The Charity Game

By Harry E. Berndt

In thinking of our Safety Net in this country and problems that loom large internationally, it occurred to me that we do not address either at home or abroad in a very intelligent way. Humans around the world, including us, tend to empathies and are charitable toward those of us needing help. People are charitable. I question, however, whether personal charity and the religious community efficiently address the problems humanity faces. Nations have deep pockets and organizational skills that are brought to bear on problems of hunger and disease, but somehow that is not enough. In addition, there are literally hundreds of not-for-profit organizations that have been created to take up the slack and address these problems. In fact, there are over a million registered charities, but not all of them solicit individual donors. With all of this, we still seem unable to accomplish all that we should to alleviate problems of hunger, disease, injustice, and violence around the world. Are we efficient in our approach or could we find a better way? I am posing the question, not answering it. I believe that there must be a better way.

During April of this year I received over 50 requests for contributions by postal service mail, many telephone solicitations and many email solicitations. Of the postal service requests, seven were from animal rights organizations, seventeen from food and poverty provider organizations, fifteen from medical assistance organizations, three from veteran organizations, three from justice related organizations, two from environmental organizations, and five from community related organizations. I believe that all were for very worthy causes making it a challenge to determine how to best address the needs made apparent by the requesting groups. All of us who receive so many worthy requests would like to be able to support all of them. With limited resources this is not possible, placing the decision to choose which has the greatest needs.

What becomes incredibly apparent is that our approach to these problems is not just inefficient but abysmally wasteful. New charities seem to emerge with regularity, if not daily, and most have significant administration costs – CEOs, professional fund raisers, the cost of mailings and other necessary forms of communicating need, and finally the cost of delivering assistance. The amount of duplication of services is significant, even considering the target specificity that exists. It is fair to assume that large amounts of the money donated is never used for the intended purpose. If the assumption has merit, why do we persist depending on charities to provide what is obviously the responsibility of government? Would we need so much dependence on charities if our safety net adequately provided food, shelter, education, and health care for all of our citizens? This is not to imply that there is no place for charity or that contributions to charitable organizations are never needed. Governments have limitations and in times of calamities are often slow to respond, especially when there are global considerations. That our government does not provide an adequate safety net, making it necessary for many of our citizens to depend on their churches and other charitable organizations for their daily needs, is reflected in the outcomes in all the above mentioned areas when compared with other advanced societies. Our society is one the wealthiest; so the question is why do we lag behind? Answers are welcome!