Only considering how much money actually reaches people can be problematic. If the money "reaches" the person through cash going directly to them, how can you be sure it is appropriate? For example, what if the person is a substance abuser and chooses to uses the money for their habit? If the money is used in a charity program and "reaches" the person that way, you still could run into a problem with your one-dimensional approach. For example, what if the charity provides awful services? Even though the money is arguably going to the person, their results indicate ineffectiveness. These are just a couple of examples of why we recommend a three dimensional analysis of finance, accountability/transparency and results.
While contributors to this blog work for or with Charity Navigator, anything published here is their personal opinion and not necessarily the opinions of Charity Navigator.
2 comments:
All I want to know is how much money is collected by the charity and how much of that money actually reaches the people it was collected for.
Dear A,
Only considering how much money actually reaches people can be problematic. If the money "reaches" the person through cash going directly to them, how can you be sure it is appropriate? For example, what if the person is a substance abuser and chooses to uses the money for their habit? If the money is used in a charity program and "reaches" the person that way, you still could run into a problem with your one-dimensional approach. For example, what if the charity provides awful services? Even though the money is arguably going to the person, their results indicate ineffectiveness. These are just a couple of examples of why we recommend a three dimensional analysis of finance, accountability/transparency and results.
Best,
Ken
Post a Comment