Dialogue: To practise charity, first find out what's needed

YVONNE DUFAUR* says the starry-eyed enthusiasts who plunge head first into humane causes often create as many problems as they solve.

Harnessing the appropriate public outrage at the recent series of horrific deaths of abused children, we have seen yet another organisation created by a group of high-profile, idealistic people whose intentions we must assume are wholly admirable.

The sadly bungled television campaign that launched their activities and the subsequent handling of the situation demonstrate the naivety involved in trying to solve a highly charged situation with meetings over a cup of coffee.

For the many hard-working and experienced people working in this minefield of human problems, all this idealism, and its unfortunate results, evoke groans of despair and feelings of deja vu.

We have seen this sort of thing too many times. Suddenly, there is a "cause" to be latched on to. Sensational headlines grab the attention. The public is clamouring for action. A solution must be found.

Someone inevitably leaps into the vanguard, holding the torch of idealism aloft and exhorting the world to back a campaign to eradicate whatever is the moment's bete noir. A group of like-minded enthusiasts gather around.

They solicit funds for the battle, and an enthusiastic and sympathetic public will unquestionably support the cause. To demonstrate their responsibility and accountability, they set up a properly constituted organisation - usually an incorporated society or a charitable trust - and swing into action.

All this is heady stuff. Later, some bleak realisations might set in. One will undoubtedly be the discovery that this whole non-profit sector is rather overcrowded, and that it is highly likely that there are at least a dozen organisations engaged in similar work, whatever the cause may be.

Many of these organisations will have a track record in the chosen field, a comprehensive nationwide network and an established funding support base. Most, through long experience, will also have developed some sensible protocols to guide their actions and to protect their "clients" in this always complex sector where people's lives can be devastated by one thoughtless or unprofessional action.

Another revelation might well be that there is not too much support for this new kid on the block from within the sector.

A little careful research before rushing in would have revealed the range of established organisations and the areas that they cover. Research might also have revealed that it is not a lack of organisations but rather a lack of funds which limits endeavours - endeavours which could, perhaps, best be assisted by the pulling power of high-profile campaigners working with established organisations rather than setting up additional ones.

Starry-eyed enthusiasm by well-meaning, high-profile people is all very well, but unless it is tempered by sound advice from those experienced in the area, it can result in the raising of funds for projects of dubious merit.

As anyone working in the field of disabilities will know, funding and media-attracting projects that parade before the public some wonderful expedition to theme parks for wheelchair-bound children may well induce warm fuzzies for those organising the fun, and for the public viewing the spectacle.

But they may do little for parents and siblings whose needs can be great. Ask any family in these circumstances and their priorities might be very different.

Likewise, a high-profile media campaign to eliminate violence may not be the most effective use of resources to make any real difference to the problem of child abuse.

Consultation with those working in this area could well reveal totally different criteria. This could well include the use of these well-known faces to encourage additional financial support for existing services.

Such agencies might well include Parentline phone services for parents under stress or budgeting services that help to restore families under financial difficulties to some degree of stability, thus relieving pressures which too often result in family violence.

Some years ago, in his book Megatrends, the American author John Naisbett identified 10 trends taking place in society.

One of these was the trend from either/or to multiple choice. An examination of the trend as it applied to the non-profit or voluntary sector over the past 30 years reveals a huge proliferation of specialist organisations. While this has often been effective, it has a serious downside.

It has brought about a great fragmentation of services in many instances with too many groups working on different aspects of a problem and possibly all pulling in different directions.

I once encountered a case where one family, admittedly with huge problems, were receiving aid, advice and support from 29 services.

Another problem is the availability of personnel - usually volunteers - to sustain all these organisations. There are well over 20,000 incorporated societies in this country. This means more than 20,000 chairmen or presidents, secretaries, treasurers and committee or board members. While it is often true that these volunteers undertake hands-on work in their chosen organisation as well as their governance duties, the loss of available volunteers or volunteer time for such work is enormous. Some rationalisation is long overdue.

An additional factor, and a serious one, is that funding is much more thinly spread. For the charitably minded public, the tendency has been to divide the same total amount over a wider number of organisations.

The effect on many organisations has been calamitous and results in far too much time and effort being directed to fundraising rather than services.

We have too many organisations, too many funding problems, too many mis-directed campaigns in this "third" sector (or non-profit sector, non-government sector, voluntary sector, call it what you will). The last thing we need is yet another organisation taking more resources away from badly stretched agencies.

What the sector does need is community support of existing organisations - certainly financial support, but also the support of volunteers who are prepared to offer their expertise and commitment to bring about change.

This year is the United Nations Year of the Volunteer - a good year for everyone to make a contribution towards a safer community. But remember to ask what is wanted first.

* Yvonne Dufaur has for many years worked for non-profit organisations in agency management and as a consultant.