Skip to content

Canadian Urbanism Uncovered

“We can’t afford to do business this way”

Read more articles by

Toronto-based think tank the Wellesley Institute has published a landmark report on the administrative burden felt by community organizations that rely on government, private and third sector grants to fund their work. The name of the report, “We can’t afford to do business this way,” sums up the findings quite nicely.

Noting a number of highly publicised funding scandals in the public sector, the Wellesley Institute says that the not-for-profit sector has been hit hardest through strict reporting requirements meant to create greater accountability in the distribution of tax and donor dollars. The cost of never-ending paperwork is, according to the report, approximately 11% of the average organization’s financial resources and 44% of its staff time.

“Community-based nonprofit organizations are believed by both funders and the Canadian public to be in closer touch and have better reach into their communities. They are seen as having less bureaucracy and are therefore more flexible and responsive than government or larger organizations could ever be. They are widely viewed as cost effective,” says the report. “The current grant process, however, works against these agency strengths and actively prevents agencies from effectively serving their communities and delivering effective, responsive services.”

Sitting on the board of directors of two small community-based organizations — one serving youth, the other homeless and socially isolated people — I can attest to the strain administrative requirements put on our already over-worked staff. While accountability is integral when we are working with tax dollars, there comes a point when more effort is being spent on administration than on service. I think we’re, generally speaking, at that point and this report confirms it.

Another key gap in non-profit sector grants is that very, very few granters provide specific money to do administration, including administration of their own administrative requirements. Although it’s hard to justify creating any additional bureaucracy, this method of funding forces organizations to do creative — though legitimate — accounting. For example, paying for a bookkeeper is next to impossible to get funding for but necessary to ensure that accounting is done properly. With that reality, an organization may pay for the cost of a bookkeeper through small portions of several grants.

We can’t afford to do business this way makes many key findings in seven general areas. Findings include:

  • -Funders, large and small, rarely give community organizations any latitude to adapt or adjust programs and finances to meet local conditions and changing circumstances.
  • -Grant applications tend to be overly long, complicated, and difficult to complete.
  • -The cumulative administrative burden on agencies is all consuming.
  • -Multi-year grants, as currently designed, do not solve the administrative burden.
  • -Grant management, of necessity, takes priority over other management responsibilities.

The Wellesley Institute report concludes that the cost of not acting to curtail the administrative burden on the not-for-profit sector will be less value for money, less effective services, reduced innovation, and, worst of all, “weaker, disconnected and fractious communities.”

The report is on the agenda of today’s Community Development & Recreation Committee meeting. Hopefully this will spur City Council to re-evaluate the administrative burden the City puts on the agencies it funds to ensure that a more appropriate balance is struck between administration and accountability. With a better system, taxpayer money will go further and a new — better — standard will be available for other levels of government, the private sector and third sector to replicate.

Photo courtesy asai22222

Recommended

15 comments

  1. Thanks for the post Adam – this is a really important issue that often stays below the radar. My sister used to run a community organization in Montreal, and she noted many of the same problems and pressures.

    Another problem is that a lot of grants are only given for “new” projects, rather than to continue existing ones, so small organizations are pushed into continually starting new projects rather than consolidating their successful core work.

  2. love the pic adam, does anybody remember “tubes” in their electronics?I feel old….but adam it’s time to implement the office of the comptroller this will allow much of the burden to be removed.Politicians are always looking to take care of their “friends” aka voters and supporters yet the good people who really make the difference in our society are just pushed aside.Take the business of the homeless,I am appalled that the amount of money given out to organizations that are supposed to solve that problem hasn’t.OK I will save it for the next election.There goes my five minute deputation.

  3. George, you bore me. The ‘business’ of the homeless? My friend, if this is a business, it is the worst business in history. People serving the homeless are working for low wages with some of society’s most challenged people — people who don’t want help, don’t know they need help, or feel like they’re beyond help — and are under the most difficult stresses and are in truly dire circumstances. The people they serve have been cut off from everything — from food to heat. These people in the ‘homeless industry’ do the work that frankly, I doubt you’d have the stomach or patience to do.

    We all know you’re a candidate — so what are you going to do to fix the problem when you’re done blaming everyone else? Spend less time whining, and more time talking about how you’d HELP PEOPLE, which is what you’re supposed to do when you get into office.

    Stick that in your deputation.

  4. well actually I did work at the food bank with Gerrard Kennedy.It was tough to see people treated like trash.But we were all volunteers,it was a thankless task but it worked and has grown considerably.And without government funding I might add.I still remember Mike Harris coming down to try and takeover the food bank and make it an arm of the government.Well Gerrard didn’t take that to lightly he decided to enter politics and make a difference.I have the same goals to make a difference, and yes I can solve the problems this city faces.The government talked a lot and did little but hire friends with union wages that did little for those in trouble.So please don’t bore me while I am having fun here with those who take tax dollars for their own benefit when the people who deserve those funds struggle daily.

  5. You didn’t answer Bored though george. You just said some unsubstantiated stuff. Please don’t do that. Answer Bored when you get a chance — what would you do, other than say you can solve it. Specifics, I think that’s what Bored wants.

  6. George, are you saying that there should be no government support for people who are homeless beyond cutting cheques to them? You have to realize that supporting people who have multiple and complex needs can’t be done through cheques and a volunteer system funded by donations. (What’s next, making Toronto Fire into a volunteer fire department?) You need people who can address mental health issues, substance use issues, the transition from street to home, life skills and employment training. These aren’t magically addressed, they require the support of professionals and that isn’t free, nor should it be.

    You also talk about hiring friends (do you have proof of cronyism within the social services sector?) and union wages but there are very few, if any, community-based agencies that serve homeless populations and are unionized.

    So, George, if you think you can do it better, show us your plan. But don’t make unsubstantiated claims that degrade the character of some of Toronto’s hardest working and most dedicated public service workers — the people who help Toronto’s homeless.

  7. First of all I don’t like the huge bill toronto is stuck with,I believe over $800 million now for social services and downloaded services.Yes Adam I agree that there are many issues relating to mental health issues.CAMH has been wonderful in addressing those issues considering the funding they receive.
    Years ago the idea in toronto was to give a “hand up ” and not a “hand out” for people in trouble.Many individuals were offered a job on the city to take care of their needs.
    Adam could you show me a public service worker that isn’t unionized?You say I degrade the character of these individuals.If these connunity based agencies,which draw a substantial amount of tax dollars has been working so well, why do we have a problem in this city?I would be happy to give you my plan but not in a “five minute” deposition.So not to be smart but maybe elect me and watch how I solve the problems instead of phishing me for solutions.

  8. As the saying goes, George, the emperor has no clothes. You have a web site, post your plan on your web site. I’ll be happy to post a link to it here on Spacing Toronto. For someone who says he believes so ardently in accountability, to say “elect me and then I’ll show you,” wreaks of hypocrisy. No one in their right mind would give their vote to someone like that.

    Moving on…You seem to be confusing people employed by the government and people employed by community-based agencies that are funded through a mixture of government, third sector and private sector grants/donations. I can’t actually think of a single agency that serves people who are homeless that is unionized. The various Eva’s shelters aren’t, Seaton House isn’t, Na Me Res isn’t, Sistering isn’t, Sketch isn’t, Youth Link isn’t, Wychwood Open Door isn’t. But your tactic of throwing the question back at me was cute, is that how you would treat your constituents when they ask a question you can’t answer?

    Anyone who has looked at the issue knows that the most sustainable solution to homelessness is an adequate stock of affordable housing combined with social services to assist those who need it and adquate income security mechanisms. Right now we have a bare bones social service sector that struggles to meet demand because money is so tight, a massive backlog of affordable housing (with little on the way, thanks, in part, to your friend Gerrard’s government), social assistance that has been slashed in real and actual dollars over the past decade, and unemployment insurance that doesn’t protect the workers who need it most.

    Clearly there’s a role for everyone to play here but to blame the federal and provincial government’s unwillingness to act on the social service providers in Toronto who put themselves on the frontlines is completely uncalled for.

    And not to burst your bubble, George, but CAMH receives government funding. Surely you don’t think they’re just taking “tax dollars for their own benefit,” do you?

  9. Thank you adam for at least discussing this serious problem.During the elction there was no discussion about this at all.I was given a 60 second moment to address the situation during one of the arranged debates.

    We aren’t going to solve anything here at all.The mess is still with “the hall” and they control the strings of power, so don’t worry about me at all.The solutions are clear and easy but there are those at the top of the NDP who care more about being in power than actually helping people.
    Take for example “daycare” it is a central problem for those in need.I helped work on a national daycare program that took more then ten years to bring to fruition and was finally being implemented before our favorite leader Jack Layton decide that bringing down a government was more important than making sure daycare was guaranteed to the parents who really needed it.Now there is a “struggle” again.It seems those like joe pantalone, david miller benefit from having these problems not solved.So please realize I’n not the enemy here. I believe in helping, OK!

    You must agree that it isn’t working now,and all three levels of government and all three parties aren’t doing the job to help the situation.By the way I never have taken any benefit for the work I have done for these goals.As I have said many times I can solve the problems but not on the sidelines,you know that.

  10. The mess, Mr. Sawision, is not just with “the hall.” It’s with those who want an end to homelessness, but are unwilling to implement the solutions. We don’t need new ideas on this one, we already know what must be done.

    But we might need your leadership — if you have the courage to give it. It wouldn’t be easy. You’d swallow your pride, discard all hope of glory or reward, and start at the streetcorner, where Toronto’s homeless are living day after day.

    You’d make sure they got the immediate help they needed (read: food, bed, warmth), that they got something to show them it was worth having hope again (read: mental care, addiction treatment, a shelter bed, anyone who didn’t treat them like trash), and a long-term solution (rent-assisted living, new affordable housing, job training, etc.).

    It won’t be easy. Ignorant self-interested homeowners and residents associations will tell you it’s ruining the neighbourhood. Bloated politicos will tell you you’re wasting money on the “homelesness industry.” The homeless won’t trust you — they’ve no reason to trust anyone.

    But you’d persevere and challenge your neighbours to allow these facilities and programs to take place not just in our city, but maybe on your very street.

    You’d stop looking for a way to blame the NDP because you got beat by Joe Pantalone (your example on childcare is a farce — Steven Harper proudly destroyed any hope of a national childcare plan with his cashback plan — you’re probably the only person in the country who thinks it can be blamed on Jack).

    I’m waiting for you to shake off your jealousy and contempt for the people who govern, whether you agree with them or not. You can’t chastise politicians for being in power, then say “I can solve the problems, but not on the sidelines.”

    I’m still bored by you, and I’m still waiting for a solution. I triple dog dare you.

  11. been there done that, I already do council the homeless and with some success.I have always worked in the “background” I don’t crave the attention and accolades of power, in fact quite the contrary.I’m not here to just mutter and blame but to point out the shortcomings of politicians who made pledges to the people who elected them and then seem to sit back and just not try implementing what they promised.

    In fact the “national childcare program” was in effect before the last federal election.In fact I applauded Jack Layton and Paul Martin for working together successfully. It was quite impressive.And yes Jack was warned and knew the implications of bringing down the government.Stephen Harper didn’t make any secret of what he would do to that program and yet Jack went ahead and, well the rest is history.

    So yes I do try solutions and then those who do crave power like Jack or Joe do reverse the good work of others. So what is your point?

    So we are now in the school yard “I triple dare you”?We spend close to $800 million a year on social assistance in this city,what am I missing?There is still a problem and the solution is to better use that money to help people.
    Firstly we have to get out of the landloard business,the city has the worst track record of being a landloard and has the highest amount of outstanding work orders by the building department.The shelter system must be revamped,almost every homeless person tells me they fear going to shelters because of the inherent danger and lack of supervision for their “wordly goods”.You would be surprised what people hold onto when you have nothing.Contact with those in need is very important.
    In one of the debates with Rosario Marchese a distressed woman in the audience verbally attacked Rosario for not assisting her when she needed help.I turned to Rosario and asked him what the problem was,he replied that “she isn’t well”.After the debate I spoke to this lady who was very upset yet wasn’t clear as to what her problem was, she was crying and tense.I looked at her then offered her a big hug.I was touched, she was in trouble but couldn’t articulate her dilema.After a long conversation and a few phone calls without getting into her personal information she is at least getting the assistance that she needs.

    Sometimes its the little things that count,the attention to detail that is easily lost by government.Not everybody is mentally ill,people do get frustrated and many times do need to at least be heard.And it starts with respect and a due diligence to use tax dollars to stop that endless need for assistance.Remember many immigrants came here with just the shirt on their backs and have contributed greatly to this country and have built a good life here.People in need of assistance can be directed on that road we just have to give our elected officials the proverbial “kick in the ass” to do so.Maybe when they have the community meetings they can start listening to the people.

    Okay now I’m back to the sidelines working as usual.Hope I wasn’t to boring for u, never thought of myself as an entertainer.

  12. Wow. Mr. Sawisons political platform does not really line up with his writings here. I think he’s doing much more damage to any campaign he has planned then he realises.
    I mean, unionized homeless workers? That’s basically just crazy talk.
    Both my parents work with the homeless, and neither of them are in anyway unionized, nor is anyone they work with, nor is anyone they’ve ever worked with. It’s silly to even think of.
    The closest I can even fathom is perhaps some nurses, particularily those working through Public Health may, indeed, be unionized. But Public Health is a blanket organization that works with many groups across the city, not directly with the homeless and has done so for a very, very long time.
    My mother was a nurse, and she is in fact, not currently unionized, as she finds hereself in the role of an admnistrator, dealing with some of the bureaucracy outlined in this very article.

  13. George, $800 million isn’t the cost of providing services to assist people who are homeless. $729 million is what the entire roster of downloaded programs comes to. Shelter, Housing and Support’s budget is somewhere in the $225-250 million range. While that is hardly an insignificant amount of money, it isn’t remotely close to what you’re suggesting.

    And, believe it or not George, people who aren’t in unions also make money. Because “soft” services are mostly based on person-to-person contact, labour costs are always going to be a significant factor in delivering those services, regardless of whether they work in a unionized workplace.