Charity Discussion

[PlanetFrnd]

I found myself responding to grad's post in the Obama thread:

http://money.cnn.com/2012/04/13/news/economy/obama_tax_return/index.htm?iid=Lead

But will put this here, as it was largely off topic (though not much more than a post about an entirely different person in Obama's thread )

I get your point here, and not defending Biden, but most charities have just as much bureaucratic nonsense, and accrete very little to the bottom line or actual charitable work... I don't necessarily 'get' how those who rail against the government for having the above qualities will mindlessly give to charities whose primary function is to provide jobs for the people who work for it (or sell stationary)... the cynic in my feels like people feel more comfortable with the level of control that directed giving brings and hate when of fear that their tax dollars will benefit, for lack of better terms, people they find undesirable... anyways... here's a thread on charities...

 

[AKAK]

I found myself responding to grad's post in the Obama thread:



But will put this here, as it was largely off topic (though not much more than a post about an entirely different person in Obama's thread )

I get your point here, and not defending Biden, but most charities have just as much bureaucratic nonsense, and accrete very little to the bottom line or actual charitable work... I don't necessarily 'get' how those who rail against the government for having the above qualities will mindlessly give to charities whose primary function is to provide jobs for the people who work for it (or sell stationary)... the cynic in my feels like people feel more comfortable with the level of control that directed giving brings and hate when of fear that their tax dollars will benefit, for lack of better terms, people they find undesirable... anyways... here's a thread on charities...

Oh, yeah, I mean there are aren't any government programs like that at all.

 

[PlanetFrnd]

Oh, yeah, I mean there are aren't any government programs like that at all.

Precisement

 

[AKAK]

Precisement

I remember once, in college thinking about Greek Philanthropy events where you have "all the stuff" the T-Shirts, pointless adverstising and all this shit, so you end up collecting say, 3 or 4K for participation in the event and then donating like $287 to the charity, it seemed so inefficient almost to the degree of pointlessness.

Imagine my shock when I found in the real world, it wasn't too bad of a percent.

 

[Deety]

Hopefully people do look into the charities they participate in. Guidestar.org is a good one as it collects the actual tax forms so you can better see where the money has gone in the past.

If not, being careless with your money by choice is still worlds better than being careless with it because you are forced to do so.

 

[Deety]

I remember once, in college thinking about Greek Philanthropy events where you have "all the stuff" the T-Shirts, pointless adverstising and all this shit, so you end up collecting say, 3 or 4K for participation in the event and then donating like $287 to the charity, it seemed so inefficient almost to the degree of pointlessness.

Imagine my shock when I found in the real world, it wasn't too bad of a percent.

A few years ago, I interviewed with a group whose main fundraiser was the Couch Potato Ball. You would buy tickets for an evening of staying at home and doing absolutely nothing. The only thing they sent were these festive little cards you could give to friends to tell them why you would not be answering the phone - oh, and maybe a sign for your window. Those tickets moved faster than a new model iPad. The lack of overhead made it their biggest fundraiser, and only their "real" ball on the other half of the year did better for gross receipts.

 

[buckeyegrad]

I get your point here, and not defending Biden, but most charities have just as much bureaucratic nonsense, and accrete very little to the bottom line or actual charitable work... I don't necessarily 'get' how those who rail against the government for having the above qualities will mindlessly give to charities whose primary function is to provide jobs for the people who work for it (or sell stationary)... the cynic in my feels like people feel more comfortable with the level of control that directed giving brings and hate when of fear that their tax dollars will benefit, for lack of better terms, people they find undesirable... anyways... here's a thread on charities...

This is why I never give to the United Way.

It is also why most of my charity goes to my own church, where no one takes a salary and do to its independence there is not parent organization to give to; and to the Salvation Army, where if there are salaries, they are very low.

 

[buxfan4life]

I donate a ton of clothes and household items every year, and that mainly goes to the Goodwill stores or to the Domestic Violence people who help women/mothers who are victims of domestic violence get set up in new housing with donated furniture and such.

I also donate my time to certain causes (mainly the schools for my son right now).

I worked a telemarketer job for 3 weeks while I was a freshman at OSU. Was run out of some office space on High just north of 15th (I believe it was above Not Al's Too while I was there). Their purpose was to get money for some charity (can't remember what it was exactly) but only like 22% of the actual "donation" went to the charity itself and the company kept the rest. Ever since that time I will not give cash to charities since more than likely less than 50% of the donation actually makes it to the cause.

 

[Deety]

I worked a telemarketer job for 3 weeks while I was a freshman at OSU. Was run out of some office space on High just north of 15th (I believe it was above Not Al's Too while I was there). Their purpose was to get money for some charity (can't remember what it was exactly) but only like 22% of the actual "donation" went to the charity itself and the company kept the rest. Ever since that time I will not give cash to charities since more than likely less than 50% of the donation actually makes it to the cause.

To make it more complicated, there are often tiers for fundraising. For example, I've worked with organizations that have a large and thriving group of volunteers doing the most cost-efficient work, fundraising from those participating with the group and community members. You expect a large portion of those funds to go straight into programs. The second layer would be paid staff, still working likely lists but with a broader and less personal approach. This is usually salary based with some incentives, so the ratio starts off at a good level and gets better the more skilled they become. The third tier would be telemarketing or similar campaigns, where a majority of funds received go to overhead and it's far less likely that any particular prospect will donate, but the overall flow is positive. I don't much like that third tier, but if you stick with good, permission-based local lists, it's a good way to locate donors who will wind up in a more efficient tier the next year.

It's fairly difficult to tell if a non-profit is efficient without looking into their administration in a fair amount of detail, but looking at the five top salaries reported on a Form 990 will certainly make many of the worst ones obvious very quickly.

 

[PlanetFrnd]

This is why I never give to the United Way.

It is also why most of my charity goes to my own church, where no one takes a salary and do to its independence their is not parent organization to give to; and to the Salvation Army, where if there are salaries, they are very low.

For the sake of argument - is 'donating' to your own church really a charity? I'm assuming that your church does charity work, so I guess I'm not really talking about that... more of the question of, does keeping the lights on at your own church really equate charity? Ifso, why?

 

[korchiki]

Something I picked up from my uncle who travels quite a bit is to grab the shampoo and conditioner from the hotel you are staying at and throw it into a bag. I got the rest of my office to chip in and once a month I take the bag(s) to the battered women's shelter in town.

It's the little things.

 

[buckeyebri]

I am very similar in nature to Bux that I give of my time at events, etc. and donate possessions to Goodwill and others. For me, giving of oneself is one of the most valuable gifts of charity.

 

[Muck]

Precisement

The difference being that I can choose which charities are efficient in properly handling the money I decide to give to them.

 

[buckeyegrad]

For the sake of argument - is 'donating' to your own church really a charity? I'm assuming that your church does charity work, so I guess I'm not really talking about that... more of the question of, does keeping the lights on at your own church really equate charity? Ifso, why?

Are you asking about my own church or churches in general? I would argue that in general, yes, it is charity.

Of course only speaking in general terms here, not only do many churches do charity work (i.e. soup kitchens, clothing drives, sponsoring families in need, etc.), they often provide free counseling and educational programs--even beyond those tied strictly to their religion . Added to this, many churches provide free or discounted organized activities ranging from sports and recreation to summer camps and movie nights. Though these latter activities may not be seen as strictly "charity", they do provide people--often times youths--activities that keep them out of trouble, which is a service to the community.

And of course, there is also the question of whether or not providing community cohesiveness is a charitable act. Or what about inspiring people to have hope, take responsibility for themselves, or to do charity on their own? I would argue yes to all of theses, but I understand why that is more debatable.

 

[Gatorubet]

The difference being that I can choose which charities are efficient in properly handling the money I decide to give to them.

Which is an interesting topic.

Harvard Business Review had a series of articles on the subject, showing that most of what we think is important - even in labeling of "efficiency" as it relates to rating charities - is often skewed or misplaced. (Not the desire to have your heard earned money used wisely, mind you, Muck is right, just that the metrics to help determine that are sketchy at best)

You can click on the other related articles at the end of each one in the series. This is a good one to start with:

http://blogs.hbr.org/pallotta/2009/06/the-worst-question-to-ask-abou.html