Easy-peasy fundraising for CWDF?

[BlueStringPudding]

This is one for the purse-holders and admins: 

 

Does CWDF have a charity number?

Asking because Ecclesiastical is running its annual draw to give small grants to charities throughout a chunk of December. All it takes is for one (or better still, lots) of us to nominate CWDF to be in with a chance:

https://movementforgood.com/12days/#nominateACharity

 

If we don't have a registered  charity number, they also accept nominations for not-for-profit organisations and community interest groups. We just need to know the "formal" name of CWDF as an organisation, and which of their categories we fall into.  It's easy money, unlike with most other funding organisations.  

 

Perhaps the purse holders here would like to take a look at the link above, and start a thread encouraging us all to nominate CWDF, giving us the correct details to put in when we nominate? 

 

I know a few websites and small community groups that have benefited from their grants, so I thought it might help with forum running costs.

[Pie Eater]

Good idea.

[David Mack]

I don't think this is appropriate. CWDF is not in any sense a charitable enterprise deserving funding from such sources. We are simply a group of folks who get to chat about things related to (and completely unrelated to) canals.

The latest post from our treasurer shows that our finances are in a healthy state with income exceeding expenditure. That income comes in the main from those members who contribute small sums to the group, knowing that all are welcome to join and to contribute to the discussions, whether or not they choose to contribute financially.

There are other, more deserving, causes out there for Ecclesiastical's funding.

[David Schweizer]

3 hours ago, David Mack said:

I don't think this is appropriate. CWDF is not in any sense a charitable enterprise deserving funding from such sources. We are simply a group of folks who get to chat about things related to (and completely unrelated to) canals.

The latest post from our treasurer shows that our finances are in a healthy state with income exceeding expenditure. That income comes in the main from those members who contribute small sums to the group, knowing that all are welcome to join and to contribute to the discussions, whether or not they choose to contribute financially.

There are other, more deserving, causes out there for Ecclesiastical's funding.

 

I am sure you are correct. I doubt very much that CWDF is, or even could be, a Registered Charity with a Charity Number. It may be eligible for Charitable Status, which affords certain Tax benefits, but even that status would require a constitution and an Annual General Meeting to which all members must be invited. I could be wrong, but if I am, I would be interested  to see the application details, and the minutes of the Trustee's meetings.

 

 

Edited December 6, 2021 by David Schweizer
spelling correction

[BEngo]

CWDF is not currently a charity.  As far as I know Daniel has never considered it.  I think it would be very difficult to make a successful application, particularly since the site is the responsibility ofq Daniel personally. 

 

As it is we are solvent and, overall, members donations continue to be adequate to pay the Bills.  I last reported finances at the end of July (link above in David M's post) and will do so at the end of December.  In the meanwhile if any member has a burning finances question I will try to answer it.

N

[MrsM]

I was involved in setting up a cancer support charity some years ago that started as a Facebook group. It was a lot of work and the reporting regulations for charities are pretty tough.

 

[David Schweizer]

10 hours ago, MrsM said:

I was involved in setting up a cancer support charity some years ago that started as a Facebook group. It was a lot of work and the reporting regulations for charities are pretty tough.

 

 

Yes they are.  Part of my job involved advising small voluntary Youth Groups on how to achieve Charitable Status, the constitutional aims and objectives have to be worded in a very specific way to achieve this, something which most people would be totally unaware of.

[doratheexplorer]

Being granted charitable status requires fullfilling quite strict criteria.  I'd be very surprised if CWDF was in any way eligable.  In fact I'd be surprised if any charity existed which was entirely in digital form and did no 'real world' work.  You'd have to make a case for the educational aspects of the site, i.e. informing boaters.  But to do that you'd first have to demonstrate that the educators were qualified in some way and that the outcome of that education would benefit society.

[Mad Harold]

What would CWF do with extra money?

[tree monkey]

Just to point this bit out

 

"If we don't have a registered  charity number, they also accept nominations for not-for-profit organisations and community interest groups"

 

 

Just to point this bit out

 

"If we don't have a registered  charity number, they also accept nominations for not-for-profit organisations and community interest groups"

 

 

[doratheexplorer]

2 hours ago, tree monkey said:

Just to point this bit out

 

"If we don't have a registered  charity number, they also accept nominations for not-for-profit organisations and community interest groups"

 

 

Just to point this bit out

 

"If we don't have a registered  charity number, they also accept nominations for not-for-profit organisations and community interest groups"

 

 

Oh yes.  I'd overlooked that.  Maybe then?...

[tree monkey]

46 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

Oh yes.  I'd overlooked that.  Maybe then?...

Honestly I don't know if the forum needs the cash, I suppose it's an avenue that could be followed if Dan wants.

 

Plus I have a certain amount of self interest in showing BSP some support 

 

[Kiwidad]

13 minutes ago, tree monkey said:

 

Plus I have a certain amount of self interest in showing BSP some support 

 

A very wise move munky 

[doratheexplorer]

If Dan wanted to raise revenue he could allow some very limited advertising.  I quite like that the site is advert free though, it's a real rarity online.

[tree monkey]

24 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

If Dan wanted to raise revenue he could allow some very limited advertising.  I quite like that the site is advert free though, it's a real rarity online.

With you 100% on the lack of advertising

[BEngo]

6 hours ago, doratheexplorer said:

If Dan wanted to raise revenue he could allow some very limited advertising.  I quite like that the site is advert free though, it's a real rarity online.

Daniel holds views about accepting commercial advertising on the Forum.  They could be described as firmly held, if serious understatement is your thing. 

 

Should we, in the future, be strapped for cash I have little doubt that, as we have previously done (albeit not for a while), Daniel would advise the forum members and seek their help.

 

N

[DHutch]

When I took 

On 10/12/2021 at 15:31, BEngo said:

Daniel holds views about accepting commercial advertising on the Forum.  They could be described as firmly held,...

Ha! I guess so.

 

When I took this site on from Jon many years ago, he was of the opinion that it should as so far as possible be run as it is now, free at the point of use, and without advertisements. and while I am sure he would support changing that if it was well supported and or the only practical way of retaining the forum in a practical way, as the is yet to be the case we proudly remain free to use and free from adverts. Certainly I have no plans to use the forum to generate personal profit.

 

Given we are bless with generous members who give their own time and money towards the running of the site, and the software and hosting costs remain manageable and in line with donations, so long as that continues we will remain free to use and advert free.

 

That said, the site does cost time and money time to run, and we are always option to new funding options.

[DHutch]

Obviously a bit slow on this, nominations closed and cash awarded.

 

Certainly an interesting idea, and CWDF would not turn its nose up at £1000 obviously, however for classification, we are not a registered charity and as above I think it would be highly unlikely the additional paperwork and ongoing scrutiny would be viable for the benefits over an above our current status as an informal non-for-profit entity.

 

Thanks for bring it to our attention, and feel free to PM/tag me about this sort of thing if it comes up again.

 

 

Daniel