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) ↑
8. • 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.

   ↑

9. Is it this Rendell Ridge? ↑
10. 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. ↑
11. ↑
12. Not on their website, but common to YWAMs: ↑ ↑
13. Clause 22 (3) ↑
14. The only mention of Australia in a long list of ‘global contacts’ all around the world is ‘Pacific & Asia Field Convenor’. ↑