Habitat for Humanity Scam

[Fawksie]

Quoting theshadowhost from 15:49, 8th Jul 2008
I want the ten minutes I spent reading this thread back

The Sinner regrettably cannot perform time refunds. Your statutory rights are not affected.

[Grant]

Quoting theshadowhost from 15:49, 8th Jul 2008
I want the ten minutes I spent reading this thread back

[hr]

If I were you, i'd be more concerned by the lost time listening to coming out boy.

[Bizarre Atheist]

Quoting Fedoraccoon from 01:28, 8th Jul 2008
Charity is about more than efficiency, it's about people helping other people. Using collected funds to hire a local builder might be a more economical way to build more homes more quickly, but it's not exactly inspiring is it? Not only is it banal, it also doesn't offer charitable people the same "hands on" approach to helping others. Perhaps you, unregistered, are content with putting a pound in a plastic bucket, but others are not, and you've no right to tell them they can't fly to Africa and build the house themselves. If you don't like it, don't donate, and next time you want to try and demean what is, at its core, a good act, jump off a bridge.

This may qualify as the most complete and prime example of utter nonsense spouted by a terminally uninformed individual that I have ever read on The Sinner.

Charities are about solving problems. The goal is providing what the end user needs most; transport to hospital, a square meal, up-to-date medical treatment, counselling, whatever. There is absolutely no room for sentimental feel-good claptrap, except where it occurs as a by-product of providing the service for the end user. If it costs less to hire the local builder than to fly out the pretentious Gap Year student, then the charity should, and usually will, employ the local.

Hence I agree entirely with Grant, except;

Quoting Grant from 15:37, 8th Jul 2008
People dont like to think that 68p or whatever from every £1 goes into admin or pointless purchases.

You seem to have lumped 'admin' in with 'pointless purchases', highlighting exactly the attitude I attempted to combat in my previous post. Incidentally,

Quoting eagle from 11:10, 8th Jul 2008
I'd like to encourage people to reread Bizarre Atheist's post. It was very good.

Holy smokes! You've made my day.

[hr]

[Guest]

Quoting Fedoraccoon from 01:28, 8th Jul 2008
Charity is about more than efficiency, it's about people helping other people. Using collected funds to hire a local builder might be a more economical way to build more homes more quickly, but it's not exactly inspiring is it? Not only is it banal, it also doesn't offer charitable people the same "hands on" approach to helping others. Perhaps you, unregistered, are content with putting a pound in a plastic bucket, but others are not, and you've no right to tell them they can't fly to Africa and build the house themselves. If you don't like it, don't donate, and next time you want to try and demean what is, at its core, a good act, jump off a bridge.



[hr]

This world...is made of... LOVE AND PEACE!..LOVE AND PEACE!..LOVE AND PEACE!!

There is so much about this last paragraph that annoys me. For a start no one said they couldn't fly out to Africa and do charitable work, but if they want to do that they should use their own money to get there. Also people who need houses build by charities are obviously going to be in quite a desperate situation and surely that should take priority over giving someone the opportunity to go over there and feel good about themselves for 'helping'.

[Haunted]

Quoting Fedoraccoon from 01:28, 8th Jul 2008
Charity is about more than efficiency, it's about people helping other people. Using collected funds to hire a local builder might be a more economical way to build more homes more quickly, but it's not exactly inspiring is it? Not only is it banal, it also doesn't offer charitable people the same "hands on" approach to helping others. Perhaps you, unregistered, are content with putting a pound in a plastic bucket, but others are not, and you've no right to tell them they can't fly to Africa and build the house themselves. If you don't like it, don't donate, and next time you want to try and demean what is, at its core, a good act, jump off a bridge.

You're doing it wrong

[hr]

Now with 100% more corn

[RandomMusings]

Quoting Fawksie from 15:52, 8th Jul 2008

Quoting theshadowhost from 15:49, 8th Jul 2008
I want the ten minutes I spent reading this thread back

The Sinner regrettably cannot perform time refunds. Your statutory rights are not affected.

No refunds, but I believe an exchange can be made as long as the original post is returned in perfect condition.
Think about those 10 minutes 'wasted' and think about what other clap-trap you've avoided on the internet instead by reading this - there really is much much worse out there. I'm sure you'll now agree that your day, and indeed life, has been enhanced by reading the sinner - just ask Bizarre Atheist....

[hr]

I like paper.

[munchingfoo]

Quoting Fedoraccoon from 15:27, 8th Jul 2008
Unreg didn't actually use evidence, but this piece of your argument could be due to a mutual miscommunication of our working definitions (they happen more often than one might think). Unreg alleged an intentional fraud on the part of HfH, a fraud by which HfH was acquiring essentially free vacations, but he offered no actual proof beyond the word of a generic, unverifiable "friend." I would have appreciated a url to a news article in which the alleged fraud was actually exposed by an investigative body of some sort (news, PI, whatever). When I said evidence, I meant proof of the alleged fraud. This is why I dismissed the fact-based section of the rant.

Evidence of X is not synonymous with proof of X, otherwise there would be no need to have a Jury in a court of law.

When deciding if X is true we examine the evidence from both sides then decide on a proof for X using using the strongest evidence.

"It costs Y to build a house using local contractors and Z, where Y
[hr]

"The entirety of these definitions lie outside the gamut of the sRGB color space — such a pure color cannot be represented using RGB primaries. The color swatch to the right is a desaturated approximation, created by taking the centroid of the standard definition and moving it towards the D65 white point, until it meets the sRGB gamut triangle."

[Fedoraccoon]

Anyone who thinks there's no room for inspirational stories and warm sentiments in charitable organizations is forgetting a very important aspect of charity work, public relations.

Inspirational stories about volunteers who journey all the way to Africa to build a house with their own hands are great for getting media and public attention. The extra attention attracts more donations to the charity. The hands-on approach doesn't just allow participants to feel good, it makes non-participants more likely to want to be part of the solution.

Somebody should probably run the numbers, but it's entirely possible that a little, or even a lot, of extra money spent to create a story people can relate to and be inspired by would actually increase the ability of the charity to do their job.

[hr]

This world...is made of... LOVE AND PEACE!..LOVE AND PEACE!..LOVE AND PEACE!!

[Fedoraccoon]

Well spotted, Munchingfoo.

Perhaps I should have worded it like this: "When I said evidence, I meant facts that might be held credibly as proof of the alleged fraud." It would have been more clear.

My point, however, remains unchanged. Unreg offered only second-hand testimony as evidence of this supposed fraud. Such testimony, commonly called hearsay, is weak evidence at best, generally inadmissible in courts of law, and certainly is not enough to be considered proof. For all we know Unreg made this stuff up just to see what would happen.

[hr]

This world...is made of... LOVE AND PEACE!..LOVE AND PEACE!..LOVE AND PEACE!!

[Haunted]

Quoting Fedoraccoon from 18:31, 8th Jul 2008
Anyone who thinks there's no room for inspirational stories and warm sentiments in charitable organizations is forgetting a very important aspect of charity work, public relations.

You cretin. Nobody has even hinted that people should not be inspired by doing charitable work. Only when it is at the expense of the needy should such inspirational bullshit be impeded. You act as if the needy should just be grateful they're getting anything at all. Do you really think people should suffer just so your CV can get an extra coat of smug?

Inspirational stories about volunteers who journey all the way to Africa to build a house with their own hands are great for getting media and public attention. The extra attention attracts more donations to the charity. The hands-on approach doesn't just allow participants to feel good, it makes non-participants more likely to want to be part of the solution.

Hold the phone. You, who accused the unreg of "second-hand testimony and hearsay", are now yourself offering such weak evidence? Seriously, it sounds as if you just made that up

Somebody should probably run the numbers,

Not probably, should. If you want any sort of credibility that is.

but it's entirely possible that a little, or even a lot, of extra money spent to create a story people can relate to and be inspired by would actually increase the ability of the charity to do their job.

Speculation, generally inadmissible in courts of law.

[hr]

Now with 100% more corn

[Fedoraccoon]

Wow, I got a good laugh out of that one. I can't decide if you're intentionally obfuscating what I said, or you just can't understand it. Either way, I pity you and offer the following advice: Read more and think harder.

Where's Munchin? He's way more fun to debate with.

[hr]

This world...is made of... LOVE AND PEACE!..LOVE AND PEACE!..LOVE AND PEACE!!

[Haunted]

Sweet merciful crap an Ad hominem!



[hr]

Now with 100% more corn

[the Empress]

Your posts seem to have a very 'western' old school perspective. A current trend in charities, particularly development charities, is a move away from a western imposed solution to community empowerment, in which the locals are enabled through resources and education to implement their own solution. I would suggest that within many targeted communities, they are capable of building suitable housing but lack the capacity - which could be 'charitably' assisted by the provision of funds/materials, and assistance with skilled features such as plumbing. Teaching those aspects would allow the independent continuation of suitable building throughout the community. Further, locals would most likely be much better suited to assess their needs than outsiders. This changes the PR picture from western 'inspiration' to community capacity, and would most likely engender more positive relations with the targeted community.

This is not a comment on Habitat for Humanity which I haven't looked at (as yet), but a response to your post which discusses only 'participants' (student volunteers) and 'non-participants' (other westerners) and excludes any reference to the host community itself.

Quoting Fedoraccoon from 18:31, 8th Jul 2008

Inspirational stories about volunteers who journey all the way to Africa to build a house with their own hands are great for getting media and public attention. The extra attention attracts more donations to the charity. The hands-on approach doesn't just allow participants to feel good, it makes non-participants more likely to want to be part of the solution.

[hr]

[edited for crazy brackets]

[Grant]

Quoting Fedoraccoon from 18:31, 8th Jul 2008
Anyone who thinks there's no room for inspirational stories and warm sentiments in charitable organizations is forgetting a very important aspect of charity work, public relations.

Inspirational stories about volunteers who journey all the way to Africa to build a house with their own hands are great for getting media and public attention. The extra attention attracts more donations to the charity. The hands-on approach doesn't just allow participants to feel good, it makes non-participants more likely to want to be part of the solution.

Somebody should probably run the numbers, but it's entirely possible that a little, or even a lot, of extra money spent to create a story people can relate to and be inspired by would actually increase the ability of the charity to do their job.

[hr]

This world...is made of... LOVE AND PEACE!..LOVE AND PEACE!..LOVE AND PEACE!!

I disagree. Simply based upon the reactions of this thread, the majority of people seem to veiw those who volunteered as being CV pushers.

I know people involved, and I think they mean well. However, if you don't know them, then its very easy to have this opinion. "Hey, this will look good on my CV".

I for one, would be more impressed by a tactic that utilised the money raised and allowed the local people to benefit, with a combination of economic, agricultural and environmental stratagies put into place that were designed to stop any further reliance on western input.

One thing I ponder, is that with new houses did they solve the initial problem that lead to a lack of housing? If it was water or land use problems, I cant see how this wont increase the need for further external input.

**I can't know for sure, I am just musing...**

[Fedoraccoon]

Empress, you make a very good point, and I agree that it's a well-known fact that it's far better to teach a man to fish than give him a fish.

That being said, I still think that getting the wider population engaged is important. Teaching construction skills costs money, just like building houses does. If a net-increase in available funding can be achieved by making use of less efficient but more inspirational charity programs, it'd be silly not to.

It would probably be smart for a charity to do both. Effective PR and an efficient charity plan aren't necessarily mutually exclusive. I do not know if HfH does this sort of two-pronged approach. I looked on their website, but it doesn't specify.

[hr]

This world...is made of... LOVE AND PEACE!..LOVE AND PEACE!..LOVE AND PEACE!!

[pambo]

Quoting Fedoraccoon from 20:30, 8th Jul 2008
it's a well-known fact that it's far better to teach a man to fish than give him a fish.

This may be true in general, but do you expect me to belive that the people sent over there have anymore experience in house building than the locals? I think not.

[the Empress]

I had a quick look at their website where it breaks down the costs:

Trip cost £1,710 per perspn
deposit £200, Balance £1,160 [includes flights accomodation, local transfers, means, water, travel insurance, cultural activites]
Fundraising challenge - £350 ['vital funds to ensure that we can continue our building programme']

Bascially it seems to say that you pay £1,360 for the trip. You then fund raise, or choose to pay in addition, at least £350 which is the charitable gift. So it seems no charitably given funds are used to pay for the trip. You can site see on your days off, 'On your days off you will spend time with the locals, learning about the vibrant local culture and customs and exploring some of the stunning local landmarks'

Skilled local people are used who instruct westerners *not* the other way around:

‘Working together with a homepartner family, the local community and skilled local builders, you will assist in constructing a new home using pressed blocks or baked bricks and aluminium sheeting.'

The housing solves local problems:

’ Dirt floors are a breeding ground for insects and rodents. Such living conditions lead to poor health, reduced capacity to work or study and a continuous struggle to escape the cycle of poverty housing.’

http://www.habitatforhumanity.org.uk/gh ... illage.htm

If anyone knows anything else I'd be interested to hear it, but it seems reasonable to me. Obviously people could give the entire £1,710 to the charity direct, but given that at least £1,360 is your own money and not fund raised, it seems reasonable to me to enjoy an exotic location while acting as free labour . . .

[Andy Monkey B]

I have recently returned from a trip to India with the charity Joy to the World (now one of the charities campaign's nominated charities). As it is locally based, quite small and focussed, and as I know almost everyone involved, the trip was fairly efficiently organised.

The cost breakdown for the charity: The administration cost is virtually nil, nobody is actually employed because its so small. Money raised by various events, sponsorships and donations is almost all used to provide for the orphanage out in Tamil Nadu (and in the future, a school in China also). The four of us who went out on the trip each payed our own insurance, flights, vaccinations and all other personal expenses. However I did do some fundraising for this (by shaving my head), although the intention of spending the money on getting myself out there was quite clear, and people were willing to give.

The team went out there instead of just sending the money for several reasons. Firstly, the orphanage is a Christian organisation, and anti-conversion laws in India prevent Christian organisations receiving funding from abroad. Scottish Charity law prevents the sending of money to individuals so the only solution was for the charity's president and VP to go and spend the money personally on behalf of the charity. We purchased school supplies, uniforms, bikes, ceiling fans and beds for the children, as well as paying the college fees for one of the older children's nursing course. Secondly, the charity is not just about sending money to those who have none, it is about encouraging and inspiring both the children at the orphanage and the people who run it. Children from orphanages have very little hope of improving their lives. Shunned by society, their greatest chance of survival is to work in a factory, in practically slave labour. Education, marriage and family and wealth are all beyond them. We want to change this though, and provide each child with a chance to reach their potential and benefit the community they live in. Santi, who is about to start her nursing course, now has an amazing opportunity to better herself and for a life she could not have otherwise had. She and the other children have benefited from the encouragement received by visits from the charity.

So that was a long winded response. Basically I'm trying to say, judge each case by its own merits, find out about the charities and give to those you feel are doing the better work, and people visiting the places where the money is spent is not always about CV boosting or getting a good feeling for yourself, or a free holiday.

Oh, and give money to Joy to the World!

[HfH]

I have been reading this thread with interest and wish to address some of the concerns raised by the original post.

Firstly I should like to say that I have partaken in a Habitat build with the St Andrews group and can only speak of my very positive experience.

As quite a cynic, I must admit that before joining I did consider the idea of this being a sort of disguised holiday/CV building exercise. This thought was quickly quashed.

Team members invest a highly significant amount of their own money (including personal donations), time and energy into making a trip happen. I can safely say that my personal expense far exceeded the ‘free holiday’ alluded to. It is bloody hard work to make the trip happen and team members are under no false impressions of this. If my goal was to have a holiday I wouldn’t have signed up.

Moreover, the original poster fails to recognise the fact that the work of the charity extends beyond building a house abroad. Of course we could have used the money raised to write a Banker’s Draft and send it over, however, this is extremely short sighted and unsustainable. Going abroad gave me an unparallel insight into the desperately important work HfH carry out. As a result, a passion was ignited in me to spread my story and my work for the charity continues today.

[David Bean]

Well, this is an interesting one! And as the Socs Grants Convener at the time the Friends of Habitat for Humanity was affiliated - Jenny, lately DoSDA, was incidentally the president - I feel like I ought to comment quickly.

It seems we got a bit sidetracked early on with the issues of whether we were talking about the charity or the affiliated 'Friends of' society - it seems fairly obvious to me that the OP was referring to the society, but mistakenly omitted the two extra words - and John's reaction (don't worry, John, they're not going to censure you over a fight on a message board - not unless they really hate you, that is).

But on the issue of whether the Friends is actually misusing Association funds or the money they've raised, it's a difficult one but in the absence of any real evidence I'm inclined to think not. Usually when people go on these charitable trips they're responsible for paying for, or raising the funding to pay for, the trip by themselves; this might be through individual sponsorship events, but when that's what they're raising the money for, they should be transparent about it.

Ultimately it's for individuals to decide what charitable pursuits they support, based on whatever criteria they feel like, but it is legitimate to raise questions, in public or in private, about whether it is appropriate for Association resources to be used in support of any particular group. Ultimately the most effective way usually is to approach the Societies' Committee directly, but I don't think there should be any taboo on discussions.

Incidentally I don't agree that student or other such amateur charities are generally inefficient; of those in St Andrews that I'm most familiar with, the Charities Campaign and the SVS, do tremendous work with the limited resources they have, and are extremely efficient in ensuring that the money they raise goes to the causes they're working for.

[hr]

Psalm 91:7