{FIAPO} Fundraising #6

[Guest guest]

What ANIMAL PEOPLE expects of ethical charities

 

For charities:

 

1) The activities of an animal protection charity should

verifiably endeavor to help animals, committing the overwhelming

volume of resources raised to animal protection work other than

fundraising, administration, and the maintenance of reserve funds.

a) ANIMAL PEOPLE believes that all fundraising and program

literature distributed by an ethical animal protection organization

should be truthful, accurate, and up-to-date, and should be

amended or withdrawn, as is appropriate, when circumstances change

or new information emerges. If a project, campaign, or program is

announced but fails to be developed, for whatever reason, donors

should be told what happened and what was done instead with the

resources raised in the name of that project, campaign, or program.

b) ANIMAL PEOPLE believes it is inherently unethical for

board members and executives of animal charities to simultaneously

represent entities whose activities or goals conflict with those of

the animal charities. ANIMAL PEOPLE believes that board members and

executives of animal charities should explicitly, personally, and

on the public record endorse the goals and policies of the animal

charities they represent. If a board member or executive opposes or

seeks to amend the goals and/or policies of the animal charity he/she

represents, the position of the board member or executive should be

clearly articulated, on the public record.

c) ANIMAL PEOPLE believes that under all except the most

unusual circumstances, which should be clearly, fully, and

prominently explained to donors with solicitations for funds, an

ethical animal protection charity should hold fundraising and

administrative cost to less than 35% of total expense within a

calendar or fiscal year. ANIMAL PEOPLE considers " fundraising costs "

to include any use of telemarketing to solicit funds, as well as any

direct mailings which solicit funds, include envelopes for the

return of donations, and would probably not have been mailed if

postal rules forbade the inclusion of the donation envelopes. (This

standard parallels the guidelines of the Wise Giving Alliance.)

d) ANIMAL PEOPLE believes under all except the most

extraordinary circumstances, which should be clearly, fully, and

prominently explained to donors with solicitations for funds, an

ethical animal protection charity should avoid keeping more than

twice the annual operating budget of the charity in economic

reserves, including investment accounts and the reserved assets of

subsidiaries. (This is also consistent with the recommendations of

the Wise Giving Alliance.)

2) ANIMAL PEOPLE believes that the activities of an animal

protection charity should be clearly visible to donors, news media,

and the public. This includes filling out IRS Form 990 fully and

accurately, and filing it in a timely manner. Donors, news media,

and the public should have the opportunity to personally verify the

charitable program.

3) ANIMAL PEOPLE believes that animal care charities should

go beyond meeting the minimal animal care standards enforced by

government agencies such as the USDA Animal & Plant Health Inspection

Service under the Animal Welfare Act, and should strive to meet or

exceed the " best practice " recommendations of the major supervisory

and/or accreditation organizations, if any, overseeing their

specialties. Because the purposes of animal care charities vary

widely, the appropriate " best practice " recommendations are also

widely varied.

Examples of supervisory and/or accreditation organizations

whose animal care standards we may expect charities to follow

include, but are not limited to, the National Animal Control

Association, if an organization holds animal control contracts; the

American Zoo Association and the Alliance of Marine Mammal Parks &

Aquariums, if the organization exhibits animals or manages

zoological conservation programs; and for sanctuaries, the

standards of The Association of Sanctuaries and the American

Sanctuary Association.

Similar organizations set comparable standards for animal

care in many nations, with variations suited to their circumstances.

Where no national or regional organization has established

standards appropriate for the operation of animal care charities,

ANIMAL PEOPLE finds generally applicable the " best practice "

recommendations in the instructional pamphlet series authored by

Maneka Gandhi for distribution by the Animal Welfare Board of India.

These recommendations were developed for use under highly adverse

conditions with limited resources, yet aspire to a high level of

animal well-being.

4) ANIMAL PEOPLE believes that an ethical animal protection

charity should behave in a manner which takes into consideration the

welfare of all animals, not only those under the direct auspices of

the charitable programs. Just as it would be unethical for a human

welfare charity to sacrifice the well-being of some people in order

to benefit a chosen few, so ANIMAL PEOPLE believes it is inherently

unethical to cause some animals to suffer on behalf of other animals.

a) Policies which promote the well-being of some animals by

encouraging the killing of predators or competitor species are to

ANIMAL PEOPLE inherently unethical--as are policies which encourage

the release or return of animals to habitat where the animals are

unwelcome and may be at high risk of enduring human cruelty or

extermination.

b) ANIMAL PEOPLE recommends that all food served for human

consumption by or on behalf of animal charities should be vegetarian

or, better, vegan.

5) ANIMAL PEOPLE believes that an ethical animal charity

should behave in a manner which takes into consideration the

well-being of the whole of the animal-related nonprofit sector.

a) Fundraising may be competitive, as charities strive to

develop the most effective programs of their kind, but ANIMAL PEOPLE

views as inherently unethical any practice that tends to raise the

fundraising costs as opposed to program expenditure of the animal

protection sector in general.

b) ANIMAL PEOPLE views as inherently unethical the

involvement of an animal protection charity, or the officers,

directors, and other management of the charity, in any form of

crime except for occasional acts of open civil disobedience

undertaken in connection with nonviolent protest or documentation of

animal suffering. ANIMAL PEOPLE believes that animal protection

charities should not be directed or managed by persons of felonious

criminal history involving theft, fraud, or violence against either

humans or nonhuman animals.

6) ANIMAL PEOPLE believes that even beyond the requirements

of law, an ethical animal protection organization must discourage

racism, sexism, sexual predation, discrimination, and harassment.

Humans are animals too, and must not be subjected to any practice

which would be considered cruel or inappropriate if done to the

nonhuman animals who are the intended beneficiaries of the work of an

animal-related charity.

7) ANIMAL PEOPLE believes that even beyond the requirements

of law, an ethical animal charity must maintain facilities which are

safe, clean, and physically and emotionally healthy for animals,

visitors, and staff.

8) ANIMAL PEOPLE believes that if and when an ethical animal

charity finds itself to be in violation of any of these standards,

even if accidentally and unintentionally, it must immediately work

to resolve the problems.

9) ANIMAL PEOPLE views as inherently unethical the use of

legal action to attempt to silence criticism. ANIMAL PEOPLE believes

that all nonprofit charities and their officers, directors, and

management should view themselves as operating under public scrutiny,

for the public benefit, and as being therefore public figures

subject to the same kinds of observation, criticism, commentary,

and satire as elected officials, candidates for public office, and

celebrities. This is a somewhat more stringent requirement than is

recommended by other codes of ethics recommended for nonprofit

organizations. It replaces the expectation implied within the

standards developed with human service institutions in mind that the

constituency of the charity shall be able to monitor the work and

intervene if necessary to ensure that the duties of the charity are

properly fulfilled.

10) ANIMAL PEOPLE believes that an ethical animal-related

charity, if it employs an outside fundraiser or fundraising counsel,

should hire only fundraisers or fundraising counsels with no

conflicts of interest, such as simultaneously representing

organizations or political candidates with goals opposed to those of

the animal-related charity.

We believe fundraisers should follow these standards:

 

For fundraisers

 

F1) ANIMAL PEOPLE believes that an ethical fundraiser or

fundraising counsel for an animal charity is one who endeavors to

help the client charity to meet all of the ten standards enumerated

above.

F2) ANIMAL PEOPLE believes it is inherently unethical for a

fundraiser or fundraising counsel to undertake or advise

telemarketing, direct mailing, or any other kind of activity at a

level or in a manner which results in combined fundraising and

administrative cost exceeding 35% of the total spending by the

charity during the year.

F3) ANIMAL PEOPLE believes it is inherently unethical for a

fundraiser or fundraising counsel to make claims in telemarketing,

direct mailing, or other fundraising activity which are not

factually substantiated.

F4) ANIMAL PEOPLE believes it is incumbent upon a fundraiser

or fundraising counsel to ascertain that all claims made in

telemarketing, direct mailing, or other fundraising activity are

factual. As with the failure of an animal protection charity to meet

basic animal care standards, ANIMAL PEOPLE believes that ignorance

is no excuse.

F5) ANIMAL PEOPLE believes it is incumbent upon a fundraiser

or fundraising counsel to ensure that all nonprofit organizations

represented fill out and promptly file a complete and accurate IRS

Form 990, if operating in the U.S., including complete disclosure

of all telemarketing and direct mailing expenses, and that an

ethical fundraiser should sever ties with any charity which fails to

do so.

Similar financial disclosures should be required of charities

operating abroad.

F6) ANIMAL PEOPLE believes it is incumbent upon a fundraiser

or fundraising counsel for animal charities to ensure that all

applicable animal care standards are consistently met. Though an

ethical fundraiser or fundraising counsel may represent an animal

charity which is raising funds to achieve compliance with applicable

standards that it temporarily falls short of meeting, ANIMAL PEOPLE

believes the need to raise an exceptional amount of money for capital

improvements does not justify an investment in fundraising so high

that fundraising and administration cost more than 35% of the total

expenditures of the charity during the fiscal or calendar year.

ANIMAL PEOPLE believes an ethical fundraiser or fundraising counsel

for animal charities should not represent an organization which is so

far derelict in meeting the applicable animal care standards,

especially those of the U.S. Animal Welfare Act, that adequate funds

to make improvements cannot be raised while staying under the 35%

limit.

F7) ANIMAL PEOPLE believes it is inherently unethical for a

fundraiser or fundraising counsel to represent an animal charity

which is involved in any kind of crime other than civil disobedience

undertaken as nonviolent protest or documentation of animal

suffering, or whose officers, directors, and other management are

involved in crime other than civil disobedience as nonviolent protest

or documentation of animal suffering, or whose officers, directors,

and other management have felonious criminal records involving theft,

fraud, or violence against either humans or nonhuman animals.

ANIMAL PEOPLE believes that it is incumbent upon a fundraiser

or fundraising counsel to ascertain whether the key personnel of

client charities have criminal history.

F8) ANIMAL PEOPLE believes it is inherently unethical for a

fundraiser or fundraising counsel for animal charities to

simultaneously represent organizations or political candidates whose

activities or goals conflict with the interests of animals.

For example, ANIMAL PEOPLE believes it is inherently

unethical for a fundraiser or fundraising counsel for animal

charities to simultaneously represent, including through technically

separate companies, any organizations or political candidates whose

activities or goals include weakening or repealing animal protection

laws.

F9) ANIMAL PEOPLE believes it is inherently unethical for a

fundraiser or fundraising counsel to use lawsuits, or the threat of

lawsuits, to try to silence criticism, or to try to compel a

charity to adhere to a fundraising contract which the charity has

determined is disadvantageous.

If a charity finds that it erred in signing a contract which

is so disadvantageous that the activities undertaken in the name of

the charity are not chiefly benefiting the charitable work, the

charity should be allowed to break or amend that contract without

further allocation or diversion of resources away from the charitable

work that it was incorporated to do. An ethical fundraiser or

fundraising counsel should accordingly discourage client charities

from incurring debts to the fundraiser or fundraising counsel so

large as to require additional fundraising activity after the initial

contracted telemarketing or mailings.

F10) ANIMAL PEOPLE believes that fundraisers and fundraising

counsels for charities should view themselves as operating as

ex-officio officers of their client charities, under mandate to

represent the best interests of the client charities, and under

public scrutiny, for the public benefit, which makes them therefore

public figures subject to the same kinds of observation, criticism,

commentary, and satire as elected officials, candidates for public

office, and celebrities.

Similar standards already apply to lawyers employed by

charities in some states, recognizing the privileged position of a

lawyer relative to the governance of a charity, yet a hired

fundraiser or fundraising counsel often has equal or greater

influence on how a charity operates because fundraising--along with

policymaking and oversight--is among the generally recognized duties

of a nonprofit board of directors.

 

 

--

Merritt Clifton

Editor, ANIMAL PEOPLE

P.O. Box 960

Clinton, WA 98236

 

Telephone: 360-579-2505

Fax: 360-579-2575

E-mail: anmlpepl

Web: www.animalpeoplenews.org

 

[ANIMAL PEOPLE is the leading independent newspaper providing

original investigative coverage of animal protection worldwide,

founded in 1992. Our readership of 30,000-plus includes the

decision-makers at more than 10,000 animal protection organizations.

We have no alignment or affiliation with any other entity. $24/year;

for free sample, send address.]

 

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~

You received this message because you are d to the Google

Groups " Federation of Indian Animal Protection Organisations " group.

This Group is meant only as a forum for communications between

members of the group with items of news, actions, notices and

general interest chiefly for the benefit of India's animals. This

is a moderated list and ongoing discussions between members are

encouraged to take place " off-list " .

 

For queries write to mail

 

Learn more about us at: http://indiananimalsfederation.org