Pattaya Street Kids - just a reminder

[bao-bao]

SGT member Dick wrote a post some time ago about an organization doing good work there in the Pattaya area:

http://www.sawatdee-gay-thailand.com/fo ... ya%20slums (http://www.sawatdee-gay-thailand.com/forum/update-pattaya-street-kids-new-year-party-appeal-t10032.html?highlight=pattaya%20slums)

It's not too late to make a difference again this year. Just a reminder for those willing to pass along the price of a beer or two to help out.

Info on how to donate is available at http://pattayastreetkids.homestead.com/ ... onsor.html (http://pattayastreetkids.homestead.com/howtosponsor.html)

Like other posters here I am dubious about many of the "charities" based in and around Pattaya. As this charity appears to be registered in the UK and, presumably, above board I looked at the website.

The first point that struck me was that there was no address for the 2 large homes for street kids in Huay Pong, an area I know reasonably well near Mapthaphut, nor any photographs of the outside of any of the buildings. The only locations I am aware of which matched the descriptions, details and sites (either side of the Sukhumvit-Rayong road, one for boys, one for girls,etc) are the two government custodial establishments, which on closer reading of the annual report are indeed the two "street kids' homes" supported by the charity.

Second point was that there was not only no balance sheet, but no financial summary whatsoever - quite an oversight for a UK charity.

The list went on. I have no specific reasons to doubt that the "trustees" are well-intentioned or that, as they point out regularly, donations are not used to cover the costs of their regular visits from the UK to Thailand. They may well be doing their best to ensure that young children do not become "involved in the under age sex trade that thrives in the city ... amidst the corruption that is rife in Pattaya." From their web-site, although it is extensive, it is simply impossible to tell.

Do they deserve and will they be getting my support? Unsurprisingly "No" to both - if it is too much trouble for them to show me how much money they are getting and where it is going, even in the broadest terms, it is too much trouble for me to give any to them.

[bao-bao]

I'm usually suspicious of charities overall, so I understand your reticence to participate, Gone Fishing. I'm always interested in seeing what "administrative costs" are, myself.

It's certainly not a deluxe website full of bells and whistles, but sometimes that's not such a bad sign.

Any charity ought to be researched before investing too much into it, but I have a good feeling about this one after sharing PMs with another board member who helps them out.

I plan to visit there myself in a couple of months and see what my "gut feel" is about them and I'll report after that -- but in the meantime, my meager $20US can help four kids have a nice day. Nothing wrong with that. Most here would spend that much (and more) in a flash on a night out.

You can't save the world, but you CAN save little pieces of it.

I do find it very odd that every-time their is an appeal for a charity, people find time to poke around in a website and dig up some reason not to contribute, which encourages others to hoard their money.. I trust that they will get a visit from the Ghosts of Christmases Past Present, and Future soon.

I have yet to see one who has taken the trouble to ask the charity directly for any information required. Nor I have I seen one who advises us to give to a charity which they have checked out and found to be exemplary.

We in the West were 'born with silver spoons in our mouths' and huge advantages over the majority in this world. It seems to me that not giving a little of one's excess wealth to the needy, especially at this time of year, shows a less than generous spirit.


P.S. There is mention of accounting on the Home Page. Their submission to the UK Charity Commission reads http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/reg ... no=1104335 (http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/registeredcharities/showcharity.asp?remchar=&chyno=1104335). I have written and asked for more detail.

Most here would spend that much (and more) in a flash on a night out.

From what I have seen of some here and how slow they are to pay their own check bins, let alone anyone elses, I am not so sure that statement of yours above is totally accurate. http://i167.photobucket.com/albums/u152/GeorgeThai/biglaugh.gif



G.

Good morning

Thanks for your email.

Yes we have accounts available on request. I will send you an analysis of our last financial years accounts later today and if you would like previous year accounts then please let me know.

We did publish accounts on our website up until March this year but our site statistics tracker showed that in 5 years the accounts page only received a total of 34 hits, so we decided that as our website account storage space is always verging on the top limit and as to upgrade to the next level of storage would cost more than ┬г450 it did not make sense when we are always happy to supply accounts on request.

Kind regards
Don Ford



http://www.pattayastreetkids.org

"Hello again,

I have attached the 2006/07 accounts for you converted to an Excel file format. Our Financial Year ends in March 2008 so the next set of
available accounts will be published in early April 2008. If you have any questions about the accounts please let me know.

I have converted the accounts from a different accounting program so if you have any problem in opening the file please let me know and I will
try again.

Kind regards
Don
http://www.pattayastreetkids.org"

I don't know how to post an excel file here. If anyone wants a copy e-mail me.

Basically in UKPounds

April06 to March 07 Income ┬г8385
.. .. .. Expenditure ┬г8386

Expenses were, Education sponsorships ┬г2414, New Year Parties ┬г1400, Medical ┬г320, Students camp ┬г188, Ko Pai care center equip food and milk ┬г1870 and the balance was minor furnishings.

The parties at the Huay Pong home, The Pattaya Students, The Ko Pai slum were oversubscribed by some late donations. The excess will be carried forward to the 2008 parties. This expenditure included presents for all the children.

----------------------------

To be honest I was rather shocked how very little money they raise and spend. They seem very good people and deserving of support.



----------------------------

To be honest I was rather shocked how very little money they raise and spend. They seem very good people and deserving of support.


I have supported a couple of children through this charity for three years and also had the pleasure of meeting one of the trustees in Bangkok on two occasions.

Like wowpow I find the set up to be deserving of support and being in the financial world I have looked at accounts from the charity over the past three years and am surprised and delighted that the trustees manage to carry out the work that they are doing and finance the running costs from their own pockets.

One aspect I am very impressed by is that the charity is able and more than willing to act as a contact and referall point to a lot of people who want to help out with the donation of goods and services. I know that Hard Rock Hotel ( Pattaya) , Hewlett Packard, HSBC Bank (Thailand), Barclays Bank, an Australian and a UK Rotary Club have all thanks to the charity acting as a contact point been able to help at the street kids home in Pattaya ( Banglamung) and the kids home in HauyPong. The support from these organisations does not show in the charity's own accounts as benefits have been made between the donors and the homes concerned, but when the value of that support is taken into account the benefits are clear to see. So many charities insist on all support being chanelled through their own system so it is good to see a charity that is willing to refer potential supporters directly to the point of need rather than being seen to wish to control every last aspect themselves, which of course adds to the adminstrative burden and associated costs that so many charities donations are used to fund.

Incidentally it was mentioned in an earlier post by 'Gone fishing' that the HauyPong home is a custodial centre, whilst there are still some children there for petty offences the vast majority there are either orphans, abandoned or in need of care. The secure unit that was once the main part of HauyPong moved 25kms south more than five years ago. HauyPong is not a secure unit as can be seen when driving past, a lot of children there attend schools in the area whereas in the secure unit all schooling was carried out on-site.

In the same posting by 'gone fishing' it was stated that the two homes the charity supports are the two units at HauyPong. Again this is incorrect, it is clear from the charities website that the two homes are the Hauypong centre, the Pattaya Street Kids Home and additional support for the day care unit on the KoPai slum in Pattaya.

GF also comments on the fact that there is no address for either of the homes, personally I think it is not a good idea to pinpoint the locations of specific centres where children at risk are cared for, anyone interested in making a visit can as the charities newletters and website make clear contact them for a contact phone number for these homes where arrangements can be made to visit and satisfy oneself as to the value of the work carried out, and a quick look at the charity's website will show than a number of sponsors do just that.

GF also makes the comment that there is no financial summary of accounts on the website whereas there is a link on the charity's 'Our mission' page direct to the UK's Charity Commission website page for that charity.

I do find it very odd that every-time their is an appeal for a charity, people find time to poke around in a website and dig up some reason not to contribute, which encourages others to hoard their money.. I trust that they will get a visit from the Ghosts of Christmases Past Present, and Future soon.

I have yet to see one who has taken the trouble to ask the charity directly for any information required. Nor I have I seen one who advises us to give to a charity which they have checked out and found to be exemplary.


wowpow, you are wrong on every count.

Any charity which asks for support, large or small, is asking for support in competition with other charities, so it is their responsibility to present the best case possible. Although in theory the pool of potential donors may be bottomless, in reality it is not; if a charity does not make its case clearly, briefly and with the minimum room for doubt their potential supporters will go elsewhere, irrespective of how deserving their case actually is. It is not the responsibility of a potential donor to approach charities directly for basic information.

Many moons ago there was a lot of debate about charities on this website, mainly as the result of one member plugging the "charities" he had established repeatedly, but refusing to publish any figures on the grounds that he would show them to anyone who went to his bar and asked him personally to see them. At the time I named the Camillian Centre in Rayong as being one charity I had personally found to be "exemplary" (and still do) and also cited the Pattaya Animal Welfare Society (PAWS) as a Charity which had failed (and why) despite being registered, run by honourable and well-intentioned people, with full transparency, with a clearly identifiable aim, badly needed, with no similar charities in the area, and having a substantial working capital (well over 2,000,000 baht at one stage).

Anyone who supports charities on a regular basis (and, whether you believe it or not, I do), rather than as a one off or at a "fund-raiser", usually chooses their charities carefully and gives to the one they consider to be the most deserving; even Bill Gates' funds are finite. Whether they have made the right choice or not is a different matter, but it is up to a charity to make their case to persuade someone to donate their limited funds (or, in your case, your "excess wealth" to them. In this case although I have no doubt that the trustees of this charity are "very good people", as I made clear, that alone is not enough to persuade me that they are more deserving of any money I am in a position to donate to charity than others.

Naughty But Nice, you have either mis-read or deliberately mis-reported me.

The "Huay Pong Homes" are not secure units, but they are government custodial establishments. Children there are not free to come and go as they please, and while it is true that "the vast majority are either orphans, abandoned or in need of care" it is also true that they are sent there and not permitted to leave until they are 18 - those who do rapidly find themselves moved to the secure unit. This does not make them any less deserving of charity (if anything, the reverse), but the general description is misleading.

I did not " state that the two homes the charity supports are the two units at Huay Pong". I said that there was "no address for the 2 large homes for Street Kids in Huay Pong" (the charity's description); the details of exactly what they are is anything but clear at first read. If you feel that "it is not a good idea to pinpoint the locations of specific centres where children at risk are cared for" then I suggest you point this out to the Superintendent there and have the two large signs removed which are clearly visible from the main road.

I did say that "there is no financial summary of accounts on the website", because that is 100% correct. The Charity Commision's page from the link shows "Gross Income" and "Total Expeniture", nothing more. As you are "in the financial world", whatever that may mean, one would expect you to know the difference. To say, as Don Ford the main trustee did in his e-mail to wowpow, that he would have had to upgrade storage space at considerable cost and "it did not make sense" is being very naive, which is something that no charity can afford to be if they are to succeed. More storage space could be made by simply removing one or two photos, some of which are duplicated.

I am not "rubbishing" the charity or its supporters, poking around, or encouraging anyone to hoard their money. I am merely stating cold, hard facts about charities and fund raising. If you happen not to like them, or how I put them, that is your prerogative.


"It is well to give when asked, but it is better to give unasked, through understanding" - Kahlil Gibran, The Prophet, 1923

"You can't give it to everywan offen provides an excuse to give it to no-wan" - Sean O'Casey, Nannie's Night Out, 1924

I rarely write anything negative but rubbishing a worthwhile tiny charity on a public forum without the kindness of investigating further I find distressing.

Some good has come out of it, however, and Pattaya Street Kids will include a summary of their accounts in their next annual report and continue to make their full accounts available on request - see below.

I totally agree that charities of any size have to make their accounts readily available but here we are talking about a miniscule one and run very good kind people.

When, as a youngster, I made fudge and sold it door to door or made up a box of toiletries and had a raffle/lucky number, again door to door, I used to show the receipt for the last event from Dr. Barnardo's Boys homes more as a matter of pride than transparency.

You seem to place yourself as a very harsh judge monitoring a little charities efforts and punishing them when they do not come up to your exemplary standards. It is the street kids of Pattaya that you risk depriving.

I prefer to check and help and do not rubbish them in public without investigation.

I have heard very good things about the Camillan Rayong and it would do not harm to mention them again http://www.camillian-rayong.org/. I have the impression that http://www.thais4life.com/ also is transparent and worthwhile. The Teddy Bears Picnic raised a magnificent 104,000 baht yesterday which is to be split between the above causes.

I am not sure what your point was about the animal charity. I always felt it a bad thing that in the UK the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) invariably come a poor second best in raising funds to the NSPCA (Animals). Maybe Thais are better at setting their priorities than Brits?

======================

From the Treasurer of Pattaya Street Kids:

"Many thanks for your interest and your help in clarifying the matter for anyone who is cynical, it is much appreciated. We do appreciate that people always wish to know that their hard-earned money is being used in the proper manner so we are always more than happy to give details..

I will certainly take on board your suggestion and we will include a summary of our accounts in the next Annual Report and also with the Annual Report on our website.

Thanks for your good wishes for the parties, we will do everything we can to ensure the kids have a memorable day.

I hope you have a great Christmas & New Year holiday.

Kind regards
Don
http://www.pattayastreetkids.org"

++++++++++++++++++++++


It seems we have a Happy ending! Make it a little happier by contributing a little to http://www.sawatdee-gay-thailand.com/fo ... ya%20slums (http://www.sawatdee-gay-thailand.com/forum/update-pattaya-street-kids-new-year-party-appeal-t10032.html?highlight=pattaya%20slums)
_________________

I can certainly understand anyone's concerns about charity, most especially here in Thailand. The rip offs are everywhere. I have done some personal indepth investigation into the Mery Center, and I can assure all of you that every stang that you donate to them goes to the kids, and they are doing a GREAT job with the kids. Fred and Diane, who run Mercy Center are there working their hearts out everyday and living very a very modest lifestyle. Mercy Center is the real thing. If you are in Pattaya give them a call go on over and if you like what you see open your wallet and donate.

As for the Hauypong Home, I have gone in search of it and have never been able to locate it, so I have nothing to report.

[quote="Soi 10 Tom"] I have done some personal indepth investigation into the Mery Center, and I can assure all of you that every stang that you donate to them goes to the kids, and they are doing a GREAT job with the kids. Fred and Diane, who run Mercy Center are there working their hearts out everyday and living very a very modest lifestyle. Mercy Center is the real thing. If you are in Pattaya give them a call go on over and if you like what you see open your wallet and donate.
quote]

I endorse your comments 100%.

I know of the work by Fred and Dianne of the Mercy Centre only because of my sponsorship of students through the Pattaya Street Kids support project. It is the Mercy Project that administer the Pattaya side of that scheme on the charity's behalf and the charity's support of the street kids' home

Apart for the kids home that Mercy established they also established with the support of the PSKSP and others the day care centre at the KoPai slum. As you say anyone in Pattaya should make an effort to make a visit to the Mercy Project office, where they will be welcomed, to see the depth of poverty that exists in what is a major tourist destination.

I am shortly off on holiday to Australia for three weeks so will take this chance to wish all board members, whether we agree with each other or not, a Happy Christmas and New Year Holiday. Whatever you are doing for the holiday stay safe and may your god go with you.

You seem to place yourself as a very harsh judge monitoring a little charities efforts and punishing them when they do not come up to your exemplary standards. It is the street kids of Pattaya that you risk depriving.


As an exercise, yes it has been a quiet day today, I went to the Saga Charitable Trust website, not by any means a small UK charity to look for their accounts. None being available I emailed the trust asking for a link to their published accounts and received the following response:

'Thank you for your e-mail, I am pleased pleased to inform you that our accounts are lodged with the charity commission and can be viewed via their website, www.charitycommission.gov.uk (http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk)

You may need to input our registered charity number which is: 291991.

Please do not hesitate to contact me should you require any further information.

Kind regards

PA to Janice Lee, Director of the Saga Charitable Trust
The Saga Building
Enbrook Park
Folkestone
Kent
CT20 3SE'

Not even an offer to send me a copy.

I then emailed the UK Charity Commission and enquired about their policy regarding publication of accounts. The official UK government policy is that only those charities with an income of more than ┬г10k a year are required to submit an Annual Return to the commission. Charities with an income under 10K a year do not have to submit returns.
So it would appear that although the PSKSP do make an Annual Return to the Charity Commission they are under no legal obligation to do so. This in itself as wowpow did with his Dr Barnado's fund raising reflects the transparency of the organisations accounting procedures.

May be we can now all move on and and let's see if with a final burst of Christmas or New Year spirit we can make the New Year a time to remember for many of those kids who live in a city that so many members of this forum love.

wowpow,

you are wrong yet again!

The myth about the RSPCA and the NSPCC is totally incorrect. Last year the Save the Children Fund (UK) came 20th in the UK Charity table, raising 163.2 million pounds, the NSPCC 27th with 116.2 million and the RSPCA 29th with 110.7 million; Dr Barnardo's beat them all, coming 16th with 193.3 million (that's an awful lot of fudge!).

We clearly have different views on what constitutes "rubbishing", so we will have to agree to differ.

My point in mentioning PAWS was that no matter how well intentioned and honest the organisers are, or even how worthwhile their cause, unless they are properly run (in competition with others, wnich has nothing to do with my "standards") they will at best remain "tiny" or "miniscule" and at worst fail completely. In the previous thread I referred to I did actually mention Thais4Life as an example of a charity being run with total transparency.

Cynical ... strange that you should have referred to me as cynical, to the charity, yet my point on the accounts has somehow become "your suggestion". I will take that as a compliment.

Soi 10 Tom,

the homes in Huay Pong are prominently signed and clearly visible from the Sukhumvit Road, between Sattahip and Mabthaput just after Ban Chang. They are also shown on most local maps. Unless you have previously arranged to visit, you will not be permitted access as these are closed government facilities.

Naughty But Nice,

Saga is hardly an appropriate charity to have targeted; being "in the financial world" you must know that many charities, including most public schools for example, have chartable status to minimise tax and they are largely self-financing through their business side.

If nothing else I have given PSKSP more publicity than they have had for a long time.

Oh! such harsh words. Still if my postings have helped the Pattaya Street Kids I will carry the pain of such strong language.

Regarding UK charities I may be totally wrong again" but for most of my life it has been true. Thanks Google!

""Children edge animals off leader board
Alison Benjamin, The Guardian, Wednesday June 18 2003

Children's charities have displaced animal welfare groups in the top three most popular good causes, according to an authoritiative analysis of charitable giving.
The Charities Aid Foundation (Caf) calculates that, of the top 500 fundraising charities, children's causes attracted ┬г255m of voluntary income in 2002, compared to ┬г244m for animal welfare groups. International aid attracted the greatest support, at ┬г486m, with cancer in second place at ┬г442m."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2003/ ... ityfinance (http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2003/jun/18/fundraising.charityfinance)

I used the word cynic meaning fault finder. I was referring to all cynics - you are not alone.

I agree that 'rubbishing' was an inappropriate choice of word for putting the Pattaya Street Kids Charity in a bad light which could have restricted the flow of their funds. Happily my intervention has, I hope, prevented this happening.

I didn't say you were wrong. I did mean that you were unkind.