Whatever charity I donate to, I would expect a financial statement from them upon demand. Check to see how much is going into administration and how much is going to the people who need it.
Carefully.
Having received two PMs now about this thread (with two very different purposes…) I want to here make clear that the OP was not written as part of any current budgeting that I am doing with my family’s money right now.
I was idly curious, with a view towards thinking about how my family’s money might be spent in the future.
If the OP has already gotten PMs about items, I can imagine the demands that might be put upon his benighted family. That’s another reason why virtually all the “sponsor a child” philanthropies no longer actually sponsor individual children (can you imagine the difficulty of having one or two sponsored children and one or more unsponsored in the same family?).
I recently met a guy on a bench. I talk to everybody and get them to talk back too!
Anyway, he worked for some “church” that donated cows to communities way way overseas. I forget where but it was a plane ride that I wouldn’t take unless wherever I was headed flying for that many hours I was going to stay for a year as an example of a bad late night sentence.
Fast forward: They have to pay “authorities” that pop out of the wild along the way and then the major corporation (guy in the next town with 4 cows) gets pissed off and steals the cow and on and on.
In theory it was a great idea.
Speaking of cows it reminds me of that tribe in India/Africa? that donated some cows to us in response to hearing about the 9-11 attacks. The cows never made it here. I was angry at that–it was rather rude of us methinks.
Good nite!
P.S. There are hungry working people right here in our great country. Just saying.
Just a heads-up. Be very wary of the Heifer Fund. It sounded good on paper but has not worked well in practice.
Just another thought. If you really want to do something effective, donate to an orphanage that cares for abandoned and disabled children. Children that are at the bottom of the social totem pole. Children that otherwise have no hope. Your dollars will give them some time to live a life of dignity and will get them some of the respect they deserve for being born as a human being.
Don’t donate to any organization that is doing adoptions of children from third world counties. Almost all of these are corrupt. Don’t even get involved with them if you want to adopt a child. Stay away.
If you want a suggestion as to an agency that really takes care of the least of the least then PM me.
Can you elaborate?
bad idea, the charity countries, the ngo countries remain mired in poverty, ones like china that took care of business themselves are moving ahead.
there are plenty need causes in your own country i bet anyways.
Heifer Fund is another organization that raises money in a disingenuous way. Also, it’s easy to reproduce animals and people have had a lot of time to figure out what amount of animals are sustainable in a given area. Dumping livestock on an area can be a bad thing. Check out these links:
http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.comments&orgid=3809
http://www.valuesandcapitalism.com/dialogue/global-affairs/are-you-really-buying-heifer
http://www.earthsave.org/news/gatesfoundationcruel.htm
As for adoption, it can work but it is a business that has a lot of shady operators. Hopeful “parents” will be strung along for years while some glitch pops up in the process time after time. All the while, money is being sucked out of them. They have already invested so they keep chasing. Even if its not the adoption organization it might be the government official that needs a bribe, or two, or three in order to process the paperwork.
If you sponsored a family directly, you wouldn’t get this kind of control over their finances. A lot of people who would want to sponsor a family directly would want the right to tell the sponsored family what they can and can’t do with the money. I’m not sure a lot of poor families would want to sign up for a deal like that. You probably wouldn’t like it if someone gave you money but told you how to run your financial life, why should they?
Sometimes it gets worse than that. My parents’ church provided housing for some Katrina refugees. Some of the members of the church were complaining about the refugees doing things like sleeping in on weekends, things that had nothing to do with finances but of which the church members didn’t approve. I’d have to be pretty desperate, or getting a shitload of money, to accept someone else wanting that level of control over my life. Even if the things they told me to do were things I would do anyway, I would feel that I was not being treated like an adult by being told to do those things.
There are ways to do this that have some hope of being effective, no matter how broken the situation (although I’m not aware of any that involve sponsorship of whole families - probably because those are really quite variable units in comparison to, say, individual orphans.
But sponsoring the education and support of a named child through a reputable, auditable scheme seems like it ought to work - by targeting development, it should be able to contribute positively (however minutely) to the future of the community in which the individual is embedded - educated children are tomorrow’s doctors, etc.
This is way too simplistic. For one thing, there are charity organizations working with, e.g., orphanages and rural development in China too. It’s not as though Chinese economic policies accomplish all the improvements by themselves.
For another, some other third-world countries such as India are both growing economically overall and getting a lot of NGO input for their many impoverished people.
It’s true that some charity programs are inefficient and/or corrupt, and if you want to give money to help people in a third-world country you should scrutinize the recipient organization(s) very carefully. But there are a lot of reasons why many chronically poor countries stay poor. Receiving aid from people in richer countries doesn’t guarantee improvement, but it certainly doesn’t automatically prevent improvement.
Just saying “oh, don’t bother giving at all because it will just keep them dependent” is ignorant and inaccurate (not to mention a cheap excuse for selfishness).
Which child sponsorship is disingenuous in their methods? I know of Plan intl. (secular), World Vision (protestant, was under criticsm for too-emotional ads in the past but promised to do better now) and SOS children’s village. True, they all have posters and spots with “make a difference in the life of one child” - but once you read the extended brochure, they point out quite clearly that you are not handing money to one child directly, but giving to one community, and that the child is meant as representative of that community (in case of Plan and World Vision) or that you are financing the whole village (in case of SOS).
That explains why I got all those geese sent back to me. I’m just glad I didn’t order the bees.
I haven’t had much luck ordering orphans either. They’re never as cute as their pictures and most of them seem to be a lot older than they claimed. Too expensive to ship them back, too.
Getting money to the type of person you want to help can be problematic.
Some years ago, a friend and I were rescued from a difficult situation in a Mexican train station by an amazing Mexican woman, who eked out a living by aiding travelers there. She was very intelligent and spoke numerous languages fluently. She was also homeless and malnourished. Her story was that as a child she’d been plucked from her impoverished family by a university that wanted to study her incredible gift for languages. She got an education, but in the process was put on display, poked, prodded, and made to jump through hoops. Eventually the study ended or funds ran out, and she was sent home. How much of this is true I couldn’t say.
We adored her and were extremely grateful, so made arrangements to send her things like shoes and clothing from the U.S. We sent several packages and also letters with small amounts of money. It didn’t take long for someone in the Mexican delivery system to realize what was going on, and the letters and packages either didn’t arrive at all, or they arrived opened, with anything of value removed.
Impoverished people may not have access to the amenities we take for granted. There may not be a reliable way to gift them. It’s unlikely they have a bank account. They probably lack the sophistication to figure out a safe way through a corrupt system. And it’s unlikely that their windfall will go unnoticed by those around them.
Sheesh. How are things going at Occupy Wall Street?
Another recommendation for Kiva.com here. The money you give is a loan not a charitable donation. The payback rate is close to 100% and you can roll it over into another loan to another entrepeneur when paid in full. Select a particular country or type of business you wish to fund and they will match you with a screened recipient. I made a small ($25) loan to a family in Cambodia wanting to start a small grocery store and recieve an accounting from Kiva each month as to the amount repaid. So far payments each month are on time and $16.00 is available for me. When it’s back up to $25 I plan to let it ride. LRR!
The only money you don’t get back is a small administrative fee of IIRC $3.
An added benefit is you can tell all your friends you’re in the international banking business. 
International development professional here.
Larger (and many smaller) development organizations are relatively skilled at what they do. They have decades of experience, and are increasingly focusing on data-driven interventions that have been proven to be effective. It’s been a learning process and it’s far from perfect, but aid agencies are pretty darn effective. For example, if you want to run a program say, building wells, you are going to do a survey first to determine incidence of water-borne diseases, and a survey (with a control group- maybe in a village with similar conditions and disease burden) after the wells are used to see if your program is cutting down on disease. In other words, these organizations are not just stabbing in the dark- they are basically run like businesses, and they put out products and services that help their beneficiaries.
I’d make a donation in the name of a trusted organization, and count on them to leverage their experience and expertise.
Does this offer still stands? If so, I can link you with poor families in Zimbabwe. I work for a small non governmental organisation in Zimbabwe.
Considering that it was a thread from 2012 and the OP actually said that he was asking out of curiosity rather than any real plans, probably not.