Intelligent Giving

Hi Steve,

Thanks for your comment. As a result of your enquiry, I did have quite an extensive search on the Oxfam website, but could not find the 79% figure. No matter. I'm sure it is there.

We calculate charitable expenditure by figuring out what percentage of a charity's overall expenditure went on charitable activities. We do this from 'the statement of consolidated financial activities' in a charity's annual report. It's easy to work out. We just divide 'charitable activities' figure by the 'total resources expended' figure. Some charities calculate their charitable expenditure in different ways, and that's fine. We just feel that our way is simple and understandable.

In fact,the figure above (73%) is from last year's Oxfam accounts (2005-6). The 2006-7 accounts have just come out. ASAP, we will update this profile to 2007. I did calculate the 2007 charitable expenditure ratio, and it came to 72%.

Charitable expenditure ratios can get quite political with different charities trumpeting varying figures, that 'prove' how efficient they are. At 'Intelligent Giving', we take a reasonably relaxed view towards it all. We realise that governance costs, costs of generating funds, and other associated costs, can amount to quite a lot. As long as a charity doesn't spend too little on its charitable activities (around 70% is absolutely fine), then we are not bothered by the figure.

In fact, as you will surely know, the most important point is not what percentage an outfit spends on 'charitable activities', but how they spend that money. Is the money actually making a difference? Is it going to the right places? Is it being handled by the right people? And from Oxfam's impressive track record, you can be pretty sure that it is.

Please reply if you have more questions or queries

Nat Ogborn, Intelligent Giving

This site says that 73% of Oxfams income is spent on charitable work ,but the Oxfam site says 79 % ?????

My main issue with Oxfam is the wretched begging letters addressed "To occupier" with free pen. Yes, I know it must work and be cost-effective, or they wouldn't do it. But I don't give to *any* organisation that adds to my rubbish/recycling pile.

(For the record, I've been signed with Mailing Preference Service for years and am anxiously awaiting for the Post Office to get its act together and action the "Please don't give me unaddressed mail" request I sent them :non-existent rolleyes emoticon:)

On a more positive note: "big up" to Oxfam for helping the Ethiopian Government to take on Starbucks in Ethiopian coffee farmers' (IMO completely justified) attempt to retain intellectual property rights over Ethiopian names.

I particularly like the element of self criticism in many Oxfam reports. International development is appallingly difficult, but you would never guess this from the reports of many charities.

Luke FitzHerbert