One month ago, singer Wycef Jean's "NGO" (for"Non-Governmental Organization) called "Yelle Haiti" raised just over $1 million to help victims of the 7.0 Haiti Earthquake. At the time, scores of non-profit organizations sprang up to announce some kind of effort to assist the quake-damaged country.
But of all of them, Yelle Haiti received the most attention because of alleged past spending patterns, leading to the awful and unfounded accusation that Wycef Jean was using the money for personal use. In this video made one month ago, Wycef Jean answered his critics:
Just after The Smoking Gun and The Washington Post blog posts were issued (and with no evidence of having attempted to personally contact Wycef Jean to give him a chance to respond to the accusations) and the rescue efforts ramped up, suddenly the American Red Cross became mentioned in commercial after commercial as the "go-to" nonprofit for donations.
 |
| Ok, but where's the $165 million? |
Some newspapers, like The San Francisco Chronicle, included the American Red Cross in a list of recommended organizations to donate to in the effort to help Haiti. The message, and thus the common assumption or "conventional wisdom", was that the American Red Cross was the "safe" organization to donate to.
It's not.
According to CNN Money, The American Red Cross had to ask for a $100 million cash infusion after its emergency fund was depleted. Today, reports are that the American Red Cross spent or committed nearly $80 million to "meet the most urgent needs of earthquake survivors."
But wait. Where did the cost of $80 million come from? Or is it that the American Red Cross received that much in donations and while all of it is committed, only part of it is spent? According to the American Red Cross' own one month report, it has raised $255 million for the Haitian Relief effort.
That's as much money as was raised to finance the upgrade construction of the Miami Dolphins' stadium for Super Bowl XLIV.
But here's where the reports gets really confusing and disturbing. While $255 million was raised, only $80 million was spent or committed, leaving $175 million in donations that's neither spent nor committed to Haiti.
Where's the $175 million the American Red Cross collected? Where's The Washington Post and The Smoking Gun to look at this?
The complete American Red Cross Haiti one month report does not help because it fails to even mention the $175 million collected but not spent or committed to Haiti.
Why?
The logical mind would think that if the American Red Cross gained $255 million in money that donors believed was going to the Haiti effort, then all of the $255 million should be committed to Haiti, not some of it.
This is a major outrage. But more outrageous is the media's blind eye to the American Red Cross' activities. One would think a reporter would not be so lazy that they could avoid subtracting $80 million from $255 million, get $175 million, read the Red Cross' online documents, and start asking about the unallocated $175 million?
But that's what's happened in the case of the only mainstream media organization to look at donation spending progress to date, The Miami Herald. The report in the business section mentions the $255 million and the $80 million in one sentence - this one:
For Haiti, the Red Cross has raised more than $250 million and has plans for some $80 million of that so far, said Red Cross spokesman Jonathan Aiken.
But disturbingly, The Miami Herald fails to ask the "What happened to the $175 million in donations" question.
Everyone deserves an answer, especially Wycef Jean and those who've ran Yelle Haiti, and who continue to be dogged by a PR attack that seems to have benefitted organizations like the American Red Cross and allowed them to submit sloppy reports of their own.
Indeed, The Miami Herald picked up the "something's wrong with Yelle Haiti" theme and repeated it in the same story where they give the American Red Cross a blind pass. That is awful and must be explained ASAP.
Stay tuned.
Comments
If it even is a discrepancy. Maybe they just haven't spent it yet.
"So far" Do you expect them to just spend the entire 255 million in the first month? These people need to live 6 months from now also.
I'm to see you shine the light on this matter. I hope the truth is very different from what i suspect it will be. Despicable!
I am all for every type of organization helping the poor people of Haiti and I expect that Wyclef will continue to do all he can to help these people. Is it the fault of the Red Cross that The Smoking Gun and The Washington Post have an issue with Wyclef, absolutely not. Why dont you train your attention on those who you feel are wrongfully accusing him?
Why some of you knee jerk, blindly defend the Red Cross, thus adding to an incomplete report is really beyond the pale.
Of course they haven't said the 175 million is committed to Haiti, if they did they would have to say what it was for, and if it's for long term help they HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IT IS FOR YET. Hence the LONG in long term.
"The American Red Cross has debt of $613 million, more than $100 million of which is due to be repaid to lenders this year. Its annual deficit of $33.5 million in fiscal year 2009, was a vast improvement from a deficit of $209 million in fiscal 2008."
While I am not jumping to any conclusions on where the missing $175 million is, I do think that this money would at least count in the "COMMITTED" section. Apparently it's not though which is the part I find odd.
And yes, I understand that we need to think long term but if you need $50 million to feed the people for the next 3-6 months wouldn't that money be "COMMITTED" to something?
Just my thoughts
.8 credit is given in economics. .9 in government. Thats all. English studies rewards students with three credits, every year, and everyone in my son's classes has spoken English and reads on their own. Suddenly a light went off when I read this blog.
In this blog there are many comments by well-intentioned people who don't understand how to read an NGO balance sheet. The person posting this article does understand how to read the balance sheet, and is somewhat familiar with what is required of an NGO. I am still learning about non-profits, public service, etc. I think the good news is, that we can have a better public response as we learn more and participate more fully. The bad news is, we sure are being bamboozled so much of the time.
Remember back when Katrina hit New Orleans, how all the buses were going to save a million people?
Well, Red Cross is going into the Haiti episode with over 600 mil debt. Only we can decide how much debt is too much for a congressionally designated first responder organization, but we should surely have required Red Cross to at least have significant capital.....sortof like we require of insurance companies in Florida who deal with our cyclical disasters of hurricane and flood.
I know we are still struggling with issues of solvency and support for our communities and personal lives. This makes us no different than any one else, anywhere in the world. I feel we can do this together.
Annie