How do I make a decision as to which organization to donate to using the parameters of
who can get the aid to the affected areas most effectively?
who can use to money with the least amount of overhead, waste, graft, and all-around hi-jinks?
who has the best track record for knowing what needs to go where, i.e. not sending rice to an area that has plenty of rice but needs the fuel to cook it with, etc?
I know it’s a subjective, but I know that certain organizations waste just a little too much for my blood. I’m not inclined to donate to the American Red Cross…I can’t believe they have the infrastructure to work effectively on the other side of the globe, and they have been shown to be rife with incompetence.
A U.N. based group seems like a poor choice, also. I think they’ve got their work cut out for them and I fear most of that is internal.
The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) does some great work in disaster areas – it’s arguably one of the most efficient organizations in our government. Their website discusses the most efficient ways to donate money to the cause. Of course, they say you should give to one of the following NGOs, which are the ones you were asking abou. Full list in the link.
Now, here’s where you may have to do some work. Because many of those organizations work closely with the US Government and federal employees, some will have chosen to be included in the “Combined Federal Campaign,” the annual charity drive sponsored by government employees. Because these charities are being vouched for by your government, you have a right to know their overhead costs, which can be found here (Word doc - open with WordPad or similar). A quick cross-reference will tell you where your money will do the most good.
For example, the first one listed (Action Against Hunger) has a 9.9% overhead rate. The American Red Cross is only 7.6%, and so on. Because of the vast number of ethnicities and religions over there, I think any religious charity is going to have some doors slammed in their faces – for example, India has already turned away a group of aid-workers who are Jewish.
And of course, the USAID page goes into great detail about why cash donations are better than sending supplies or care packages. The aid workers buy what they can from local suppliers (helping the local economy recover) and avoid burdening shipping channels with excess packaging or unnecessary materials. Imagine if someone said “well, they need drinking water, so I’ll FedEx them 800 gallon jugs of water!” That would weigh down several trucks that could be carrying food or medicine; a poorly-thought-out care package could clog up the works and cause more harm than good.