AfME staffing and structure

Cinders66 said:
I’d tried to look up figures before and it’s hard to find more recent in table form. They are most with an income of £5m /year plus. It’s interesting the ratio of salary versus income. So the only charity there with a comparable income to ME charities a Methodist charity, had a CEO wage of £33, 000 with a wage per 1000 pound income score of 19. The next vaguely similar income, princess Diana charity with a £4m income, had a CEO wAge of £78 000 had a score of 19 but many wealthier charities are having a score of around 2. Obviously there’s going to be an expected wage level so poorer charities will have a higher score but prior to this year, AFME were with income around £0.5m yet a high CEO wage so a wage per 1000 pound income score would have been around 40. It’s still quite shocking how little ME charities can fundraise in context.
Click to expand...

In a business framework though having the company increase it's income as above is a great success for a CEO as this is what matters. And indeed in order to effect change and do things that need doing money is needed. The problem as we know is in the allocation of those funds. For a charity the amount of money raised is only the beginning and there are other metrics of success.

This is where AfME fail. Their agenda is always one of the high profile endeavour in order to capture more funding (the self-perpetuation). Advocacy must be tempered with realisation of how money comes to them. It's not a new theme by any means.

I expect that people with ME could well accept less professional standards and more competence at real concrete helping of a community in distress.
 
I think that its Great they’ve increasd the money but am not sure this has anything much to do with SC being great who began around 2012!?. I’m not a member so don’t have inside knowledge but from what I see, they’ve started to specifically ask their members now for funds for biomedical research, which they weren’t into before or in the early years of SC, probably more due to realisation, unlike their past interests alternative therapies and behaviour intervention it actually was where the money was needed. Their members responded very generously at xmas, like £100 000 in a few days , far more than MEA used to get , probably because they were now being given a channel for what was bleeding obviously needed. I actually think to put it crudely their membership could probably if more inspired and asked finance more.


Also i think that the profile raising of unrest and #MEAction, plus the similarities of name, might have inspired all those thousands out there quite passive to actually get more involved. Without seeing a breakdown of why funds raised from subsistence its hard to say, or they could have just had a couple of large legacies. You’re still looking at a fraction of other charities , a 1/28th of MS society, 1/7th of motor neurone at 2003 figures.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom