I’m interviewing you because you identified yourself as a person heavily involved in non-profit charity work.  Which organizations or groups have you been involved with and why?

I have been involved with the American Cancer Society, specifically Relay for Life. The reason being the cancer has impacted my life and that of everyone I know.

How much money would you say you’ve personally raised for these groups, or helped raise at events?

I would say approximately $25000. to date.

Before becoming involved in theses fundraisers, did you look into how those groups used the funds they gathered?

I am embarrassed to say I did not.

People often use phrases like, “all of the money raised goes to Blah Blah Blah.”  Do you think somebody should be more specific when some of the funds are used to pay for fund raising events or administrative costs (often considered to be part of the cause and often including salaries)?

I think that reasonable administrative costs and salaries are to be expected.

Have you talked about these issues when collecting donations for the groups you’ve been involved in?

No. I have never discussed these issues with regard to Relay for Life, or the other charities I raise money for. I have discussed it with regard to charities we’ve seen in the news. Those who’ve been exposed for misuse of funds.

When the funds raised are used to pay for an event, as opposed to being sponsored, it means that less money goes to the cause itself; however, more funds are usually raised at an event than normally would be donated.  If an organization has to pat for its own event, how much do you think is reasonable to spend?

I think that would depend on the size of the event. For example, Relay (the site I’m involved with), uses a huge school. The school has to stay open, and although they allow us the use of the grounds, free of charge, the organization does have to pay for such things as staff to keep the building open. In this case, I would say for an 18 hour event, it is reasonable for Relay to pa a couple of thousand dollars. Over a $100,000 is raised.

What do you believe the most effective fund raising method is, monetarily speaking?

Sponsorship. Each participant gets however many people they can to “sponsor” them for the event. This can be a flat donation, donation per lap, whatever. Sponsorship allows more people to be involved; therefore, more money is raised.

It’s been suggested to me, that I unfairly judge charities solely on a financial basis.  Would you say that an organization’s impact, as far as awareness and a sense of strength in numbers can make up for inefficiency in collecting or allocating funding?

NO, a charity should spend as much money as possible on the cause the money has been donated for. In the case of my charity, although a great deal of money is spent on staff, and event planning, tons more money goes directly to the cause, which is Cancer research. I think it’s great for people to be vigilant about where their money is really going.  Without watchdogs, there would be much more opportunity for scams.

When someone is advocating a specific cause, they sometimes use extreme measures to help spread awareness.  Does a person need to be violent or destructive to be out of line, or is disturbing the public enough?

Where do you think we should draw the line? That depends on what you consider disturbing the public.  We have free speech and freedom of peaceful assembly in this country.  I believe people should have a right to hand out pamphlets, advertise, or otherwise increase awareness to their cause. This should be within reason, however.

It is hard to, maybe unfair to, judge any organization based on anything other than its past.  If a group has had bad publicity or poor management in the past, but still has a worthy cause, should you still support it?

If the problems have been adequately addressed, then yes.

Some charities have causes that are very, very, somewhat ridiculously specific.  Let’s say that you like dogs, but really love English Sheep Dogs; you could easily donate money to a group that helps English Sheep Dogs, all dogs, or animals in general.  Which is the more moral choice in this case (you don’t have to stick with the example, but feel free to)?

I believe that people should be able to give their money in support of whatever they see fit. Personally, I would rather see the money go to a broader spectrum, but that is my opinion.

Is it better to help a lot of different groups, or to focus your energy on one to more effectively help that cause?

I am involved in several different charities.  I personally like to try to make a difference in several areas. For example, I run a baby shower for an unwed mother’s home. This provides basic needs for women who otherwise would do without. This does not take away from my work for Relay.

How much of our own time do you think we should each spend on charity work of some type?

I believe that charity work is an individual choice. I do not judge someone who doesn’t want to devote any of their time to charity. I get personal satisfaction out of knowing I’ve helped others.

Do you think that there are enough of us are willing to help to make a real difference?

If one person is willing to help, that’s 100% more than no people helping. One person therefore, makes a huge difference.

How can we best inspire others to become more involved?

By example. If people see that you are willing to go out of your way to help, they are more likely to do the same.

Thank you for taking the time to help me address these issues.  Is there anything you would personally like to say to my readers?

I know that there is a gross misuse of charitable funds. That is why it’s important to know where your money is going. However, please don’t let that discourage you from giving. There are just as many deserving organizations out there. These organizations help with research for cancer cures, birth defect prevention, and child abuse prevention, among others. Please follow your heart, and help wherever you can. Charity really does change lives for the better.

Ally, a local student (like Herc Poirot),  runs a blog called Travel Tips at Your Fingertips; which gives people a heads -up to any beneficial airport travel behavior.  She put a post up about Delta Airline’s support of Breast Cancer Awareness Month.  Here is a quote; “Delta Airlines painted its plane in pink for Breast Cancer awareness Month. The airline sells different types of materials, example pins, pens, t-shirts and even dress shirts. The price isn’t too high, so many agents always go out of their way to help out. The money is usually donated to one certain charity. I always bought something small but since one of my good friend’s mom was diagnosed but is now fully cured,I will be spending a lot more. Even something little helps. For more information about Breast Cancer, check out, thepowerofpink.wordpress.com.”

That blog also deserves a shout out.  It’s run by local resident Nicole, the daughter of a Breast Cancer survivor.  Here’s something a from her page,  “Although the cancer has been dug, scrapped, and entirely extracted from what is left of my mother’s femininity, my determination grows stronger. My goal is to further educate myself on this cancer, and to be able to give simple answers to others when they come looking”.  She has posted about people who’ve helped raise awareness for that cause.

Lastly, local musician Justin Sharachick, is promoting a music related cause, run by an A. Gaynor.  Here’s what he Justin to say about it, “Many artists can relate to that first song they every wrote, or the first beat they ever banged out on the drums.  What Alan is hoping to create, is a chance for a school of children to experience this for the first time too. Tomorrows musicians can be in that school, and not have a chance to express themselves creatively because their music program is gone”.  His site is theSIbandguy.blogspot.com.

Click the thumbnails for a link directly to their blogs, good stuff there.

Sometimes it isn’t necessarily corruption that make a charity not worth donating to.  The March of Dimes is one group that does a lot of work in the local area through charity runs jogs walks and they do it for a good cause.  Here it is in their own words (From MarchOfDimes.Org),

“Why we walk: When you walk in March for Babies, you give hope to the more than half a million babies born too soon each year. The money you raise supports programs in your community that help moms have healthy, full-term pregnancies. And it funds research to find answers to the problems that threaten our babies. We’ve been walking since 1970 and have raised an incredible $1.8 billion to benefit all babies.”

I think only a very few people would disagree with their goal and if you are interested in helping them out they have and event coming up soon.  Here is the info on that: April 25, 2010, Staten Island Mall, 2655 Richmond Avenue, Staten Island, NY 10314, Walk Distance: 4.8miles, Registration Time: 8:00 AM, Start Time: 9:00 AM, Chapter: New York, Phone: (718) 981-3000

This is where people may start to get angry, because I really don’t think that you should participate in this, or any of their other, events.  The fact is that The March of Dimes is a very ineffective charity.  On the homepage of their website, linked above, they claim that 76 cents of every donated dollar goes to helping the babies.  I don’t know where that figure comes from, but it already makes me ask where the other 24 cents (about 1/4) of peoples’ dollars are going.

Charity Navigator, a widely trusted charity evaluation website, reports that of $236,057,508 raised by March of Dimes in 2008 (Impressive!), $232,445,150 was used for ‘Total Functional Expenses” , which include both fundraiser events and administrative expenses (Way Less Impressive!).  This wasn’t only true in 2008.  The same efficiency, or lack of, was reached in both 2007 and 2006 (They haven’t been able to run all the numbers for 2009 yet).  Overall, they were given only 1 out of 4 possible stars by that site.  Out of all the walking events in America, this is the most popular and most attended (which may help explain the high costs of their events), but this is not a good thing.  With so many people participating, giving both time and money to such an important cause, we can’t ignore where that money is actually going.

Criticism of the Organization was also easy to find on The March of Dimes Wikipedia page;

“Criticism

The March of Dimes has been cited as an example of bureaucracy for not disbanding after it achieved its mission of eliminating polio.^[4] The organization’s new mission, “to improve the health of babies by preventing birth defects, premature birth, and infant mortality”, may justify its existence indefinitely.

Conversely, not disbanding may be regarded as a positive example of an organization successfully reinventing itself after achieving its original mission.

Charity Navigator has given the organization a rating of two out of four stars based on its financial filings, meaning “Needs Improvement:Meets or nearly meets industry standards but underperforms most charities in its Cause.”

Animal experiments

Some of the research funded by the March of Dimes involves laboratory animals. PETA and PCRM, have raised concerns about the use of animals in such research.  March of Dimes asserts that it supports the use of non-animal research alternatives, whenever possible, but it “could not fulfill its mission to improve the health of babies by preventing birth defects and infant death” without supporting research involving animals.”

Herc Poirot will be attending this event on the 25th so that I can bring you a more acurate report. Herc Poirot will not be able to provide further information about this event.

I think it’s okay to laugh.

KFC has a very specific, short-term, goal for their campaign.  They aren’t even using the standard coin buckets; they stuck with their standard bucket and died them pink.  Here is there deal, they aren’t asking people to give them extra change.  Instead, every bucket of chicken purchased automatically donates 50¢ to a charity called Susan G. Komen for the Cure, which fights to “end breast cancer forever.”  If you don’t know what breast cancer is, then go look it up, extensively, right now.  KFC’s mission not only differs in how it is raising funds, but also because it ends when they reach a specific amount of money.  In this case it is $8.5 million dollars and they’ve already gotten over a tenth of the way there.  This temporary charity will most likely, and not coincidentally, bring more customers in to KFC until it ends; because McDonald’s and Wendy’s always have their coin collectors there, this probably isn’t true for them.  They aren’t raising money for another organization, but want to continuously run their own programs .  (Although, when you click the Ronald McDonald House link on McDonald’s website, they make it clear that you’re going to a third-party site) This means that they always need more funds.

The RMCH states it’s mission like this, “The mission of Ronald McDonald House Charities (RMHC) is to create, find and support programs that directly improve the health and well-being of children. Guiding us in our mission are our core values: Focusing on the critical needs of children, celebrating the diversity of the programs we offer and the staff, volunteers and donors who make them possible, staying true to our heritage of 35 years of responsible stewardship, and operating with accountability and transparency.”  Charity Navigator thinks that they do a good job.  They got three out of four stars, which isn’t so common on that site, but that was odd because they also report that the charity spends 25¢ to raise each dollar and gave them zero stars for efficiency.

It isn’t hard to guess what the Dave Thomas Foundation for Adoption’s goal is.  I’ll let them state their goal too though, “Created by Wendy’s founder, Dave Thomas, who was adopted as a child, the Foundation implements results-driven national signature programs, foster care adoption awareness initiatives and research-based advocacy efforts. As the only foundation dedicated exclusively to foster care adoption, we are driven by Dave’s simple value: Do what’s best for the child.”  You can see how, like the RMHC, this charity needs continuous funds to help achieving its goal.  Charity Navigator gave them the first four star rating I’ve seen and they also had four stars for efficiency.  They only spend 06¢ to raise each dollar.  That leaves $0.94 compared to the RMCH’s $0.75.  By the way, KFC’s group SGKFTC only spends 07¢ as well.

I was completely surprised at how well all of these organizations are doing for their causes.  The Dave Thomas Foundation raised $10,681,887 in 2008,  The Ronald McDonald House Charity raised $12,438,648 (in New York alone) ,  and Susan G. Koman for the Cure raised an amazing $304,409,624 (they also got a four star rating).  I think that the burger places are doing something more honorable with their causes because they are very long-term and not used greatly for publicity on the parts of their restaurants.  KFC is clearly acting to get more people through their doors, but the charity KFC is collecting for obviously uses more effective methods to collect funds; so, I can’t say that one is better than the other to give to.  I do find it funny that each charity is somehow involved in better health, two with the health of children specifically, and somewhat hypocritically, they all serve unhealthy children’s meals and very unhealthy food for adults, but their charities are working.  They all go unbashed…for now.

Let’s all thank the Arizona Attorney General for articulating this.

Quote-“But are they legit?”

If you have never met anyone who is asthmatic, then you probably don’t live in this country.  I almost wrote about how there were more important medical conditions to address in the city; but, I’m glad I looked in to before I did that.  Here is a quote I found that was typical of quotes on many other sites;

“An estimated 30.8 million people in the United States had asthma diagnosed at some point in their life, including some 8.9 million children. Asthma is estimated to affect as many as 300 million people worldwide. Asthma is the leading cause of hospitalization in children, the most prevalent chronic disease in childhood, and the most common cause of school absenteeism due to chronic disease. It is more common and more severe in African-Americans, and in people with a low income living in urban areas. In 2001, 4,269 people died of asthma in the U.S.; over 65% of these deaths occurred in women. Asthma accounts for 1 of every 250 deaths worldwide”.

So, I may have been wrong when I planned to tell you to avoid this event…or not.  Sometimes the thing about facts is that there are so many of them.  A lot of the facts concerning this event are keeping me from walking with them.  While The American Lung Association did a good job of getting this event payed for by sponsors like TD Bank, Clean Air NY, and TEVA Specialty Pharmaceuticals (check out this article from Charitiesblog.net to see why that is important), the New York department spends twenty three times what the national headquarters spends in order to raise each dollar , according to Charity Navigator.  In fact, the Southeast, Southwest, Mid-Atlantic, and Californian branches were all more efficient and most of them were by a large percentage. So, if you want to donate to The American Lung Association, then I suggest donating to them out of state.

There are still a couple other problems with this event.  One is the diversity of The American Lung Association itself.  This walk is supposed to be directly supporting Asthma related research and care.  Now, The ALA is one of the leading organizations in that field, but it is not their only (or their most prominently addressed) mission.  So, while some of the funds raised will go toward helping Asthma sufferers, most of it will go to other areas.  According to their own website, this organization also works on, “Fighting Lung Disease, Fighting Second-Hand Smoke, Fighting Smoking (First Hand), Fighting Tobacco, and Fighting Air Pollution”.  The event itself has also been becoming less efective each year.  In 2007 donators were given chances to win hybrid cars and 3 night vacations; I couldn’t find any offered rewards for the years after that.  Even last year, in 2009, they had a goal of $300,000 dollars.  That is $30,000 less than this year’s goal.  I’ve never seen an annual event do that before.   In summary, the ALA of New York just doesn’t stand up to it’s national counterparts and this event just is not effective enough.  The Breathe NYC Asthma Walk raises money that is not used solely for Asthma related causes,  it is raising less money each year, and its sponsers are not supporting donors the same way they used to.  If you still want to get out of Staten Island, that’s good; but, I can tell you one place not to go.