Unclaimed toys will be sent to other entities that give toys to needy children, but the number of no-shows blows my mind - or maybe it shouldn’t, because it was in a place that was not exactly easy to find.
Does anyone else have similar local stories to tell?
Any links? I assume many of those families don’t own cars, so if the pickup point wasn’t easily accessible without one, that’s probably a big part of the problem.
After looking at the website, I can probably guess another reason why. In short, enrolling is online, and they would only release the toys if people presented proof of guardianship (birth certificate or Social Security card, among others) along with proof of local address. Some people may not have had that, or had it available; in the past, they had to present those when they signed up in person.
I’m leaning towards embarrassment.
It’s possible more than a few came into some other good fortune that renders this aid unnecessary. Better to ‘leave it for someone who needs it more’, sort of thinking.
This seems like the obvious reason.
Of course people are suggesting that they be shipped to the tornado-stricken towns in Kentucky, but there’s plenty of need here, and I really think that for disaster-stricken areas, anything that can be obtained locally or regionally, should be.
That’s completely messed up. Who carries their kid’s birth certificate or SS card around with them? Like they’re SO fucking concerned that there will be a massive tidal wave of people who don’t have kids trying to get free toys unless there’s a rigorous fraud prevention program in place? This is what’s wrong with America.
Still, it seems like all the toys will eventually make their way to kids one way or another, so that’s good.
Most people don’t, but you DO need them in order to sign up for many social services.
Sure, for something like reduced utility bills or ongoing food assistance, that’s one thing, but a one-time giveaway of TOYS? Seems Grinchy.
I’ve never distributed toys in person to families, but a coworker said some percentage seem embarrassed/ashamed.
Somebody mentioned paperwork problems. I expect transportation might be an issue too.
Are you referring to the necessary paperwork? It’s a way to prevent fraud.
I know a divorced guy, works, makes decent salary. He is the primary/custodial parent (kids went to school in the district where he lives). Ex managed to get on disability; he then gets a letter that the kids are eligible for free/reduced cost meals. He called/emailed the school & said. “WTF, I didn’t ask for this, I don’t need it, I don’t want to get in any legal (fraud?) trouble, please take it off.” was basically told that’s the way the system works & since she gets it, you get it too.
Part B was that since the kids were on free/reduced meals he then got a letter that they were eligible for Christmas gifts & to fill out & return the form with age/sex/size/preferences. He (intentionally) never returned it. I’m wondering if this could be the case with some of the un-picked up gifts, that a parent never signed up for them & didn’t want/need to take resources that they could afford.
Yeah, but you know without some sort of controls that some scammer is going to sign up, collect toys and sell them on eBay or something. Hopefully that would be a small enough segment that stringent signup criteria blocking legitimate need cases wouldn’t be blocked, but hard to say.