC.
  • CI: to the ACNC and the New South Wales associations regulator.

1. The law in this area is not straightforward – is an internet invitation ‘fundraising’ for instance? – and advice varies, so check with the charity before drawing any conclusions. ↑
2. For one opinion on the strength of that accountability, see the section Activities in this review. ↑