CC BY
5DOI: 10.12731/2070-7568-2014-4-6 UDC 33.053
ALTERNATIVE SOURCES OF FINANCING HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
Kozarezenko L.V.
The article studies the possibilities and expediency of endowment utilization as an alternative of the social sphere elements budgetary funding in Ukraine. We have conclusions that the endowments have some advantages. That's is creates the possibility for a long-term planning and development of social sphere (mechanism of adequate general stable situation in the country), convenient for major companies inclined to strategic business planning and contributions in the social sphere, transparent and provides guarantees for the donors in the specific cash expenditure, provides the non-commercial organizations with the possibility to change the approach to implementation of social projects, to study how to earn the money and not to be just the consumers, creates the possibility to accumulate the funds in charitable purposes that makes them attractive for medium and small companies. The disadvantages of endowments are risks of financial nature (small income guaranteed transactions, high inflation rate, exposure to the financial crises), difficulties with forming the «body» of the specific capital of such size that would guarantee more or
less substantial income directed for charity, no instant effect for recipient's favor, possibility to be used in swindling, no tax stimulation of donors. Let's think that endowments or funds specific capital have an important meaning in the development of social sphere because they are basis for its long-term planning and development. For non-commercial organization there are at least two advantages. First is stable financing and second is attraction of new contributors for non-commercial organizations. It is both stability of financing and guarantee of stable functioning.
Keywords: endowment, philanthropy, specific capital, financing, social sphere, health protection, education, culture.
АЛЬТЕРНАТИВНЫЕ ИСТОЧНИКИ ФИНАНСИРОВАНИЯ РАЗВИТИЯ ЧЕЛОВЕЧЕСКОГО ПОТЕНЦИАЛА
Козарезенко Л.В.
В статье рассмотрен процесс становления эндаумен-тов в качестве альтернативы бюджетного финансирования социальной сферы. Изучена история зарождения и становления эндаументов в странах Западной Европы и США. Исследован процесс становления эндаументов в Российской Федерации и Украине. Изучен опыт использования эндаументов в Украине. Выявлены положительные последствия применения эндаументов в Украине, а именно: создание возможностей для долгосрочного планирова-
ния и развития социальной сферы (механизм адекватной общей стабильной ситуации в стране), удобство для крупных компаний, склонных к стратегическому планированию бизнеса и вложений в социальную сферу, прозрачность и обеспечение гарантии для доноров в целевом расходовании средств, обеспечение для некоммерческих организаций возможностей изменения подходов к реализации социальных проектов, предоставление возможностей учиться зарабатывать деньги, а не только выступать в роли потребителей, создание возможностей аккумулировать средства в благотворительных целях, что делает ее привлекательной для средних и небольших компаний. Также выявлен ряд недостатков в возможностях применения в Украине, связанных прежде всего с отсутствием институтов регулирования эндаументов, а именно: риски финансового характера (малодоходных гарантированных финансовых операций, высокий уровень инфляции, незащищенность от финансовых кризисов), сложность с формированием «тела» целевого капитала такого размера, который гарантировал бы более-менее существенный по объему размер прибыли, направляемую на благотворительную деятельность, отсутствие быстрого эффекта для благополучателя, возможность использования в мошеннических целях, отсутствие налогового стимулирования жертвователей. Сделан вывод, что эндаументы или фонды целевого капитала имеют важное значение в развитии социальной сферы, ведь это является основой для ее долгосрочного планиро-
вания и развития. Для некоммерческой организации, как минимум, преимуществ два. Во-первых - стабильное финансирование. Во-вторых, для некоммерческих организаций это является фактором стабильности с точки зрения привлечения сотрудников. Это и стабильность финансирования, и гарантия стабильного функционирования.
Ключевые слова: пожертвования, благотворительность, целевой капитал, финансирование, социальная сфера, здравоохранение, образование, культура.
In the annual state-of-the-nation address of the President to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine «On internal and external condition of Ukraine in 2012» [7, p. 156-159] in the process of national economy reforming the top-priority significance is devoted to the social security and Ukrainian citizens' social protection reform. In the context of reforming process its main principles should be the guarantees of appropriate governmental assistance to those who really need that, reasonable social spending and high quality of social services from the state to its citizens.
The observance of these principles in the state social policy during reforms in the sphere of social security, health protection, education, culture will enable Ukraine to come to creation of the modern social free-market economy model. Its advantages are high level of social standards, efficient protection of workers' rights, developed system of social security, manifold development of the national socio-cultural sphere in general.
The social sphere reforming in Ukraine attracts one of the most
serious attention in the Program of Economic Reforms 2010-2014 «Prosperous society, competitive economy, efficient state» [4]. Particularly it concerns the growth of life standards. The attention in the Program is focused on such components as medical services, system of pension insurance and educational system reforms. In general, the common element in the process of standards of life growth is the search for additional funding sources of the social sphere and their direction with the state budget funds for social development.
Among the recommendations of the social sphere reforming it is worth paying attention at the proposal of implementation in Ukraine of endowments - first of all in education - as an alternative to the budgetary funding, though this proposal may be considered for the national social sphere in general. So, the purpose of the article is the review of possibilities and expediency of endowments utilization in Ukraine as an alternative of the budgetary funding.
Endowment or specific capital funds are financial resources from donations or charitable donations which incomes are used to fund the non-commercial organizations, namely educational, medical, cultural, political, ecological establishments etc.
The endowment functioning has almost 500-year history. As the original sources state the first analogue of the modern endowments appeared in XVI cent. in Great Britain when Lady Margaret Beaufort donated the funds to create the chairs of theology in the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge. In the USA the leader of endowment creation was Harvard University when in 1649 its four graduates remembered in will to Alma Mater a small plot of land. Nowadays, there is University Widener Library at this territory.
The most well-known international endowment - Nobel - was created in the late of XIX century. According to the will of Alfred Nobel the funds received from the sale of his property should have been invested into the securities and the prizes to the scientists would be awarded from the interest income. At the moment of Nobel's death his capital was estimated in the current prices as approximately $212 million, today the assets of the Nobel Fund exceed $500 million. This is more than enough to award to every prizewinner a prize in the sum of at least $1 million.
In Russia the analogues of the modern endowments have existed since 1770 in the form of «eternal capital» - bank deposit which interest income covered the ongoing expenses for certain charitable project.
Traditionally, the specific capital funds were spread in those countries where historically there was no state support to education, science and culture and the national traditions encouraged private charity. For instance, by means of endowments the universities in the U.S., Great Britain, Japan, Australia and other countries have the possibility to fund the applied researches, to encourage materially the higher-education teaching staff to qualitative and productive work, to award grants to the students, introduce the university scholarships etc. In the United States the endowment organizers have considerably influenced the choice of teachers (there is even a special term endowed-professors) or students (they could get special scholarships thanks to endowments).
Currently such funds have accumulated substantial capital. Harvard University has at its disposal the specific capital of almost $35
billion. Its endowment consists of more than 10.8 thousand separate funds. In 2007 FY at their account it was financed almost one third of University operating budget - more than $1.1 billion. The endowment of the main Harvard's competitor - Yale University at the end of 2007 FY was estimated as $22.5 billion. The establishment's budget that does not exceed $2.07 billion was also for one third funded at the account of endowment proceeds. Last year the total capital volume in the funds of US colleges and universities exceeded $340 billion.
The endowment volume in other countries is smaller. E.g. the university funds in England have accumulated about $5 billion, and out of this sum $4 billion is in the funds of Oxford and Cambridge [8, p.19-26].
The long-term average annual profit ability of endowment investments is about 7-12% per annum, the size of payments based for the primary goals of the fund activity is about 5% (from the sum of its assets), approximately half of incomes is reinvested. A part of reinvestments is neutralized by inflation which in case of efficient specific capital management's hall provide annual assets growth about 4-5% in real terms. As a result the funds of Princeton and Stanford provide up to $500 million of those universities funding. In general the endowments funds give the Western higher educational establishments up to 40-50% of annual income, i.e. the most importants source of on going university needs financing.
Moreover, there are vivid examples of endowments that sponsor the political activity (as a rule, support to opposition) in the countries with «un-advanced» democracy.
Princeton's experience is very interesting: annual donations to the
endowment make 55-60% (!) of graduates. This fund is the global leader by the proportion of the specific capital to the number of students - this figure is more than $2 million.
It is worth mentioning that the USA is the global leader in the sphere of charity and fundraising (it is search for resources (people, equipment, information, time, money etc.) to implement the projects and/or support of the organization existence. 50% (about 100 million people) of the adult population of this country donate. Every year an American family spends for charity in average $1623. In 2008 donations in the US was 2.2% GDP, including 15% of this sum was directed to the educational establishments. The second place is in Great Britain which spends 0.7% GDP for charity, though this country lags behind the USA both in absolute terms and in organization of charitable organizations work as far as the British started actively developing the fundraising only several decades ago, and the Americans already in 1891 John Rockefeller sent his employees to manage the funds that he directed for charity. The countries of continental Europe are far behind in fundraising organization not only from the US but also from Great Britain. Lately China has begun quite active work in this direction. Various countries of the world do not long for their own model of fundraising because the American model proved its efficiency and has evolved during the centuries, so they are actually developing according to the strategy of catching-up development.
In the USSR the fundraising, particularly higher education fundraising had little attention as far as the private donations were just impossible and higher educational establishment were funded from the state budget.
The endowment usually is filled by charity donations. As potential investors to endowments there may be the graduates of educational establishments, students' parents, major companies, charity organizations, sponsors etc.
The students' informing about the priority directions of the universities development and importance of received donations and income from the endowment to decrease the cost of education and support the significant university programs is an important step to find the major sponsors. The most probable is that those sponsors will make the most valuable donations for priority university programs development. Another important feature of fund raising system is graduates' attraction to the voluntary programs that vary from the undergraduates' motivation to cooperate with the organization and to persuading the course mates to donate to the fund at the end of the year and encouraging the sponsors to support the university financially. The people that regard themselves as part of the family, like-minded fellows are more willing to be generous when they have such an opportunity. Such donors often do such donations that have no narrow limitation in their application. From such donation the educational establishment administration may at its own discretion fund the priority direction of its development - such donations are the most valuable.
The endowment may invest its funds to get income though it is obliged to direct all the income to those organizations for which support it had been created. The endowment distinction from the ordinary charity organization is its target character of activity (as a rule, the endowment is created to support one organization, for instance, certain university) and directed to get the income from the fund's investment.
Endowment has to provide:
- partial independence from one-time donations and other voluntary contributions;
- financial stability as a result of guaranteed income;
- forming the long-term source of financing of certain noncommercial activity.
The endowment advantage is transparent character of its activity. As far as the endowment funds may be directed only in that organization for which support it was created it is impossible to use it for taxation minimization (when the taxes are lowered at the account of expenses that as if are spent for charity. It is relevant for those countries where charity is not taxed).
Several subjects take part in the process of endowments forming and functioning, namely: income recipients from the specific capital, owners of the specific capital, donors or sponsors and management companies. Let's describe them in brief.
The income recipients from the specific capital are non-commercial organizations that work in the sphere of education, science, health protection, culture, physical culture and sports (excluding professional sports), arts, archive business, social security (support).
The specific capital owners are specially created non-commercial organizations that carry out the donations collection and income distribution from the specific capital in favor of other recipients.
The donors and sponsors are any persons (both private and legal) that transfer the monetary assets to the non-commercial organizations - owners of the specific capital.
The management companies are professional licensed assets managers who receive the endowment funds for trust management. The funds may be managed by the companies that have license for activity of assets management or license for activity of investment funds, unit investment funds and non-governmental pension funds management.
The fund activity has long-term character. The instant success in the endowments construction is unlikely. Thus, for instance, the biggest in the world endowment of Harvard University with the assets more than $35 billion has been accumulated thanks to donations made during 350 years. The endowments revenues in the recipient's budget may be insignificant for a long time - save that the fund begins his life from the huge contribution (e.g. Nobel Fund). After the fund has accumulated certain volume of cash it becomes for the recipient a steady constantly growing income for a long time.
In the Russian Federation an example of successful endowments functioning (excluding the educational establishments) is their using in the museum business, e.g. Peterhof and Hermitage.
In the United States there is a saying that «endowment land is a country in the country, system that is not controlled by the power first of all because of its complete financial independence» [9, p. 63-69].
The endowments have actively developed in nowadays Russia. The possibility to use such tool of charity became available at the end of 2006 with the adoption of the law No 275-FL«On the procedure of generation and use of non-commercial organizations' specific capital». Along with that law the amendments to the Tax Code were adopted that exempted the income of funds' capital from the income
tax. Currently the government is also considering the possibility of additional privileges granting to the benefactors of such funds. There are about 30 such endowments in Russia at the moment.
One of the first of the modern endowments in the Russian Federation was «Fund of Higher School of Management Development at St. Petersburg State University» (HSM SPbSU) that exists since December 2007. Besides, from the beginning 2011 with the participation of St. Petersburg management company «BFA» that manages the endowment HSM SPbSU the «Fund of Support and Development of St. Petersburg State University of Economics and Finances» and currently it is managed by this company.
In Ukraine the endowments are the financial tools of primarily charity funds as «Ukraine for Children». Unfortunately, the endowments in Ukraine have obtained such application in education, museum business, health protection, social security as in the West or in Russia. E.g. only since October 2011 upon an initiative of the Institute of Foreign Relations of Kyiv National University named after Taras Shevchenko direction has initiated the process of endowment formation (Institute Development Fund) which the university graduates are invited to form.
In December, 2012 British Charities Aid Foundation Organization presented the data of annual word charity rating During 2007-2011 the rating leaders are Australia, Ireland, USA, New Zealand and Canada (table 1).
Table 1
Components of the index for charity Ukraine and some other countries that rank highest and lowest ranking places to Ukraine in 2011
Thecountryanditsrank Valuerating (%) Cashdonations (%) Placeintheranking Volunteer (%) Placeintheranking Helptheneedy, (%) Placeintheranking
Australia (1) 60 76 2 37 12 67 10
Ireland (2) 60 79 1 34 15 66 13
Canada (3) 58 64 10 42 7 67 10
Ukraine (111) 21 7 130 20 56 36 108
Albania (144) 13 9 126 7 125 23 141
Greece (145) 13 5 141 3 145 30 124
Montenegro (146) 13 10 115 5 135 33 141
Source: [1, p. 62-66].
The data from table 1 suggest that Ukraine ranked 111 place and lost 6 positions compared to 2011. What is more, the country lost positions by all rating criteria. It may be assumed that such situation can be explained by an increase of people distrust in charity organization activity and by weakening of the financial standing of the people in the whole, country passing through the global financial crisis, the general stagnation of business and rate of economic growth in the country.
We analyzed current charity practice in Ukraine to understand the opportunities for the development and establishment of endowments
as the alternative sources for the funding of the country social sphere. Analyses are carried out by the following criteria: number of the charity organizations, legislation, branches of the charity activity, care assistance forms, people stance on the charity activity.
European funds centre of Brussels that joints about 400 major European funds, first tried to collect official data of the EU countries-members relating to number of funds that perform in the region, and volume of the annual sums, that are diverted to implementation of its programs. Results are the following. As of today over 110 thousands of charity funds are registered and actively perform in Europe; they provide work at an average for 750 thsd to 1 mln people (direct provision of employment); funds divert about 100 bln Euro to its programs annually.
About 12918 thsd of funds were registered by Ministry of Justice of Ukraine at the end of 2011 [2, p. 37]. Naturally, compared to 110 thsd throughout Europe, domestic number of such organizations seems large enough: one fund in EU is accounted for by 4,5thsd of people, and the same one in Ukraine is accounted for by 3 thsd of people. But, experience has proven that just a little part of all domestic funds registered really performs charity activity. Besides of that, ambiguities in the legislation allow to register different public organizations as the charity funds, which are not related to the fund activity in actual fact, saving and reassignment of the charity funds more specifically.
Unfortunately, it is difficult to count the scope of finance that is diverted to the charity as of today in Ukraine. Tax return in Ukraine, as distinct from the same one in the countries of Europe and USA,
is private information and its publicity isn't compulsory condition. According to expert opinion, charity sums, that are mostly nowhere declared, are large enough, especially in medical sphere. Results of research of the public organizations activity in 2011 in Ukraine [2, p. 57-60] present the following data. Receipt of the charity funds to charity organizations accounts is amounting to 1454156,4thsd of UAH in 2011. Where receipt of the funds from enterprises and organizations is amounting to 563936,4thsd of UAH, from the residents of Ukraine - 199955,2 thsd of UAH, from non-residents - 690264,8 thsd of UAH. As seen, the major part in the general charity fund structure is receipt of funds from non-residents that is amounting to 47.5%, the second part in fund structure arrives from the enterprises and organizations and is amounting to 38.8%, the last part of funds arrives from residents of Ukraine - 13.8%. It is easy to explain why the major part in the general charity fund structure arrives from non-residents. First of all, we consider, that charity culture is the new stream in Ukraine, secondly, usual resident of Ukraine feels distrust in charity organizations activity, thirdly, Ukrainians with their income level do not have opportunities to take part in charity activity, because they spend about 60% of their income for the food products, that is commonly known as the one of the attribute of the society immiseration. Figure 1 displays the main directions of the funding of the domestic charity organizations activity in 2009.
Other
Religious Organizations Science, Technology and Research Human Rights C ommunity D ev el opment Health Art and Culture Ecology and Environment Sport a lid Lei sure Education Social Protection
0 2 -I 6 S 10 12 14 16 IS % Of the total number of observations
Figure 1. Distribution of study participants to the question «In what area of life is directed charitable activities of your company?»
(Data 2009)
Source: [3, p. 27].
According to the results (figure1), the major objects of the domestic companies and organizations funding are such charity activity spheres as social security (16%), education (15%), and sport and leisure time (13%). Less attractive funding spheres are funding of human rights (7%), science, technologies and research (2%). We consider, that the situation with funding of science, technologies and research is unacceptable, because enterprises and companies should understand the importance of new technologies and innovations in the development not only of their companies, but also in the country economic advancement, in such a manner they should reconsider the
directions of charity activity funding in favour of the development of science, innovations, research-and-development and research-and-constructive works. If we analyse in which forms charity support is provided by Ukrainian enterprises, the situation will be the following (Figure 2).
Other
Pro vi cling Expert Assistance
Providing Goods and Services that are not Related to the Activities oftlie Company
Volunteer Work Employees oftlie Company
Money
12
44
0
64
19
63
1
76
77
2009 12005
0 50 100
0 o Of the answers that respondents could choose Figure 2. Distribution of answers to the question «In what form assists?»(comparison studies in 2005 and 2009, respondents could choose several answers, %)
Source: [3, p. 30].
According to the results of figure2, the most common form of charity support is monetary fund (76%), compared to 2005 volume of the charity support coming from volunteerism of the corporate
employees notably increases in 2009 (5% and 68% respectively), also volume of the charity support related to the delivery by the companies of goods and services, that are not associated with their main activity (19% and 64% respectively) increases, and in 2009 volume of the charity support related to expert support assistance by the companies also increases compared to 2005 (0% and 44% respectively). In other words, there is the positive tendency in providing charity support in kind, to avoid inappropriate use of funds.
The parliaments of various countries adopted more than 50 laws about regulations of various aspects of charity funds activity (inside the needs, on which charitable funds can be spent, and out the requirements for reporting and taxation). For example, to open charity fund in Malta, for founders will be enough to carry to its account payment in the amount of240 euro. In Austria - 70 thsd euro. In France certain founders are required to make a payment in registered capital in the amount of 1 mln euro. In actual fact, in all EU countries legally it is stipulated the requirement of public accountability of funds - one of the instruments that encourage confidence in their work. The only problem, that the Europeans are trying to resolve the past 15 years -is the development of common legal document that would regulate the activities of charitable institutions of the EU countries, allowing easily implement international charity projects. On the one hand, the Ukrainian «charity» legislation seems pretty loyal and democratic. On the other hand, the current situation is a bit depressing. During the 2008-2012 experts of Ukrainian charity sector actively participated in the drafting of the Law «On Charity and Charitable Organizations», registered in the Verkhovna Rada as new version of a 2010. In July
2012, the Parliament voted for a law in the second reading [6]. It seems, the government of the country is not yet ready to fully appreciate the role that charity funds and organizations either already do or can do in the state.
Experiencing the effects of the financial crisis, many European countries are trying to transfer responsibility for tasks and solving specific social problems on the shoulders of private donor funds. In the context of the state budget deficit it is become profitably, when funds are responsible for some liabilities, implement new social programs, develop and test the models of the problems solution. Ukraine has such experience. For example, fund «Vidrodzhennya» prepared tried and delivered to the government the current system of external evaluation. Now this fund and the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine are opening throughout Ukraine legal advice for citizens with low-income. However, the executive director of the International Charity Fund «Vidrodzhennya» Eugene Bystrytsky notes: «it is not a system yet, but probably an exception to the rule».
President of the International Charity Fund «Karitas Ukraina» Andrew Vaskovych believes that the reason of non-system is the reluctance of the state to lose monopoly in the social sphere, and it is permanent, during ten years, the budget deficit in the social sphere. Although visibility of involving charity funds and organizations into solving social problems is created, there are no specific mechanisms at the level of the budget code and other basic documents for the practical implementation of such cooperation exist.
The financial crisis has affected the charity sector both in Europe and in Ukraine. On the one hand, experts say that despite this, the
European sector is steadily increasing. According to the European Network of Donor Association, vice president of the Association of charity funds in Spain, Halleho Roses, an average daily new fund is registered in Spain, but the German charity sector is supplemented by two institutions. Statistical data of the Association of French funds indicate that charity sector increased by 60% during 2001-2010. On the other hand, crisis makes many funds sit up and take notice about the purpose and timing of their activity.
At the end of 90 the availability of endowment, as the targeted capital fund, belonged to the category of unchallenged questions. It was believed that the share (target) capital fund, which was submitted by the founder at the moment of its creation, and then was deposited along with fund development, it was necessary to invest for profit, and the charity activity of the fund should be performed solely by profits costs, providing «longevity» activity.
Today some funds make decisions refusing endowment, send all the money to solve a particular problem (10-15 years). When finances are exhausted, the fund closes. This is quite an innovative approach: a time limit takes the effectiveness of investments to the topside.
Today image is one of the key problems of funds both in Europe and in Ukraine. Because reputation which makes charity sector for years, can be instantly destroyed by incorrect actions of one player.
In December 2012 Ilk Kucheriv «Democratic Initiatives» Fund with sociologic service of Razumkov Centre for ordering of the Ukrainian Charity Forum conducted a national survey to examine people attitudes and their involvement in the activities of charity funds and organizations. Only 21% of respondents supported the activity of
charity funds and organizations. Among the main support instruments were the following: financial contributions through charity box (43%), purchase of goods, the money from which went to charity (21%), participation in charity events organized by the employer (16%), volunteering (11%) , bank transfer, donation (9%), buying a ticket for a charity concert (6%), charitable SMS (5%), buying charity cards (2%). 77% of respondents said they did it, wanting to help others. Only 6% funded their money thanks to the credibility of the organization supported. Among the most common responses of 79% of respondents who were not involved in charity last year were: «because I was not asked to do it» (38%); «I do not constitute myself as a benefactor» (20%); «I don't know about the real needs of people and charity organizations» (11%).
Received data indicates distrust in charity funds and organizations that now prevailing in Ukrainian society. Ambiguity, unaccountability and privateers of the charity sector, on the one hand, the use of funds for political purposes, on the other hand, formed negative attitudes and misunderstanding of the value and importance of charity for the development of Ukrainian society.
The endowments have some advantages:
- creates the possibility for a long-term planning and development of social sphere (mechanism of adequate general stable situation in the country);
- convenient for major companies inclined to strategic business planning and contributions in the social sphere;
- transparent and provides guarantees for the donors in the specific cash expenditure;
- provides the non-commercial organizations with the possibility to change the approach to implementation of social projects, to study how to earn the money and not to be just the consumers;
- creates the possibility to accumulate the funds in charitable purposes that makes them attractive for medium and small companies.
The disadvantages of endowments are:
- risks of financial nature (small income guaranteed transactions, high inflation rate, exposure to the financial crises);
- difficulties with forming the «body» of the specific capital of such size that would guarantee more or less substantial income directed for charity;
- no instant effect for recipient's favor. The model is designed for long-term effect but cannot satisfy the urgent needs, fast return which is psychologically uncomfortable for certain donors that got used to provide assistance in the traditional form of direct support;
- possibility to be used in swindling;
- no tax stimulation of donors.
Let's think that endowments or funds specific capital have an important meaning in the development of social sphere because they are basis for its long-term planning and development. For noncommercial organization there are at least two advantages. First is stable financing and second is attraction of new contributors for non-commercial organizations. It is both stability of financing and guarantee of stable functioning.
We do not speak about the help to the poor at once but about serious social investments. The specific capital is not expended that is why it is possible to construct long-term plans based on it: e.g. ten years and not one or two years as it is possible in case of one-time donation or charity contribution. Thus, it is possible to undertake the long-term programs giving to those who carry them out to have at least minimum living level. And in long-term prospective it may create private specific long-term funding without necessity to spend the money quickly as most ordinary donors demand. The model of specific capital is convenient for the large enterprises that contribute in the social security in the framework of strategic business planning. A lot of large corporations finance the large-scale programs directed at creation a convenient social environment in the regions of their presence. Such programs financing is done best through the model of specific capital.
It is evident that it may not be profitable for business to do that permanently, so it is better to make one-time contributions into the funds of specific capital and simply control those capital investments thereafter in the framework of actual fund or organization of social sphere. The model of the specific capital provides possibility to change the approach to the social projects implementation - to study how to earn and spend the money and not simply distribute the sponsors' donations. As one of the donors told at the forum: «There may be direct donations to the poor ... It is as if giving a fish. And there may be social investments. It is as if giving not a fish but a fishing rod and to teach how to use it. It is an absolutely different point, different approach. Certainly, from the donor's point of view there are no
advantages. But from the point of view of work with counteragents, no doubt, there is sense because it is an absolutely correct European approach to the matter - when you get not a fish but a fishing rod» [5, p. 96-125].
Conclusions
It is absolutely relevant what Prus L. said «... with flow of time the specific capital should liberate the autonomous establishments from the budget dependence and allow them to exist in full at the account of incomes from the investments...» [8, p. 25]. We regard it the best way out from the social crisis of permanent underfunding, lack of money. With time it may also lead to the substantial load decrease on the state budget. Evident that it is insufficient only to learn the practice of specific capital funds implementation, for instance, in Russia and copy it. We should adopt the appropriate legislation and make amendments to the existing one. It is necessary to amend the Tax Code and exempt from value added tax and income tax the management companies and incomes received from the investments at the account of specific capital funds, to implement the funds use transparent mechanism of control. It is also of the first priority to encourage the donors, companies, students and parents to make donations in order to create the specific capital funds. The road seems a bit difficult and possible even hard because since the time of the Soviet Union everybody got used that the social sphere was completely maintained by the state, it was unprofitable. So, the investors are absolutely not interested in investing their money. However, we are sure that in case of transparency, impartiality, public control of endowments functioning, as well as implementation in life
of the government promises to support the donors and sponsors we will overcome at last the hard financial situation in the social sphere and get the new quality of its development.
References
1. World Giving Index 2012. A Global View of Giving Trends. http:// www.cafonline.org/pdf/worldgivingindex2012web.pdf (accessed September 22, 2013).
2. Gromads'ki organizacii' v Ukrai'ni u 2012 roci [Governmental organizations in Ukraine in 2012]. State Statistics Service of Ukraine (2013).
3. Gulevs'ka-Chernysh A. Praktyka blagodijnoi'dijal'nosti biznes-kompanij v Ukrai'ni: suchasnyj dosvid [The practice of charity business activities of companies in Ukraine: current experience (Research Report)]. - Kiev: Salyutis (2010).
4. Nacional'nyj plan dij na 2012 rik shhodo vprovadzhennja Pro-gramy ekonomichnyh reform na 2010-2014 roky «Zamozhne suspil'stvo, konkurentospromozhna ekonomika, efektyvna der-zhava» Ukaz Prezydenta Ukrai'ny [Decree of the President of Ukraine about National Action Plan for 2012 to implement the program of economic reforms for 2010-2014 «Prosperous Society, Competitive Economy, Effective State»]. http://zakon2.rada.gov. ua/laws/show/187/2012#n21 (accessed April 9, 2014).
5. Otnoshenye zhertvovatelej k modely celevogo kapytala nekom-mercheskyh organyzacyj. Analytycheskyj otchet po rezul'tatam socyologycheskogo yssledovanyja [Relations donor k models
tselevogo capital nekommercheskyh organizations. Analytical results for otchet sotsyolohycheskoho Studies]. http://www.zircon. ru (accessed April 10, 2014).
6. Pro blagodijnu dijal'nist' ta blagodijni organizacii'. Zakon Ukrai'ny [On charities and charitable organizations. The Law of Ukraine]. http://zakon2.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/5073-17 (accessed May 10, 2014).
7. Pro vnutrishnje ta zovnishnje stanovyshhe Ukrai'ny v 2012 roci: Shhorichne Poslannja Prezydenta Ukrai'ny do Verhovnoi ' Rady Ukrai'ny [On the internal and external situation of Ukraine in 2012: Annual Message of the President of Ukraine to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine]. Kiev: National Institute for Strategic Studies (2012).
8. Prus L. Zastosuvannjaendaument-fondivuformuvanni finansovogo potencialu nekomercijnyh organizacij [The use of endowment funds in shaping financial capacity of nonprofit organizations]. http://nbuv.gov.ua/portal/soc_gum/Tiru/2009_27/73.pdf (accessed May 4, 2014).
9. Yakovenko D. V vuzah prokljunulsja kapytal [In universities appeared capital]. http://expert.ru/expert/2012/45/v-vuzah-prokly-unulsya-kapital/ (accessed May 4, 2014).
Список литературы
1. World Giving Index 2012. A Global View of Giving Trends. http:// www.cafonline.org/pdf/worldgivingindex2012web.pdf
2. Громадсью оргашзаци в Укра!ш у 2012 рощ: статистичний бюллетень / Державна служба статистики Украши. - Кшв. 2013, 152 с.
3. Гулевська-Черниш А. Практика благодшно! дiяльностi бiзнес-компанiй в Украш: сучасний досвщ» (звiт за результатами дослщження) / А. Гулевська-Черниш, Д. Непочатова, Л. Па-ливода, С. Шендеровський; за заг. ред. А. Гулевсько!-Черниш. - К.: Салютiс, 2010. 60 с.
4. Нащональний план дш на 2012 рiк щодо впровадження Про-грами економiчних реформ на 2010-2014 роки «Заможне сусшльство, конкурентоспроможна економiка, ефективна держава»Указ Президента Украши вiд 12 березня 2012 року № 187/2012 / Електронний ресурс - Режим доступу^йр:// zakon2.rada.gov.Ua/laws/show/187/2012#n21
5. Отношение жертвователей к модели целевого капитала некоммерческих организаций. Аналитический отчет по результатам социологического исследования. / АНО «Социологическая мастерская Задорина» (Циркон). 2008. - Электронный ресурс. - Режим доступа: http://www.zircon.ru
6. Про благодшну дiяльнiсть та благодшш оргашзаци. Закон Украши вщ 05.07.2012 № 5073-У1 http://zakon2.rada.gov.ua/ laws/show/5073-17
7. Про внутршне та зовшшне становище Украши в 2012 рощ: Щорiчне Послання Президента Украши до Верховно! Ради Украши. - К.: Н1СД, 2012. 256 с.
8. Прус Л.Р. Застосування ендаумент-фондiв у формуванш фiнансового потенцiалу некомерщйних органiзацiй /Л.Р. Прус
// Електронний ресурс - Режим доступу±йр://пЬиу^оу.иа/ portal/soc_gum/Tiru/2009_27/73.pdf 9. Яковенко Д. В вузах проклюнулся капитал / Д. Яковенко // Эксперт. №45 (827). 12 ноября 2012 года. - Электронный ресурс. - Режим доступа: http://expert.ru/expert/2012/45/v-vuzah-proklyunulsya-kapital/
DATA ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Kozarezenko Ljudmila Vladimirovna, PhD (Economics), Associate Professor
Pereyaslav-Khmelnytskyi state pedagogical university named after Hryhoriy Skovoroda
4, Syhomlinskogo str., Pereyaslav-Khmelnytsky, Kyiv region, 08401, Ukraine
ljudmila.kozarezenko@gmail.com
ДАННЫЕ ОБ АВТОРЕ
Козарезенко Людмила Владимировна, кандидат экономических наук, доцент, доцент кафедры экономики предприятия и экономической теории
Переяслав-Хмельницкий государственный педагогический университет имени Григория Сковороды
ул. Сухомлинского, 30, г. Переяслав-Хмельницкий, Киевская область, 08401, Украина
ljudmila.kozarezenko@gmail.com
Рецензент:
Боголиб Т.М., доктор экономических наук, профессор, декан финансово-гуманитарного факультета, заведующая кафедрой финансов и кредита Государственного высшего учебного заведения «Переяслав-Хмельницкий государственный педагогический университет имени Григория Сковороды»
