I can only agree on the proposed change of course. W of the American watchdog. enough that even nonprofits unable to agree among themselves more than the Italian institute of the donation would change course, even better return approach as recommended by prof. melandri but also more agreement among nonprofits.

Important subject, or rather important topics, I mean both the transparency and control, both donors and the greater awareness of the need for greater agreement between nonprofits.
I really do not like dell'IDD communication for two reasons:
1) I know from "the war between the poor" in the sense that those who have the brand is "good" and others "... maybe ..." and yet it is not so!
2) because it creates emulation, CSV verona has registered a trade mark (www.meritafiducia.it) that has a function similar to IDD but if addressed only to voluntary associations.
Although we agree that the intentions of the CSV is dell'IDD of Verona, I really think that the method is not appropriate. The proposals made by Melandri are definitely closer to my way of thinking and may be a viable alternative particularly useful for a change of mentality of nonprofit: we always talk about trust, but then who we trust if we need to "stickers". It 'clear that a check should be done, but since it is not mandatory, it is first created the culture in which nonprofits must understand that subject to the control of a third party independent, authoritative and qualified is not just another bureaucratic efforts to be undertaken, but Besides being a duty to the donors and the community, can also be a "competitive advantage" in building the same reputation of ONP.
"So the World of the Third Sector, we decide to grow or we always need a blackboard qualcuo stating in what are the good guys?"

Let's talk, maybe even at the Festival of Fundraising 2011.

PS: and then, if there is someone who tells the good, there should also be someone on the board also marks the "bad guys" .... that we let him go only to journalists??

Luciano

Hello Valerio,
I agree about what you write, in 2007 I published this post on Since then little has been moved from the point of view of creating a real "watch dog" independent, able to generate confidence and stimulate growth in the industry!
Best regards, Francis
PS: now making a tour of the site advertising dell'IID "convicted" for now is still in

I agree completely about the speech of the increased awareness of the donor must be increasingly active player choices that work, which does not require a certification or a brand to be brought to "do" but only and exclusively of its beliefs, his values, his emotions are declared or hidden. And I think this should be taken into account for those who make fundraising that the donor should transmit more and more style, and a culture of donation that can not and must not only be paid by nonprofit organizations. I do not feel better when just a gift but when I share my gift and my Tuttuno becomes a small part with the rest. At least, once again, I think.!

[...] - We arrive at a more advanced model of transparency of the third sector: this will mean duty to publish financial statements on the websites according to models of uniform reporting by sector or type of organization; obligation to fill out forms that clearly indicate the composition governance, salaries of executive and managerial figures, the use of resources, etc.. This will allow us to get to have, even in Italy, sites like Charity Navigator or GuideStar (thanks to Stefano Zurlo referred to them during the fundraising process) better suited to photographing the current situation than they are subjects as the IID ( on which I might have to spend a post hoc to clarify my thinking but in the meantime I refer you to the post of Valerio Melandri on the condemnation of the Institute for misleading advertising). [...]

Dear Valerio,
I agree with everything you write and look to see if actually own one of these subjects will not move to create something along the lines of Charity Navigator (maybe it will be the bag for donations?).
But I would go about the subject of your post: the condemnation dell'IID.
The links are not the reasons given, but only the decision of the jury, so we have to far-fetched as to why this happened. But the issue is not trivial and may also affect the ability of the institution to respond to the points it raises. If, as we talk about misleading advertising, the question is placed on the lack of impartiality, ie that the sticker is issued not by the ones we can trust, but to those who decide to join (albeit in accordance with certain parameters ... even if they have to be very loose, judging from practice) and then become controller / controlled ... well it is the very nature dell'IID perhaps be questioned, and I do not see how this type of organization to be assured ex-post even if you do not change By its very nature.
I also note that, speaking with many mentioning the IID (the commentators companies) almost no one knows that the process of verification and control is a process of association ... and this seems to me the result of a communication does not always transparent. Oh well '... but I think this talk about shortly. But my hope is that the IID beginning to open up even more advice to get the really useful because it assumes a role and extended for the third sector. Another IID truly inserted in the third sector and its needs we need and welcome all with happiness that change.

Dear Valerio and dear all, the sentence I spoke yesterday dell'IID a friend.
We are waiting for motivation, but I have to say that to me the campaign - which continues to camp on the HP entity - not like. For the reasons you have cited, and also because of Italy suffers from the disease to "talk to him," to be self-referential.

Capiamoci, it is clear that IID should advertise, but to say - or imply - that only those who pass under his review you can trust, means that you can not trust the other ... which is false, as well that paradoxical.

They screwed up, those dell'IID, and great!

Paul F breaks through an open door - with me - on the question of the system as a means Association IID IID clearly inappropriate for that is found in the belly who has judged.
But Italy did not know anything about the impartiality?

Carlo Mazzini

[...] There was a debate on three blogs discussing fundraising, to Valerio Melandri (director of this site), Paul Ferrara and Carlo Mazzini. All three spoke of the Institute [...]

Dear Valerio,

on the ruling of the IAP, I have already expressed my opinion on the site of Charles ... I will not dwell further. You know my position for some time (ie at a glance to make more transparent and communicative mechanisms of donation ... no ruling). The Process (of which I still want to thank Valerio gave me the opportunity to coordinate it after I suggested it to him along with Paul) was a first interesting result of communication of our work (many of which still ignore the existence and significance ).
In my opinion it is necessary to overcome barriers and paving that there are good (feed stupid infighting, they lose much time and undo all the efforts being made to affirm our professionalism!) Back ... you have to sit around a table working considering the issues that affect us as much as possible and trying to resolve them - possibly with the consent of all - through a clear working agenda. This is the path that I see ... I have no other solutions.
An affectionate greeting and good (meritate!) holidays
Michelangelo

[...] And win. These days many posts that have been published addressing this topic (Valerio Melandri and the case of misleading advertising of IID, Paul Ferrara in the post "The fundraising is [...]