Home / Charity Reviews /

YWAM Tasmania

This is a review[1] for those thinking of getting involved with YWAM Tasmania (also ‘YWAM Southlands’)[2], especially as a student or a donor[3].

If this is you, then please pause and consider the following:

  • This is an organisation that has a public invitation to young people to enter agreements, at not insignificant cost, that are billed as transformative,
    • that is governed by a Committee of two couples and one other
      • where one of the couples are the long-time staff leaders of the organisation and the other three are current or former staff[4]
    • that has a Committee that can never include outsiders[5]
    • that has a ‘director/president’ – most likely the male of the two leaders – who never has to stand for re-election[6].
    • that has a membership of the Associations (to whom the Committee is accountable) that appears to be restricted to staff of the organisation[7].
  • This is an organisation, a registered charity, that has ‘responsible persons’ who continue to show their disdain for their legal responsibilities by
    • submitting a Financial Report that is both materially deficient and seriously confusing[8]
    • continuing to use an auditor, Rendell W. Ridge[9], of Max Peck and Associates, who is, based on his work for YWAM Tasmania, incompetent.
    • operating without having the required registration for its names[10].
  • This is an organisation that appears to have taken responsibility for the non-existent organsation ‘YWAM Southlands’, a Member of Missions Interlink[11].
  • This is an organisation that gives no information on what it achieved (outcomes, results, or impact) from all that it does, and is doing (using labour funded by donors[12]).
  • This is an organisation that is part of a movement where
    • periodically there are credible reports of abuse of students
    • there is a lack of accountability: the external YWAM body that this and many Australian YWAMs constitutions say needs to be involved in some of the important decisions[13], appears not to exist[14]
    • The members resist independent scrutiny of their information.

A draft of this review was sent to the charity. They…did not respond.

 

 

  1. For the previous review, see here.
  2. Neither of these are the name under which they are registered as a charity. The website is ‘YWAM Tasmania’, their clothing YWAM Southlands’. Neither of these names, or any other, have, contrary to the law, been registered.
  3. This YWAM is unusual in that it is a Public Benevolent Institution and can therefore offer donors a tax deduction. How it can do this when it is patently a missionary organisation is not explained.
  4. The other three are Timothy Coates, Tracey Coates, and Amy Thompson.
  5. Clause 23 (1) of the constitution [ACNC Register].
  6. Clause 22 (2)
  7. Clause 5 (1)
    • The directors continue to show no concern at having received a qualified audit opinion.
    • A Financial Report 2019.20 is incorrectly included (and under an incorrect heading)
      • This profit in this Report does not match that in the Statement of Profit and Loss
    • The Statement of Profit and Loss
      • has a confusing display of figures
      • uses a long-outdated format (and therefore misses an important section).
      • has items that need explanation but lack it
      • includes income that is not income
    • The Balance Sheet
      • has two contradictory headings
      • shows equity incorrectly
      • has items that need explanation but lack it
    • The buildings are not depreciated
    • The Statement of Changes in Equity
      • has no figures for last year
      • does not make sense
      • has a closing balance that doesn’t match the Balance Sheet
    • The Statement of Cash Flows
      • has no figures for last year
      • has figures that are inconsistent with the Balance Sheet
      • has no financing section
    • The Notes to the financial statements…
      • Are missing most of the Notes required
      • Show that the directors are confused about the reporting format they have chosen
    • The Auditor’s Report
      • Is an embarrassment to the profession – again.

  8. Is it this Rendell Ridge?
  9. Also, the official name is slightly different to the one on the ABN register/ACNC Register, and both are slightly different to the one in the constitution.
  10. Graphical user interface, text, application Description automatically generated
  11. Not on their website, but common to YWAMs:Text, letter Description automatically generated
  12. Clause 22 (3)
  13. The only mention of Australia in a long list of ‘global contacts’ all around the world is ‘Pacific & Asia Field Convenor’.
Share