Ask Slashdot: Most Efficient, Worthwhile Charity? 570
New submitter yanom writes "I'm thinking about making a holiday donation to a charity, but I'm not sure where to give it. I've looked at organizations such as the Red Cross and Village Reach that promote disaster relief and health in the developing world. I want my money to have the biggest possible impact, so where should I send it?"
None (Score:5, Insightful)
I've been profoundly disappointed by all charities I gave to or came in contact with professionally.
Give your time to something close to you, not your money.
really? (Score:2, Insightful)
How about something close to home, efficiency doesn't always go along with need.
Wikipedia (Score:5, Insightful)
Help a neighbor (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:American Red Cross - worst? (Score:5, Insightful)
Excuse me, but what does one person retiring with "a very good pension" say about how high the administrative costs are vs program costs? Charity Navigator says ARC has a 3.9% administrative cost. The parent post claims 49% administrative cost (which is insanely high). If you believe Charity Navigator, he's only off by an order of magnitude.
10 ways - all local (Score:5, Insightful)
No, give it to ME. I have zero overhead - I can guarantee that 100% of the net you give me will go to the intended recipient.
I even accept chocolate!
Seriously though, if you don't know what to give or where, go ask at:
1. your local police or fire station. They get to see human misery every day, and they know about those "pockets of need" ...
2. your local hospital or clinic. Same thing.
3. your local animal shelter. Pets are people too, and they're going to need a lot of help dealing with the annual post-christmas "pet dump".
4. your local schools. The teachers know that there's always some kid who need a winter coat, warm boots, or something.
5. your local library. It's probably under-funded, and you can make a "donation" by buying old books from them so they can buy new books.
6. your local church, synagogue or temple - even if you're an atheist, these organizations are still good points of contact for the needy
7. your local homeless shelter. Obvious reasons
8. your local media - tv, radio, print
9. your local city counselor, alderman, mayor, or whatever
10. your friends and neighbors.
What all these things have in common is that they're all local, they're all just an email or a phone call or a click away, and that they'll have an immediate impact - within days - and they all benefit your community. Charity begins at home.
Cross Out Red Cross (Score:5, Insightful)
I was centrally involved with relief for the Haiti earthquake and observed the Red Cross and many other such organizations in action. Or rather inaction. Their lack of logistical expertise and disaster planning is shocking.
But one outfit that did seem to have their act together was Doctors without Borders/Medecins sans Frontieres. They just hop on planes and start helping people, no BS. They also seem to have relatively low overhead, which is where the lion's share of every donated dollar goes at most charities. Maybe someone else on /. knows differently, but at least from the outside as a colleague they seemed effective and well deserving of support.
Check out religious charities (Score:5, Insightful)
I know that God is not popular on Slashdot, but even from a rational humanist perspective these charities are very effective. The administrative costs are usually born by regular tithing so any funds given to the charity can be spent 100% on the core mission of the charity. Especially, in the area of disaster relief, these charities also have strong connections with the local congregations who can quickly put resources to use where it is most needed. This in contrast to groups like the Red Cross usually have to spend time "getting in" to places.
I know there will be some objections voiced that the money will be used to evangelize victims rather then aid them. I cannot speak for other sectors of the religious sphere, but charities associated with Mainline Protestant Christian churches operate in perpetual fear of this accusation and copiously avoid any activity that might be mistaken for proselytizing.
I will end by plugging the charity of my own Episcopal Church: Episcopal Relief and Development [er-d.org].
Re:really? (Score:2, Insightful)
Nope. They're where they are voluntarily. And, since it's not a formal non-profit organization, no tax credit.
Instead, donate to a local food bank (they can use cash contributions, too) which serves families which are involuntarily in need.
Re:Charity Navigator (Score:0, Insightful)
Your time is not valuable - your money is (Score:5, Insightful)
Giving your time may make you feel better - but when $10 can feed a family for 4 for a day or two, with soups, breads etc., your time is inherently useless. Go use your time to earn money and then pass it on. Barter was fundamentally inefficient - and hence money came to be. Why go backwards ?
Re:American Red Cross - worst? (Score:4, Insightful)
A quote from the comments section on Charity Navigator:
I have worked for the ARC for over 11 years now as both a volunteer and a paid staff member. The organization is very top heavy with mostly overpaid executives at the National Headquarters in Washington DC. Generally the volunteers and staff "in the field" are the ones who go to great lengths to serve clients. Many positions in the field have been eliminated in recent years as the executives in the "ivory tower" protect their own salaries and positions. Our Service Members and their families are now served mostly by call centers empoyees who are inexperienced instead of caring employees working alongside our military throughout the world.
Re:Salvation Army (Score:5, Insightful)
It takes time for donations to wind up as available cash to spend on disaster relief. Do you think when you make a credit card donation the money is instantly transferred to the charity? From what I've heard this can sometimes take months.
I'm no charitable donations expert, but I'd guess that donations don't all come in at once, but slowly over a period of weeks. If a major disaster occurs, do you think a charity should just wait around for the money to come in, or start acting right away? Acting right away requires having money on hand.
Join me in helping Hawa Akther Jui (Score:5, Insightful)
I want to help Hawa Akther Jui [elearners.com], a Bangladeshi woman whose husband disfigured her right hand when she dared to pursue higher education against his wishes. She's determined to continue learning by training her left hand to write, and I admire her persistence. Anyone who wants to join me is more than welcome, details in my linked blog post.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Charity Navigator (Score:5, Insightful)
Local (Score:5, Insightful)
You don't need a middle-man.
Effectiveness (Score:5, Insightful)
If everyone who gave to charity gave to the one who deserves it the most, then all causes in the world except for the most worthy one would receive no money, until that most worthy cause was completely paid for, in which case the second most worthy cause would receive all the money, etc.
So I'd think a bit before giving to the most worthwhile. If it was me I'd give to groups that did things I knew about even if they weren't the most worthy groups in the world, which would include geeky groups like the EFF, or maybe local organizations.
I also agree with others that volunteering your time is a bad idea. Use your time to earn money and donate the money. We have division of labor for a reason. People like volunteering because it's more personal, but "more personal" and "helps people more" aren't necessarily the same thing.
Hire... (Score:5, Insightful)
Give work to someone who needs it. It's probably the most efficient use of your money that I can think of.