Doubling of grants announced 1 day after contribution rate increase?

After writing “3 self-help groups need to increase contributions?” on 31 August, in response to the news on the same day (“Self-help groups ask better-off to chip in more”, Sunday Times,  Aug 31) – we were really surprised to read in the news the next day (1 September) – “Govt to double grants for Sinda, Eurasian Association” (Straits Times, Sep 1).

It states that “The dollar-for-dollar matching grants for the Singapore Indian Development Association (Sinda) and Eurasian Association (EA) will be doubled so that they can help more families. Sinda will receive up to $3.4 million this year, up from $1.7 million previously, while the EA will receive up to $400,000, up from $200,000.

Chinese self-help group Chinese Development Assistance Council (CDAC) will receive a one-off $10 million grant for 2014 to 2018. The last time it received a government grant was also a one-off grant of $10 million for 1992 to 1997.

The matching grant for Malay self-help groups Yayasan Mendaki, the Association of Muslim Professionals and Malay Muslim organisations was already raised from $4 million to $5 million earlier this year.”

Increase contributions because have deficits?

Don’t you find it rather odd that just one day after the self-help groups announced the increase in the contribution rates by as much as 329% due to deficits – the next day – the Government announces a doubling of the grants to them?

Govt pretend didn’t know?

You mean the Government did not know that the self-help groups were going to increase the contribution rates?

Or is it that the Government is so efficient that it decided within a day to double their funding?

Why wasn’t the increase in funding announced at the same time?

Of course, it may really be rather odd to announce the doubling of grants because then how does one justify the increase in the contribution rates?

Is it kind of like just a show (wayang)?

No more deficits – huge surpluses instead?

Let’s try to analyse the funding increase’s impact on the cashflows of the self-help groups, based on their current revenue and expenditure.

For Sinda, we estimate that the doubling of their grant to $3.4 million may cover their deficit of $600,000 for about 3 years.

For the Eurasian Association which did not have a deficit – the doubling of their funding to $400,000 may increase their annual surplus to $396,000.

For CDAC, the $10 million extra grant for 4 years, may be able to cover its annual deficit of $1.4 million for the next 4 years to become an annual surplus of $1.1 million instead.

Reason to increase contributions still valid?

So, is there a need to increase the contribution rates announced the day before (31 August) for even people who earn as little as $2,501?

So many new fund raising initiatives?

In this connection, there seems to be so many new fund raising programmes like “New professorship: Malays/Muslims ‘to take lead‘” (Sunday Times, August 31) – which said “Several people had voiced concerns over how fund-raising would be carried out, which Dr Yaacob said were “totally misplaced”.

He stressed that most such sponsorships typically involve the Government providing matching grants for funds raised, rather than an initial sum.

“I don’t see it as something unusual,””

Charity $ strain on VWOs?

– Don’t they realise the strain that all these may have on the fund raising of existing Voluntary Welfare Organisations (VWOs), as arguably, the charity dollar is not infinite?

$61m drop in charity donations?

After all, isn’t the drop in charity donations by about $61 million or 6%  last year possibly an indication that some people may be “fatigued” by the incessant “pay and pay” more and more in practically everything?

Give money, then plan or plan then give money?

Finally, this one may be the strangest of it all – “These grants will help self-help groups run more programmes” – but there don’t seem to be any information as to what these “more programmes” are, or how many more people may be helped by the existing programmes.

Shouldn’t the normal thing be to plan what new programmes or expanded programmes you need, do the funding requirements, and then give the funding, instead of what appears to be the other way round this time?

Or is it all just a show (wayang)?

S Y Lee and Leong Sze Hian