Tell me more ×
Skeptics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for scientific skepticism. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Note: I am not entirely sure how to make this question broad enough to matter without making it too subjective. Feel free to edit if you see a better way to phrase this. Also, I just guessed at tags.

There are a handful of organizations that offer you a chance to financially support third-world orphans by sending them a monthly payment. The money is advertised as being used for supplies as varied as:

  • water
  • food
  • clothing
  • schooling
  • English lessons
  • housing

The premise is that your money will help take this child from utter poverty and give them a fighting chance at breaking into a self-supporting lifestyle. The scope of these children includes any stereotypically poor country and isn't necessarily restricted to orphans.

A typical behavior is to take a picture of a handful of kids from one area and post them up at a church or local market with the intent to acquire sponsors. The pictures are usually glued to something like a construction-paper heart and clothespinned near the entrance. People take a heart home and there is some contact information that gets you started on a monthly payment.

After a few weeks, the sponsor gets a letter in the mail from the child that is neatly handwritten in English thanking them for the support and describing typical daily events and other things you would expect in a letter from a child. This continues as long as you continue support.

The question for Skeptics is such: How legitimate are these businesses? This system would be fairly easy to abuse given that the only contact you get from the child is a picture and handwritten letters sent oversees. I would imagine that some of these organizations are exactly as they seem and their origin is in well-intentioned, helpful people. But... how would one know? Given the subject material and target market, I doubt much skepticism is entertained at the point of sale and any small amount of anecdotal evidence would be enough to assage small doubts. I see enough red flags in the process to make me wonder but I can see it going either way.

The answers I am looking for are any sort of journalistic or skeptical review of the business model or industry with a summary of the entire thing. I have avoided mentioning specific organizations or anecdotes because I am not terribly interested in answers regarding any organization in particular. That being said, if you happen to stumble across a review or investigation regarding a particular organization, please mention it.


To narrow this question down a bit, here are some specific claims to check:

  • How much money donated to this type of charity make it to the orphan depicted in the photograph?
  • Is there evidence suggesting that these donations make a significant impact?
share|improve this question
e.g. Independent Charities of America or BBB Charity Seal Program. I'm guessing most countries have similar organisations. – Oliver_C May 17 '11 at 0:59
1  
It's really impossible to give a generic answer for all possible organisations that do this. There are certainly legitimate organizations that do this, and almost certainly some that are scams. Can you give us a name? – DJClayworth Jun 7 '11 at 21:35
@DJC: I really am interested in the legitimacy of industry/business model. At this point, I would take any study or report on such an organization that was revealed to be a scam or, at the very least, misleading. Or something that studied the end result of the funds of such programs... or, really, any study on them at all. The problem with presenting specific names of organizations is that I highly doubt any organization I can name has ever been studied or reported. I don't care about any particular organization. Any study on any one of them is better than nothing. – MrHen Jun 7 '11 at 21:58
@MrHen -- it's misleading at that point. For any such activity, with pretty much any charity, there will be someone using it as a scam. So to take one instance of scamming and use that to answer a question about the industry as a whole is misleading. – Russell Steen Jun 7 '11 at 22:02
1  
@MrHen: I politefully disagree. Misleading data is worse than no data. If the question has no activity, perhaps consider rephrasing the question to refer to a specific group (as suggested). – Russell Steen Jun 7 '11 at 22:13
show 4 more comments

closed as off topic by Sklivvz Nov 15 '12 at 20:31

Questions on Skeptics Stack Exchange are expected to relate to scientific skepticism within the scope defined in the FAQ. Consider editing the question or leaving comments for improvement if you believe the question can be reworded to fit within the scope. Read more about closed questions here.

2 Answers

up vote 8 down vote accepted

One way to check them out is with Charity Navigator.

It's an nonprofit organization that analyzes charities and gives them star ratings, based on their efficiency (basically, how much of your donation goes toward charitable work rather than overhead) and their capacity (growth and working capital). You can see an explanation here: Our Approach to Rating Charities

Oddly, while they say...

Charity Navigator accepts no funding from the charities that we evaluate, ensuring that our ratings remain objective.

...they do accept ads on their site from charities that they also rate. But then I saw one ad, checked out its rating, and saw that it only got two stars. So, take that as you will.

As an example of actual ratings, a couple of the sponsor-a-child organizations I've heard of are World Vision and Compassion International. Charity Navigator gives them both 4-star ratings. Both have overhead expenses below 20%.

An example of a poorly-rated charity is the Children's Charitable Foundation, which devotes just 10.3% of funding to its ostensible mission.

share|improve this answer
1  
I met a person who job was to work for a company whose business was to send people door-to-door raising money for charities. Money went to the canvasser, to his team leaders, and to the company he worked for; a fraction went to the charity in whose name the money was being collected. Maybe that's how/why some charities have high 'fund-raising expenses'. Sometimes charities like to categorize these as 'education' or 'outreach' programs. Alternatively, some other charities employ their own fund raisers. – ChrisW Jun 8 '11 at 12:29
I accepted this answer because it provides a principle for examining particular charities in terms of money. I will probably split off the other half of the question at some point in the future. – MrHen Jun 9 '11 at 13:13

There are a number of ways you can check these organizations out, and it's essentially the same as checking out any other charity. In all developed countries charities have to register if your contributions are to be tax deductible, and you should check that your charity is registered. That usually guarantees a certain level of financial accountability and reporting, at least eliminating the most obvious scams (the organization keeps all the money itself).

You can also check with various "Charity rating" organizations, which typically give charities a score based on things like their openness and the percentage of money they spend on administration and marketing.

You can also check for personal recommendations. Some of these organizations allow you to go and visit your 'sponsored child'; if someone you know has done that, check which organization it was.

Finally, if you are a member of a church (or similar organization), there may be someone in the congregation who has personal contacts with an orphanage. They will know how to send funds there, and can vouch for them being properly used.

share|improve this answer
+1 mostly so this can get off of the unanswered list. But good tips and points, thanks. – MrHen Jun 7 '11 at 22:11
3  
-1, we shouldn't be up voting answers just so a question will show as "answered". That's a really bad precedent to set. – Russell Steen Jun 7 '11 at 22:24
@Russ: I concur. We should upvote an answer because it's actually a solid answer. If you feel there is a problem with the question then edit the question or delete it... – Borror0 Jun 7 '11 at 22:32
I don't think anyone is coming forward with a real answer to this question. This answer is helpful and provides a path forward. What could be done to bring it up? – MrHen Jun 7 '11 at 23:03
1  
Kyralessa's answer is in many ways better than mine, right down to recommending the same two organizations I would have recommended if I'd been pushed to. I'd add the last two paragraphs of mine to make it better. – DJClayworth Jun 8 '11 at 14:17

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.