NKF-that can of worms has already been opened!
-
The truth is kidney dialysis centres in Canada, Guangzhou, Malaysia are much cheaper than NKF Singapore by at least 50%.
It tells us that NKF Singapore provides overly expensive dialysis treatment.
If it can't bring costs down to those levels immediately, it should not be supported financially and should cease operation.
In its place is a new foundation that can deliver similar cost structures and patient care services like those in Canada, Guangzhou or Malaysia.
It's that simple. Why keep NKF Singapore (with its high prices) around?
-
too bad many singaporeans just dont see it that way and continue to donate. the least they should do is divert their donation to KDF.
-
The organisation still need to pay the fat cow management on the top.
Some one have to pay for the rent, utilities bills for the high class building in Kim Keat.
They have to support the publishing firms that print the pamplets.
They have to support the Mediacorp for making drama series.
They have to save up some cash to save the ex-committee members if any one is kana charged. (In this case, I dun think it is possible as Mrs Peanut is involved)
They have to pay the auditing firm for doing the investigation.
They need to pay people to clean up the building.
So, with so much expenses incurred, the reserves will never be enough.
They have to estimate a HUGE increase of kidney paitents in Singapore.
Then, the cycle will start again.
Since no one is arrested or punished from the last fiasco. -
That's the downside of ignorance and apathy.Originally posted by dragg:too bad many singaporeans just dont see it that way and continue to donate. the least they should do is divert their donation to KDF.
-
it is hardly ignorance.Originally posted by fudgester:That's the downside of ignorance and apathy.
after the big hoo-ha many still refused to accept the fact that something is seriously wrong with NKF.
i believe many, if not all donors are educated people with good income.
the reason given is always the patients need our help. doesnt donating to KDF also help kidney patients? -
Is NKF really sweeped clean?
No action against duari n his gang. What does it tell?
No transparency in their fat pay when it is a charity.
Look at those new ppl in the board of directors
If wayang, should also act more real -
i think they did not do enough too.
everything is made-believe.
as long as they keep the reserves i feel we shouldnt donate anymore.
why do singaporeans need to donate so they have reserves to last more than 7 years? i am sure many of us dont even have savings that can last 7 years in case we lose our jobs.
-
Has the full audit report come out yet?
I thought it was supposed to come out soon in mid December?
Yes? No? -
What Dr Ho Yew Kee mentioned in the ST forum have some valid reasons. In Singapore it is money which makes more money. The rich are mopping up more money and the poor are definitely getting poorer! That 200 over millions are “BIG MONEY” and if they sell the NKF headquarter, it can easily raked in another 100-200 millions! If this amount is to be invested wisely, the kidney patients may use up only its investment gains and leave the capital untouched for many donkey years to come! Looks like the local authority may not encourage it as they want its citizens to commit to share the medical costs of their own sickness together with others if possible! That was where the Managed Health Care (MHS) and many other health insurance schemes came in and you have to pay part of your own sickness in order not to abuse it! Moreover many are encourage to stay fit so that you do not burden the state!
It is highly unlikely that they will bring all the durians to the court as it may open up more cans of worms through its proceeding! Eventually more high power peanuts planters will be implicated and it may not be good for Singapore after all! -
Today's NKF's responsed in the ST forum to yesterday's letter by Mr. Cheong, is a joke, only fools will continue to donate to them.
"---i do not have an account of the standard of dialysis care in canada and china---"
"---i thank mr. cheong for his feedback. unfortunately, there are numerous inaccuracies---"
surely he is not serious? -
Summary of 2004 NKF accounts
Revenue from dialysis operations 24million
Cost to run dialysis operations 27 million
NKF patients only receive 3 million subsidy a year or about 11 percent.
This is to say bulk of the donations went to the peanut pay checks and reserves.
The NKF failed to do what it promise to do - Help patients financially by subsidising the patients.They took so much donor funds but only subside 11 perecent of the expenses and paid themselves millions dollar salaries for doing a good job by raising money with huge expense ratios.
Cost of Fund generating activites
Donation and telepoll revenues 46 million
Expenses 25 million
The NKF charity shows may have expense ratios of close to 50 percent
note - Life drops is excluded because they are donors already donating from giro years before
Administrative costs 16 million
Of which 5 million is salary – 1.8 million to T.T durai
PR marketing education expense 12 million - staff cost 7 million
other activities 4 million
I wonder how durai can sleep soundly with a 1.8 million paycheck when the suffering patients are only getting 3 million
Was Davinder Singh 30 years estimation correct? – Judge for yourself -
The right thing to do when the public has spoken is to spend time, investigate and study to learn how others are doing it better and cheaply.Originally posted by claudetnt:Today's NKF's responsed in the ST forum to yesterday's letter by Mr. Cheong, is a joke, only fools will continue to donate to them.
"---i do not have an account of the standard of dialysis care in canada and china---"
"---i thank mr. cheong for his feedback. unfortunately, there are numerous inaccuracies---"
surely he is not serious?
The wrong thing to do is to spend time to quickly cast doubts, dismiss and shoot down what the public is raising without considering to investigate and study how others are able to deliver the service better than NKF.
We have the wrong man in the job.
-
Its not just one mans fault but also our very objective newspaper ranked 140th on press freedom.Originally posted by macjoe:The right thing to do when the public has spoken is to spend time, investigate and study to learn how others are doing it better and cheaply.
The wrong thing to do is to spend time to quickly cast doubts, dismiss and shoot down what the public is raising without considering to investigate and study how others are able to deliver the service better than NKF.
We have the wrong man in the job. -
thats why the solution is to read other newspaper like The Sun from UK....there's even topless woman inside(page 3,to be specific)Originally posted by kilua:Its not just one mans fault but also our very objective newspaper ranked 140th on press freedom. -
any idea why no one has mentioned the community chest coffers, the top guys salaries are just as much if not more than the NKF's TT durai ?
-
What?Originally posted by claudetnt:any idea why no one has mentioned the community chest coffers, the top guys salaries are just as much if not more than the NKF's TT durai ?
And open up another can of worms?
NOoooooo. -
Posted by Anonymous in Feedback Unit:
The problem is that after many years of contending with people over NKF reserve, the minister did not seem to be willing to back up what he said about NKF's reserve or need for big reserve. It is the minister's unwillingness to come out with true and transparent figure that perhaps caused the problem with NKF.
A recent forum posting from a reader justifies that the
NKF reserve can last 25 years and it is close to the
estimate mentioned in the NKF/SPH court case.
Again the current board of NKF has refused to clarify
how they have concluded that the reserve can last 6.5 years.
NKF just said that the reader's estimate is inaccurate and did not justify its own conclusion.
"We need public organistion to be transparent and justify every cent spent.
Similarly, we need govt to justify that foreigners are
not taking away jobs fron citizens with real data to prove.
Govt cannot make conclusion without real and transparent data.
We need job data on citizens,permanent residents and
foreign citizens.
Govt cannot lump citizens and permanent residents as
Singaporean residents and calculate the job data."
After the NKF's lack of transparency was finally exposed in the NKF/SPH court case, again it is the minister who tries to give the impression that he will not leave stone unturned to solve problems. However after a while he is the one who seems to change stand and now wants to mull over the same old problem with lack of transparency by the new NKF.
In other word the problem with NKF might not be NKF. It may be the minister. If he himself does not want to change the new NKF will also after the huha go back to the old practice of denying problem and not giving transparent information to the donating public.
The moral of the story is that if government minister is lacking transparency whether it is the old or new NKF or Mr. Gerald, there will continue to be the same thing - lacking transparency and "challenge me with another SPH suit if any one can". -
It is already "transparent" in NKF.
If the rest of the organisation, agency, company and holdings are "transparent", do you think you have the mood to work ?? -
Latest on the KPMG's audit findings:
KPMGÂ’s report on investigation into the National Kidney Foundation (NKF)
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1. In July 2005, when the new NKF Board took office, it commissioned KPMG to conduct an independent investigation into NKFÂ’s past practices. KPMG has completed its investigation and submitted its report to the NKF Board on Friday, 16 December 2005.
1.2. The full investigation into the past practices of the former NKF board and management revealed poor management practices and a lack of good governance of the NKF under its previous Board and management, and even questionable ethical conduct.
1.3. Over the past 5 months, the new NKF Board has taken active steps to improve governance and accountability, enhance transparency, reduce operating costs and improve patient care. On top of these, clear human resource and remuneration policies have been established and financial management strengthened to prevent abuse. The new Board recognizes that it is our moral imperative to manage the NKF in accordance to the principles of good governance, integrity and accountability to our donors, and will continue to improve the NKFÂ’s governance framework and management practices to regain the publicÂ’s confidence.
2 KEY KPMG FINDINGS AND FOLLOW UP BY THE NEW NKF
2.1 For the investigation, KPMG devoted a team of forty professionals and more than 10,000 man-hours in its investigation. It sought to address questions in nine key areas.
2.2. In its report, KPMG has highlighted major weaknesses within NKFÂ’s the governance framework. The new NKF Board is seeking legal advice on whether there were corporate practices which might have crossed the legal/regulatory line, and on the appropriate course of actions to be taken against the former NKF Directors/EXCO Members and others where applicable. NKF will have to be mindful of balancing the cost of any actions and the interest of the organisation.
2.3. In this press release, we assume that readers would have read the full KPMG report. Hence only salient information in the report will be highlighted for presentation.
2.4. The key KPMG findings are summarised below, together with the new NKF BoardÂ’s follow-up actions:
3. GOVERNANCE OF THE NKF
Q1: Whether there existed any deficiencies in control, oversight and independence relating to issues of governance of the NKF?
3.1. Function of Former Board versus the Executive Commitee
3.1.1. KPMG found that the former NKF Board delegated all powers to the Executive Committee, which in turn delegated most, if not all, powers to the former Chief Executive Officer, Mr TT Durai. The Board was largely an ineffective one, which resulted in the concentration of power and authority in Mr TT Durai.
3.1.2. The new NKF Board consists of a panel of eminent professionals who are experts in their respective fields. Their roles and responsibilities are clearly spelt out and well delineated from the executive management and staff. The Board has also formed 7 committees in charge of specific areas: Audit Committee, Finance Committee, Legal/Governance Committee, HR/Remuneration Committee, Investment Committee, Nomination Committee and Medical Committee.
3.1.3. The new Board and management have also revised the NKFÂ’s administration organization structure to achieve a higher standard of governance and accountability.
3.2. Human Resources
3.2.1. Under the former NKF management, the NKF did not have a formal remuneration policy nor a comprehensive HR policy on staff benefits, which led to the apparent arbitrary determination and awarding of promotions, salary increment, performance bonus and other discretionary payments.
3.2.2. Now, the NKF has new HR policies that contain clear guidelines covering all aspects of staff benefits and entitlements as well as HR processes. Some of these polices are already in force while others, like the new salary policy, will be introduced from 1 Jan 2006. When the salary policy is implemented, the NKF will have a clear salary and grade structure and therefore a progression path for its staff. It will define salary ranges, annual increments, performance payments and there will be defined processes.
3.3. Financial Management & Control
3.3.1. The former NKF Board had a Finance Committee, but was largely ineffective. KPMG found numerous breaches of stated purchasing policy and noted inadequacies in finance and accounting controls.
3.3.2. The new NKF Board has put in place a clear finance policy with checks and balances on approval limits and limits on cheque signatories. This will ensure proper and controlled processes for budgeting, purchasing, tenders, contract approvals and claims.
3.4. Disclosure & Transparency
3.4.1. The NKF BoardÂ’s Audit Committee was also found to be ineffective.
3.4.2. The new NKF Board will outsource its Internal Audit work to an independent CPA firm to ensure maximum impartiality. -
4. TRANSPARENCY AND ACCURACY OF NKF PUBLICATIONS AND STATISTICS
Q2: Whether the NKF made or caused to be made misleading claims as to patient numbers, patient subsidies and treatment costs?
4.1. KPMG found that figures relating to the number of kidney patients, patient subsidies and treatment costs were inflated or misleading in its press releases and fund raising promotional materials.
4.1.1. In the amount of funds that was raised and used for dialysis. KPMG found that based on the financial statements for the year ended 31 December 2003, approximately 10 cents out of every charity dollar went towards subsidizing patientsÂ’ direct treatment costs.
4.1.2. In the NKF’s Investment Report 2004, it was reported that “out of every dollar NKF raised in 2003, $0.52 went to our beneficiaries and programmes for the year,…”
4.2. The new NKF Board had, in a press conference and subsequent public disclosures, clarified a number of issues, including: patient numbers of the NKF, treatment costs and subsidy amounts per dialysis patient given by the NKF. Key statistics are now available online at its website www.nkfs.org/statistics.php. The public and donors can now obtain current information on the number of patients under the NKF dialysis programme, number of LifeDrop donors, the amount of donations collected and NKF expenses among other data.
4.2.2. Applying the same basis of calculation by KPMG, the new Board aims to increase the amount spent on dialysis in FY 2006 to be at least 41% of charity income. To achieve this, the NKF will focus on its core business and have stricter control over expenditure on support, ancillary and administrative activities.
4.2.3 Going forward, the new NKF Board plans to spend at least 70% of total expenses for the year on dialysis patients. With the trimming of staff and other administrative costs combined with the reduction in fund-raising expenses, the new NKF Board is confident of achieving its desired ratio.
2003 (‘000) 2004 2006 Budget
Dialysis 29,100 43% 30,800 35% 39,000 73%
Prevention 10,100 15% 12,350 14% 4,000 7%
Fund-raising 16,600 25% 28,020 32% 3,000 5%
Administration 10,800 17% 16,800 19% 8,000 15%
Total 66,600 100% 87,970 100% 54,000 100%
4.2.4. Under the new NKF Board, rebates given by drug companies with effect from (1 August 2005) have been passed on to patients.
5. ACCOUNTING AND FUND-RAISING PRACTICES
Q3: Whether there has been any accounting and/or fund-raising irregularities?
5.1. In the area of fund-raising and irregular accounting, KPMG found a number of areas lacking, including:
Compliance with the 30/70 rule. KPMG specifically looked at three fund-raising projects of NKF and found evidence of manipulation of the accounts, in order to comply with this rule.
5.2. The new NKF will paying closer attention to the way funds are raised and the methodology used. It has put in place proper financial management and controls, and will outsource its internal audit to an independent party. This will ensure impartial internal auditing, in particular its operational and accounting processes. The NKFÂ’s Audited Financial Accounts for 2004 now conforms, as far as possible, to the UK SORP 2005 standards, and the NKF will post all future Audited Financial Accounts online for greater transparency. -
it is very obvious.
they are trying to cover up.
huantangbuhuanyao. -
6. COMPENSATION OF MR TT DURAI
Q4: Whether Mr TT Durai was appropriately or properly compensated?
6.1. KPMG concluded that Mr TT Durai received much more remuneration whilst appearing to accept less than the full official proposed salaries in his 1995 and 1997 increments. KPMG found that in fact, Mr Durai received more remuneration from an ostensibly lower salary than if his salary had been increased.
6.2. NKF has now detailed HR policies relating to salary, annual increments and performance bonuses, benefits and allowances, leave and transport and travel allowances.
7. USE OF DONATIONS
Q5: Whether the NKF used donations and/or similar forms of donation income for extravagant or excessive spending?
7.1. Air Travel. KPMG listed numerous travel trips taken by Board members, senior volunteers and staff. Travel was frequent and while Business Class was permitted, they travelled on First Class where the fare was equivalent to the Business Class fare of Singapore Airlines, purchased in Singapore.
7.2. Clear HR policies are now in place with guidelines on air travel, subsistence allowance to be used by staff or senior volunteers when they were overseas on official business.
8. THIRD PARTY CONTRACTS
Q6: Whether there existed any errors or lapses in judgment in the entering of contacts with ostensible third parties?
8.1. The former NKF Board entered into a contract each with Forte Systems Inc, and Protonweb Solutions Pte Ltd, for two major projects, but neither companies contracted delivered satisfactory results to the NKF despite payments already made to them. These contracts were worth a total of $7.5 million ($3 million with Forte Systems and $4.5 million with Protonweb)
8.2. KPMGÂ’s report indicates that all members of the former NKF Executive Committee, including Mr TT Durai, took on a role akin to directorship.
8.3. The new NKF Board is of the view that in these circumstances, the former Directors/ExCO owed fiduciary duties to NKF, duties of loyalty and fidelity and the duty to take reasonable care in the management of the NKF. KPMGÂ’s report further indicates that at least some Executive Committee members fell short on many occasions. In terms of loss to NKF, it was the entry into and administration of the contracts with Forte and Protonweb that have had the most adverse impact. The terms of these contracts were unusual, and the attitudes of the ExCo members to the poor performance of these contracts were extraordinary. The new Board has sought legal advice and is considering action against the ExCo members in relation to these contracts.
8.4. NKF has terminated its contracts with Forte Systems and Protonweb Solutions and will attempt to recover payments it has made to them.
9. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Q7:Whether there existed any abuse of any actual or perceived conflict of interest?
9.1. KPMG found that several directors in the former NKF Board and key management personnel had interests in or were involved in companies who had business relationships with the NKF. Mr Pharis Aboobacker, a friend of TT Durai, was a recurrent figure in the business relationships between NKF and a number of companies
10. NKF RESERVES
Q8: Whether the NKFÂ’s reserves are adequate in respect of its current programmes and if so, for how many years?
10.1 Based on different assumptions, KPMGÂ’s calculation of the NKFÂ’s reserves ranged from 2.35 years to 11.9 years. The set of assumptions that was most comparable to the set used by the NKF in its own calculations yielded a reserve figure of 6.6 years.
10.2 This figure is very close to the calculation by the new NKF Board of 6.7 years, as announced at a press conference held on 8 December 2005.
10.3 Whilst it is a comfortable position to have a reserve of 6.7 years, the new NKF Board is mindful that its patients are being cared for periods lasting more than 10 years. One patient has been with the NKF for 23 years now. The outcome of fund-raising efforts for any one year is always hard to predetermine. Thus, the ideal state is to have a reserve to cover 10 years of operating costs.
10.4 The new NKF Board has stated that it will immediately start on working to increase its support base. Even if new supporters each pledged $1 a month, it will provide the comfort of knowing that the support base exists and can be asked to help if there is a need to raise more money, such as for large capital expenditure in renewing existing dialysis centers or the building of new ones.
10.5 Our aim is to raise enough donations each year to at least breakeven and if possible, to provide a modest surplus to top up the reserves
10.6 The new NKF Board has no plans for any mega charity shows to rake in large sums of money. It will focus on its Life Drops programme, pledge cards and one-off individual and corporate donations. The new NKF will engage all these donors and ensure that they are regularly updated on the performance of NKF, operationally and financially.
11. REGULATORY OVERSIGHT OF THE NKF
Q9: Whether there was adequate regulatory supervision over the operations and activities of the NKF?
11.1. KPMG has made the following observations:
11.1.1. That while the Commissioner of Charities forms the central plank for the regulatory oversight of charities, there are various other bodies that participate in an assortment of roles which result in a sometimes confusing regulatory environment. The regulators play different roles, and not all are concerned with the welfare of charity beneficiaries, true owners of charities and their funds, or the management of the affairs of a charity. While some bodies have the power to initiate an investigation into the management of a charity, none did so in the case of the NKF, in the absence of formal complaint.
11.2. There is no straightforward answer to the question as to whether and which of the regulatory bodies is responsible for more extensive audit of NKF. The position of the new NKF Board is that it is the Boards of charitable organizations that must be ultimately responsible for good governance and effective management of their respective charities.
12. THE NEW NKF GOING FORWARD
12.1. The NKF is committed to set high standards of transparency and accountability, and will continue to keep donors and public informed on developments at NKF. Our fund raising strategies have been reviewed and there are checks and balances in place to ensure that donorsÂ’ money are well utilized to benefit patients.
12.2. Another top priority is to ensure that needy patientsÂ’ care and existing clinical services are not disrupted. We are focused on patient care and has brought down costs through prudent expenditure, and has also increased patient subsidies so that more can benefit.
12.3. There are many Singaporeans who have benefited from the work of the NKF and who continue to require care and assistance, and we seek the cooperation of all to continue to give their support to the NKF and other charitable organizations.
12.4. The NKF and our patients are very grateful to the 250,000 donors in our LIfeDrops Programme and individuals and corporations and religions organization who continued to support NKF course despite the very trying times over the last 5 months. We are looking into ways to engage and involve these steadfast and loyal donors and all future donors to help NKF shape how this charitable organization will be run.
http://www.nkfs.org/news/press_19_12_05.php -
It is very likely the new NKF board will have to review their options. Legal option looms ahead against the former board of directors and CEO.
-
If they proceed with legal proceedings, after the dust has settled, IMO, 10 cts patient subsidy will be reduced to 5cts.
Telco has made money,
TV station has made money,
Auditors have made money,
Bogus IT vendors have made money,
ex-Board members have made money....
....from donations.
Now it's the lawyers' turn?
It explains why they want donations to continue. -
according to the news the whistle was blown 4 years ago but nobody did anything. In fact people like Kwa Boon Wan and Gerald Ee had even defended the old NKF.Originally posted by BillyBong:
11. REGULATORY OVERSIGHT OF THE NKF
Q9: Whether there was adequate regulatory supervision over the operations and activities of the NKF?
11.1. KPMG has made the following observations:
11.1.1. That while the Commissioner of Charities forms the central plank for the regulatory oversight of charities, there are various other bodies that participate in an assortment of roles which result in a sometimes confusing regulatory environment. The regulators play different roles, and not all are concerned with the welfare of charity beneficiaries, true owners of charities and their funds, or the management of the affairs of a charity. While some bodies have the power to initiate an investigation into the management of a charity, none did so in the case of the NKF, in the absence of formal complaint.
11.2. There is no straightforward answer to the question as to whether and which of the regulatory bodies is responsible for more extensive audit of NKF. The position of the new NKF Board is that it is the Boards of charitable organizations that must be ultimately responsible for good governance and effective management of their respective charities.
http://www.nkfs.org/news/press_19_12_05.php