I want to pit fake matching funds. Seems these days almost every fund raising request I get tells me how I’m going to double or triple (or more) my impact!! I used to think these were real, that someone was matching my donations. Now I know it’s just marketing hype. Yes, there are real matching grants, but those usually list the corporation or foundation that’s providing the money as well as some sort of time period for the match. All those requests that say a “generous donor” is matching my donation? Just basically a lie.
And how do I know? Because several of the charities I donate to have asked me for donations and asked if I would let them use my donation as part of a “matching fund.” They’ll already have my money; I’m not matching some new donor’s contribution.
As you can tell, I’m annoyed. My new policy is that a fund raising request shows up with a promise of a fake match, that request goes straight to the trash. I suspect the list of charities I donate to is going to be shrinking.
And on preview, I see there’s a Factual Questions thread about this. But nobody over there seems particularly annoyed about the practice. Anyway, I feel better for venting.
Public radio stations that I listen to use this quite a bit on their fund drives, in fact it seems that having matching funds is more the rule than the exception. They are always for a specific time and a specific total amount (e.g. $1,000 within an hour), and often mention the donor(s) by name, but often it is “anonymous” or some subset of a group of elite high-dollar donors. They always make a big deal about how, if they don’t reach the goal in the time allotted, the station will have to offer to return the matching dollars (I doubt this ever happens). I have always believed these appeals to be genuine, although I also believe that they would not be above juggling donations to make it “true.” That doesn’t much bother me, they are an excellent cause, and I believe there is very little wastage.
The charities that don’t get a dime from me are the ones that advertise on TV with sad announcers talking about pets being left out in the cold with no food, or (the worst) old Jewish grandma survivors of the Holocaust who are starving in eastern Europe. I haven’t seen the latter one in a while, maybe they realize how unlikely it is that there are many such remaining from a war that ended 80 years ago.
I hear the “matching funds” thing all the time on my local NPR station as well, and have also heard it from other nonprofits. What is usually means is this: If the general public donates X amount of money within Y amount of time, and the total is over X, I will match the X amount.
Yeah, my local NPR station is currently in the middle of a fund drive and they’re what triggered my rant. They’re one of the organizations that has asked me if I’d donate and then let them use my donation as a “match.” But I still donate to them because I’m a big fan of NPR.
You are completely misunderstanding the concept of matching funds. In the situation that you are describing, Mrs J. Multimillionaire Gotrocks has promised to donate to the group $50,000 if they can match those contributions with gifts from other donors.
So she is sitting back watching donations come in and as soon as enough donations come in that equal $50,000, she will release that money to the organization. Different other conditions can be set up for matching donations. For example she might ask the organization to raise $25,000 from donations, and then she will match it with $50,000. It’s supposed to be leverage so people will think “I gave a dollar but it actually brought in $2.”
Except for skeptical people like yourself who think charitable fundraising is some kind of a scam or con.
That’s why the organization has to ask you if your donation can be used to match against Mrs. Gottocks’s donation. In other words to leverage the release of the funds that she has promised If the organization can match it.
My assumption is that Mrs. Gotrocks will give anyway, even if the goal is not met. I have no way to prove that though.
The other kind of matching funds is employer match. Our firm will match any employee charitable contribution up to $250. It’s not a huge thing, but it’s nice. And it does actually double the gift.
It’s still a good way to package a giving opportunity and appeal to more donors. To bring in more money, so the organization can continue to offer child care, meals to the homeless, symphony concerts, medical care, drug rehabilitation, and all those other ways that civilized people take care of each other in society.
I probably sounded too cynical. I’m not against the idea and I’m happy to donate to a variety of charities. If I were to do it though, I’d tell the charity, “use this as you see fit. If you want to say it’s for matching requests, fine. I’m giving you the money either way though.”
ETA: I can think of one exception. The charity needs $2M to restore a building or something. I might say, I’ll give you $1M if you can raise the rest. If they can’t raise the rest, and they can’t therefore do the project, I’m not giving them the money.
This is exactly the thinking behind matching funds at every level. “Before I write you this big check, let’s see your grass roots supporters come forward.”