Autism Awareness - funded research

I couldn't agree more Longman....It's preposterous, it truly is. All this money floating about getting squandered on research, lectures, campaigns, meetings, award ceremonies etc.. I have proven that with the budget NAS has it would be very very easy to do something worthwhile rather than just squander it - re my posting of 10th May this year - to which nobody from NAS can offer any reasoning why this would not be possible.

Quote-

92 million pounds is a phenomenal amount of money,where is it going - why does NAS think that having posh offices, meetings, speeches, award ceremonies, campaigns, research, 26 executives etc ect are of any benefit to those with ASD ? They are of no benefit at all and the only reason they do this is because they are all good 'cover' for lining their own pockets.

Here's what could be done with 92 million pounds.

That amount of money could buy a huge autism centre in 50 towns and cities around the UK and staff them with 10 full time staff - more than enough people to have daily courses, events, help, day centre etc...

Lets exagerrate beyond all proportions and say 50 million was spent on 50 centres, then each centre had 10 full time staff at £20,000 each (200,000 x 50 = 10 million) - now another 200,000 on each centre for supplies/decorating, furniture and office equipment,computers - this still only comes to 80 million and gives each centre 4,000 per week running costs.

Property 50m

Staff 10x50x20 = 10m

Supplies/decorating/equipment/furniture = 50 x 200,000 = 10m

Bills = 50 x 200,000 = 10m

Remember this is a gross exaggeration, and also the next year there won't be these costs because the property is all paid for.

Every single person in the UK with an ASD will be a short distance away from help, facilities, being lonely etc...

___________________________

Isn't this the way to help people with Autism ?

___________________________

If I set up a charity to feed the homeless and was given £5000 in donations then shouldn't most of that money go to buy food and pay for people to cook and deliver that food so that those the money is aimed at and raised for benefit directly from those donations ?

In the case of NAS it's as if they say 'right we've got £5000 lets have some meetings and conferences so we can talk about how we are going to feed the homeless, of course we need nice offices and we all need to get paid very handsomely for our services as well.'

You don't need to be a mathematical genius to work out that with this kind of structure then the money left in the pot to pay for the actual objectives of the charity diminishes.

Of course infrastructure is vital but it has to be accountable. Those at the top of NAS have been shown to have no morals or ethics by creaming off huge salaries so how can we have any trust in what they are doing on the whole ?

Corruption starts at the top, if those at the top are corrupt then you cannot have any trust in what that organisation is doing because they are the ones running that organisation.

If you look closely you will see whats' really happening. The chief executives salary of £140,00 has risen by £40,000 in 2 years, thats 40% - for this to happen means other executives have to vote, this raises further questions on morals because this is by no means morally acceptable.

To put it simply - Those at the top of NAS are pigs in a trough and you can't tell a pig in a trough to only eat a certain amount - it's no different to what has happened with the banks.

I couldn't agree more Longman....It's preposterous, it truly is. All this money floating about getting squandered on research, lectures, campaigns, meetings, award ceremonies etc.. I have proven that with the budget NAS has it would be very very easy to do something worthwhile rather than just squander it - re my posting of 10th May this year - to which nobody from NAS can offer any reasoning why this would not be possible.

Quote-

92 million pounds is a phenomenal amount of money,where is it going - why does NAS think that having posh offices, meetings, speeches, award ceremonies, campaigns, research, 26 executives etc ect are of any benefit to those with ASD ? They are of no benefit at all and the only reason they do this is because they are all good 'cover' for lining their own pockets.

Here's what could be done with 92 million pounds.

That amount of money could buy a huge autism centre in 50 towns and cities around the UK and staff them with 10 full time staff - more than enough people to have daily courses, events, help, day centre etc...

Lets exagerrate beyond all proportions and say 50 million was spent on 50 centres, then each centre had 10 full time staff at £20,000 each (200,000 x 50 = 10 million) - now another 200,000 on each centre for supplies/decorating, furniture and office equipment,computers - this still only comes to 80 million and gives each centre 4,000 per week running costs.

Property 50m

Staff 10x50x20 = 10m

Supplies/decorating/equipment/furniture = 50 x 200,000 = 10m

Bills = 50 x 200,000 = 10m

Remember this is a gross exaggeration, and also the next year there won't be these costs because the property is all paid for.

Every single person in the UK with an ASD will be a short distance away from help, facilities, being lonely etc...

___________________________

Isn't this the way to help people with Autism ?

___________________________

If I set up a charity to feed the homeless and was given £5000 in donations then shouldn't most of that money go to buy food and pay for people to cook and deliver that food so that those the money is aimed at and raised for benefit directly from those donations ?

In the case of NAS it's as if they say 'right we've got £5000 lets have some meetings and conferences so we can talk about how we are going to feed the homeless, of course we need nice offices and we all need to get paid very handsomely for our services as well.'

You don't need to be a mathematical genius to work out that with this kind of structure then the money left in the pot to pay for the actual objectives of the charity diminishes.

Of course infrastructure is vital but it has to be accountable. Those at the top of NAS have been shown to have no morals or ethics by creaming off huge salaries so how can we have any trust in what they are doing on the whole ?

Corruption starts at the top, if those at the top are corrupt then you cannot have any trust in what that organisation is doing because they are the ones running that organisation.

If you look closely you will see whats' really happening. The chief executives salary of £140,00 has risen by £40,000 in 2 years, thats 40% - for this to happen means other executives have to vote, this raises further questions on morals because this is by no means morally acceptable.

To put it simply - Those at the top of NAS are pigs in a trough and you can't tell a pig in a trough to only eat a certain amount - it's no different to what has happened with the banks.