UK Air Ambulances having it off???
 

Sorry the night air ambulances thread was drifting but is there a point to suggesting that some of these "charities" are benefiting more than just the people they aim to pick up?

If you follow this link:-

Find charities - Charity Commission

You can enter the charity number and find the % spending on salaries, admin and other spending V what gets spent on the main aim - i.e flying a helicopter to save victims.

It makes terrible reading. For instance Midlands AA spends just £258K (3% of the total) to raise its funds whilst The Air Ambulance service spends £2.3M!! (42% of the total raised)..

It does make you wonder.


Edit to add this:-

Service Services expense Running Expenses Expense % total funds

Cornwall £1,800,000.00 £827,000.00 28%
Derby/Rutland/Leic £2,300,000.00 £2,900,000.00 42%
Devon/Exeter £1,880,000.00 £2,550,000.00 35%
Dorset £1,000,000.00 £1,760,000.00 24%
East Anglian £3,100,000.00 £2,000,000.00 31%
Essex £2,800,000.00 £2,100,000.00 42%
Great Northern £2,955,000.00 £1,276,000.00 23%
Great Western £1,067,000.00 £194,000.00 14%
Hampshire £1,300,000.00 £1,130,000.00 35%
Kent £4,300,000.00 £2,370,000.00 31%
Linconshire £1,566,000.00 £748,000.00 29%
London £1,818,000.00 £928,000.00 29%
Magpas £446,900.00 £215,855.00 33%
Midland £3,100,000.00 £258,000.00 3%
North West £3,157,000.00 £937,000.00 17%
Thames Valley £1,545,000.00 £2,191,000.00 42%
Welsh £3,400,000.00 £2,128,000.00 37%
Yorkshire £2,200,000.00 £759,000.00 18%

Midland £3,100,000.00 £258,000.00 3%????

£258,000,000 is a tad more than 3% so your sums are wrong on that one.

You have to spend money to get money. That's the fact of life. If you don't then you won't. 30% seems the norm.

But that said some of the money is, in my opinion, wasted. On an inaugural flight of their 'new' aircraft one charity flew a massive detour with the new aircraft in order to get some scenic snaps. Now I know what the DOC of that particular aircraft is (its not just the fuel!) and lets just say the detour will have been in excess of £1000...!

Secondly I only know of one person in the helicopter industry who earns £130,000 and drives a £70,000 Jaguar and he is Chief Exec of an AA Charity - not a bad earner eh? Liken that to comparable helicopter companies who only operate a handful of helicopters!

The problem here is if just one AA gets bad press then funding will dry up on the whole and that IS NOT a good thing as these charities do an excellent job providing fantastic care often in difficult circumstances.

Hi - sorry for the confusion but the numbers are separate.. i.e In Midland AA case they raised whatever but I'm saying the value of providing the AA bit was £3.1M whilst the expenses side of the rest of the charity was £258K. So that reads £3.1M of value to the community for £258K of expenses...

Edited to add the accounts of Midlands AA:-

http://apps.charitycommission.gov.uk...120331_E_C.pdf

and Derby and Leics AA:-

http://apps.charitycommission.gov.uk...111231_e_c.pdf

It is a pretty amazing difference and given there is a group body I'm surprised there are not conversations being had.

How do 'The Children's Air Ambulance' (TCAA) sit amongst all those figures?

The childrens air ambulance is within the numbers for Derby and Leics..

Geography has a lot to do with things. Highly populated areas traditionally find fundraising easier and cheaper. However we are all learning from these figures that some people have no shame. This reflects society in general, some people identify easy money and exploit it, others have a concience.
I just wish the press would take this one up.

Jayteeto. I agree with you but the problem is that if the press takes it up then funding will probably dry up. Not good.

True, i would hope they would say most charities are good, but that spoils a story

The press have taken hold of this in the case of TCAA (the important one I'm sure we all agree?) BBC News - Air Ambulance Service's fundraising and spending criticised i'm sure there was also a TV piece made on the issue.

Interesting that the BBC link of SAR wanabees has another story at the bottom about ECMO teams - it makes it sound like a new capability but SAR helos have been taking ECMO teams around the country for many years.

There were few ecmo kits that fitted small aircraft, this has been addressed and specialised ac fits are available. A 'new' capability makes better news!

Well, if that new kit and the new AA night capability mean no more 6 to 8-hour ECMO transfers for SAR then whooppeee!;)

I'm not going to get drawn into this thread or the other, but just in an attempt to ensure that no-one goes off at a tangent, every charity has a Board of Trustees, all unpaid and with no personal interests in the financial performance or direct relationships with management team personnel. Their job is to provide oversight of the management team, including budgets, incomes and outgoings. The trustees have no individualauthority, but as a group, their word is God. Oh and there is some personal liability that goes with it......

I am a trustee (for over 6 years standing) of one of the charities detailed in Pittsextra's list above, along with several other people much smarter than me (including finance directors, solicitors etc). Trust me, one of the measures that we scrutinise every time we meet is the ratio of income to fulfillment of charitable objects.

There is a scheme of delegation in place, whereby the management team can approve certain purchases, but for anything above their 'ceiling', it has to be referred upwards. And of course the salaries/benefits of the management team is approved at Board level. We benchmark senior manager salary - did you know that the average CEO salary for a 'sports' charity CEO in 2012 was £75,820pa? And an animal charity? £77k. Medical/health/sickness is £62k. Make of that what you will.

Oh and Pitts, you might want to look at charity numbers 1001064 and 1143118 together, before setting the Midlands Air Ambulance up as an icon of how it should be done ;-). Charitable spending of £6.3m, spend on income generation etc of £6.38m! Not sure what that does to your ratio, but does show that there are lies, damned lies and statistics. I have no idea why they choose to run two charities. None of my business!

Jock given the involvement can i ask on what metric these trustees measure value? Especially given the wide range seen in the data and your comment regarding:-

"Trust me, one of the measures that we scrutinise every time we meet is the ratio of income to fulfillment of charitable objects"

Also what about transparancy between the charities and the beneficial owners of the commercial entities they interact with.

Thats before you come to the operators of the aircraft themselves.

Edited re: Simply looks like this is the reason? AS FROM OCTOBER 1ST 2011OUR CHARITY NUMBER HAS CHANGED TO 1143118. FOR FUTURE INFORMATION ON MIDLANDS AIR AMBULANCE, PLEASE REFER TO THE NEW CHARITY NUMBER

The funds got spat across and retained for future use see here from the accounts:-



Other





If i was a trustee with the childrens AA I'd want to know how my office expenses are 10x those of Midland AA.... Then I'd ask who we pay rent to...

And you wonder why.....

I've been called many things, but obvious...never:O

Yes sorry for the typo... now having given us the big speach how about a straight answer to a straight question.

206 Jock,

Don't post if you don't want to become involved.

I say this to you. I ran a police/hems outfit for many many years as Chief Pilot. I did the maths for procuring the a/c (direct purchase, not lease), for comparing turnkey with other options. I knew the salaries of everyone working there including the Insepctor who ran the whole caboodle. I knew the running costs down to the last penny and presented this to the CC each and every year for his public audits.
When you describe what you come across as a trustee suggests to me that you have swallowed the band wagon pill......

£75,000 to run a one / two ship operation is ridiculous - try £45000.
Turnkey - possibly the most expensive form of operating ever. The helicopter lease company is most certainly laughing all the way to the bank here with YOUR money. IF you had any business acumen you would recommend someone sat down and costed the purchase and running of their outfit as a stand alone outfit. Overheads would HALVE overnight. But no-one wants the hassle of logistics/PBH/SBH and all that is associated with running their own show. After all it's someone' else's money (public) and the boss is only getting £75000 for his efforts:eek:
If I told you the running costs of a modern police outfit by comparison - you'd choke on your muesli and cafe latte :uhoh:
[And the reason for the disparity - one is publically audited and the other isn't].

So would I! I'm certainly not associated with TAAS in any way. I'm not sure what your big question is, it seems to be shrouded in innuendo.

TC, sounds great. Why don't you step up to the plate and change the world for your local operation? I'm sure they'd want you on the inside pissing out rather than the other way round.

Jock - the question was:-

"on what metric these trustees measure value? "

I don't think that was vague or shrouded in anything!

What seems slightly odd on first look is that you have an association and yet there are obviously big gaps between the organisations, yet this isn't a new field of operation.

206Joke: ooooooh meeeeow.

I thought you weren't being draaaaaaaaaaawn in old boy.

Methinks you (as a trustee) are the problem and not looking for a solution to the problem perhaps. But don't let me draw you in. :suspect: