KEY POINTS:
Thursday night, at the Alinghi Base on Auckland's Viaduct, the air was thick with money, glamour and feel-good factor. The occasion was adiCouture, a glitzy runway show, dinner and auction to raise money for New Zealand charity KidsCan.
The main attraction, though, was visiting football uber-celebrity David Beckham.
Along with Hollywood export Martin Henderson, Posh's husband worked it for the cameras and for the children. Beckham even opened his own chequebook.
Beckham was just the latest publicity coup for the charity, which has distributed free Adidas raincoats, shoes and food to 25,000 underprivileged children in its three years of existence.
KidsCan epitomises the modern charity: slick, corporate-styled, with big marketing, events management and PR budgets; celebrity frontpeople and key staff from the corporate world.
Cynics might ask whether high-powered celebrity charity misses the point and blurs the line between philanthropy and corporate self-promotion. Pragmatists might reply it simply makes sense in today's overcrowded charity market.
It's Christmas, and we all know it's good to give. But how much of what we donate reaches its target?
High profile doesn't necessarily mean high efficiency in terms of how much of the donations go directly to a charity's cause; nor in avoiding wasteful duplication with other charities or Government agencies.
KidsCan co-founder Julie Helson admits only 60 cents in every dollar it receives goes to the charity's programmes. Not counting in kind donations, the charity's 2007 annual accounts suggest only 25 cents in the donated dollar - $246,020 out of $976,185 - went directly to the programmes last year. Almost double that - $453,993 - was spent on wages, events and promotions.
Helson says the annual report figures are misleading because they do not represent "in kind" donations from sponsors, such as raincoats, shoes and food.
The Herald on Sunday has found one national appeal where only 47 cents in the donated dollar went directly to the core cause.
Some of this is due to economies of scale in a small country and the initial cost of brand promotion. But, other Kiwi charities manage to deliver 85 cents in the dollar. In the United States, the accepted minimum benchmark is 75 cents.
The new Charities Register, run by the Charities Commission, will force all registered charities to open their books to the public (some do so voluntarily already).
This has been welcomed as a move towards greater transparency, but accountability won't necessarily follow says economist and philanthropist Gareth Morgan.
"That's a good start, but then you need people who can be bothered doing [the checking]. If you've got a can rattling in your face you tend to throw in a few coins and move on."
And, without a standard way of reporting, many of the accounts are opaque and impossible to compare across charities.
Morgan said: "They tend to aggregate money and say this is 'operations', this is 'we've built a new home' or whatever. It's very difficult to get a value for money calculation out of that."
From school cake stalls to football star-power, we are a nation of fundraisers and givers. More than 26,000 charities have applied to be registered with the Charities Commission.
In 2004, the latest figures, the country gave $8 billion to non-profit organisations (which include non-charities such as sports clubs), according to a Philanthropy New Zealand paper. Households gave $850 million, business gave $216m, and other non-profit institutions donated $543m.
We're trusting folk. Most of us - 72 per cent according to a Charities Commission survey - have a middling to high confidence in charities.
Major arts patron Jenny Gibbs says charities have become "far more professional" and more transparent. However, she says, people would be "aghast" if they knew how much money goes on overheads sometimes.
In the US, an organisation called Charity Navigator rates charities on their efficiency and financial health. It has rated 5300 charities, of which 58 per cent got three or four out of a possible five stars.
Big names such as the American Red Cross and the American Cancer Society have received two-star ratings.
Only 18 per cent of charities on its database spend less than 70 per cent of budget on core programmes.
Helson defends KidsCan's 40 per cent overheads.
"We are a young charity. There are a lot of other organisations that are spending a lot more than that. You've got to put it into perspective ... you're always going to have higher costs when you're a start-up."
The charity aims to shrink overheads to 30 per cent within two years.
In a previous life, Helson was the whistleblower who triggered a fraud investigation of four prominent Auckland businessman involved in helicopter rescue charity Child Flight (all four were acquitted by a jury).
"I'm a stickler for making sure things are done right," she says.
Another charity with apparently high overheads is the Child Cancer Foundation (CCF). Chief executive Neil Porteous says about 42 per cent of the $10.5m CCF received last year went on administration and fundraising.
Its national appeal raised $1.21m, but cost more than half that to run, $644,000. Other fundraising totalled $4.63m and cost $2.53m.
Porteous argues the figures are not an accurate reflection and include CanTeen, which has since become independent.
"All of my [salary] costs and the building costs come out of the administration total, yet the families use them."
And, he says, you need to spend money to become a household name.
"People say why does CCF need to advertise because everyone knows about us, but I'd argue the reason everyone knows about us is we have advertised."
CCF doesn't receive any Government money. Nor does human rights organisation Amnesty International. Amnesty's cause is campaigning and lobbying rather than providing tangible goods and services, making it difficult to compare to other charities. Yet, for every $1 it spends on fundraising, it raises $4.40.
Travel is one area of expense that can seem excessive. The national SPCA office spent 110,673 - or 6 per cent of its income - on travel and meetings last year.
In 2006, children's charity World Vision had planned to fly a staff member business class to Africa, but cancelled the almost $8000 fare after being questioned by this paper.
Want to make a splash? Get yourself a pet celeb. Starship has Lucy Lawless aka Xena, and a procession of other household names.
Paul Ellis has fronted up for Cure Kids; Outrageous Fortune's Pascalle (Siobhan Marshall) has walked her miniature schnauzer-cairn terrier cross to raise cash for the SPCA.
KidsCan has been extraordinarily successful in wooing celebrities. Rugby stars Ali Williams and Doug Howlett are official patrons. Actress Miriama Smith, singer Jordan Luck, and Black Caps Jeetan Patel and James Franklin are ambassadors.
Helson says KidsCan is very careful to select only celebrities who genuinely support the cause.
"It's about inspiring the children, that's predominantly where we see celebrities fitting in."
The charity has also sealed a deal with TV3 to reprise Telethon, a massive donation-generator. Renamed "Big Night In", the 21-plus-hour TV/internet event will run next June. Its target is $2m, every cent of which will go to KidsCan.
Some critics ask whether the charity should expand its brief, or band with other children's charities, given this clout.
Helson is resolute. "We're in the business of getting kids to school in a position to learn."
You could argue that part of celebrity-touting charities' appeal for corporate supporters is that they offer a backdoor marketing association with the celeb. But famous faces can pay off.
Starship Foundation's Andrew Young says Lawless has brought in tens of thousands of dollars from Xena fans, including major donors in the US, Australia and Great Britain - some of whom have never been to Auckland.
Lawless approached Starship, and both her children have been treated in the hospital. "It's not something Lucy's doing because she needs the profile; it's because her heart's in exactly the right place," says Young.
Last year, the 16-year-old foundation raised $7.2m gross, of which only 15 per cent went on administration and marketing. Young says the figure hasn't gone above 17 per cent in his 10 years at the organisation.
Young has a blacklist of celebrities that Starship would never align itself with - he's not naming names, but mentions one sport hero who approached Starship for what amounted to a character reference while he was facing assault charges about six years ago.
"We reported him back to his team management."
Mark Cassidy seeks out the most effective charity in cluttered fields. Cassidy manages the Guardian Trust philanthropic service, which pairs wealthy clients with charities.
He says the way we do philanthropy is dysfunctional in that it tends to generate mismatches between society's needs and charities.
Small-scale charities rely heavily on grants from statutory bodies such as the Lottery Commission.
"People don't voluntarily give to the Lottery Commission. When you buy a Lotto ticket, you buy to win the Lotto. And then the money is looking for a need to support.
"That is a reversal of what traditionally happens - a shift from having the need at the centre to a bureaucratic distribution of funding."
And rules that direct the money to certain areas or causes mean the money doesn't always go to areas of the greatest need.
Ultimately, says Gareth Morgan, it's up to donors to direct their generosity with maximum impact.
The Charities register will help. Charities Commission head Trevor Garrett says the commission is looking at using standardised pie charts to show income and spending.
And beyond the numbers, it has already received a couple of dozen complaints about various charities, including alleged fraud, conflict of interest, mismanagement, tax irregularities and immigration irregularities.
As the global recession bites, history suggests a fall-off in funding may be offset by a rise in volunteers.
That Kiwi generosity will always be needed if we want to maintain high standards of living, says Gibbs.
'If people really want opera or a children's hospital, they're going to have to put their hands in their pockets."
