Is Your Giving Doing More Harm Than Good?

Pexels

Every time I go to my local supermarket there seems to be somebody collecting money for another children's cancer charity I have never heard of.

Although I have no qualms about supporting families whose children are suffering from that terrible disease, I am always suspicious as to whose pockets my loose change is going to end up in. The sad truth is that perhaps we need to be a bit more discerning across the board when it comes to our charitable giving.

In his book Doing Good Better, Oxford academic William MacAskill raises important questions about the kinds of charitable work we support. He asks how many of us would think about investing in a business through a chance meeting with someone on the street, or with a door-to-door salesperson.

Although thanks to funding platform Kickstarter more of us are investing in start-up businesses than ever before, we are normally very picky about the kinds of companies we consider putting money into. We normally want to be confident about a return on our investment, or have confidence that the company is producing good products. But when it comes to charitable giving we are usually less inclined to ask the equivalent questions. Discernment when it comes to donations is seen to be somehow linked to miserliness and mean-spiritedness.

MacAskill opens his book with a powerful story about the meteoric rise of a charity with a very simple idea. Trevor Field had the brilliant idea of turning children's play into a way of helping the poorest people in Africa to access fresh clean water. His invention turned the energy expended from children playing on a roundabout into energy that could power a water pump. It caught the imagination of millions of people around the world. Through sponsorship, sales of charity water, investment from Silicon Valley entrepreneurs and even a multi-million dollar grant from the Bush administration, Field raised enough money to to build thousands of these PlayPumps. It was a life's work from a big-hearted man who wanted to make a difference in the world for some of the world's poorest people.

A PlayPump in Zambia.

However, there were four main problems with the pumps. Firstly they did not work as roundabouts as they needed continual force, in comparison with the fun free-wheeling roundabouts we are familiar with. Eventually the children realised there was little enjoyment from these roundabouts so they reverted to being driven by the women, many of whom found the roundabouts more difficult than earlier methods as well as more demeaning. Secondly they cost substantially more than traditional pumps. Thirdly they were less efficient. And fourthly they were less robust. Trevor Field did not set out to profit from other people's misfortune, but his successful entrepreneurial spirit basically created something that helped nobody.

MacAskill's tragic example of the charity play pumps, as well as his numerous models of good philanthropy in his book, challenge us to be more discerning when it comes to supporting charities. However, perhaps he doesn't go far enough. He rarely talks about working together with local people or local governments. Sadly he seems to perpetuate the 'white saviour complex', fundamentally holding on to the assumption that charity remains a western prerogative: parachuting expertise into other nations from outside.

This paternalistic imperialism is not restricted to global development charities. Even our local charities can adopt an attitude of being technically or morally superior to those they are seeking to help. With this in mind, how do we avoid well-intentioned bad philanthropy? How do we understand what actually goes on with the money we send to support poverty alleviation, social justice, or evangelistic outreach?

Full disclosure: I am the founder and director of a young charity. Of course I want you to support what I am doing – if I didn't believe that my charity is doing is worth supporting I wouldn't have started it. But I am also a Christian who wants to be responsible about the way that I engage in and encourage charitable giving.

Here are four questions we all need to ask ourselves before we drop our pennies in the pot, or sign that standing order.

1. Does the charity actually know what it's doing?

I believe in the power of the amateur. Many times we shirk personal responsibility by deferring to professionals, especially when it comes to evangelism and social action. But as I write this article my son is in surgery and I am very pleased that professionals are in charge of the operation. When it comes to aid and development there are so many important skills that need to be in play: cross-cultural understanding, social and psychological impact assessment, protection of vulnerable people, understanding of the local political culture.

The amateur who decides to build an orphanage to rescue abandoned children may well have a big heart and amazing stories to tell but there are good reasons to stop and ask questions before supporting their work. Is an orphanage really the best option for these children? What work is being done to find and support wider and extended family? How are the nation's local children's services being worked with? What child protection measures are in place? If your children had to be looked after by someone else would you want them housed in an orphanage or would you prefer to have them taken in by friends and family?

There has been a lot of professional research in this field that is worth referring to before backing a charity simply because it claims to help orphaned children. This would be just as true in other charity sectors. Whether involved in community development, health awareness or human rights, charities should be aware of the leading research and best practice in their field, and their donors should hold them to account on that.

2. Does the charity really respect and care about local people?

I spoke with a Ugandan doctoral student who explained how frustrating he found it when agencies came into his country and started building wells. They had done no liaison with the the government's water strategy as they had assumed the government was corrupt or ignorant. He found this particularly galling as his sister had a doctorate and was part of the national water team. He concluded that do-gooders were more interested in their social media impact and on building their charities reputation than on making a long term difference to his nation. (see here for the full interview).

I can understand both sides of this challenge. Fundraising is a difficult task with so many charities needing to resource their work; getting heard over the background noise is difficult so innovative engagement tactics are needed. But when our concern for profile outstrips the relevance of the activity, or overlooks the hard work of local, contextual engagement then something has gone seriously wrong. We should be wary of global programmes where all the decision-making happens outside the country and the local people are simply the worker bees that put the directives into practice.

For example, it would have been good to know whether those people collecting water enjoyed using the PlayPumps as much as the westerners loved funding them. Similarly, we should be cautious about local programmes where there is not enough contextual engagement. Supporting a drop-in centre may sound like a worthy cause. But if there are two existing drop-in centres in the same area, perhaps the money would be better spent elsewhere.

3. Is the charity actually doing any good or just make donors feel good?

I know the power of a beautiful video. I know the influence of a moving story. I have seen the transformation on a short-term mission team can experience through a visit. I know the media uplift if you can engage a celebrity to turn up at your event or to hug a child on camera. But we need more rigour in our impact assessment. The quality of a video does not necessarily directly correspond to the quality of the programme. What happens when the programme actually perpetuates a problem, or causes more harm than good in unintended consequences? Is some of our charitable work helping short term, or supporting individuals actually creating unhealthy long term dependencies?

I have met pastors from North Kenya who were very scathing in their assessment of some child sponsorship programmes, for example. In their view extended family members would normally assist a bereaved or orphaned child. But if they hear that foreign sponsorship money is available, it is not unusual for the family to hold back their help so that the child appeared more vulnerable so that they could meet the eligibility criteria for sponsorship.

Speaking to charity leaders, it is clear that some things are easier to fund than others. There are things that give the donor more of a sense of accomplishment. So raising money to build things is often relatively easy while raising money for education programmes is more difficult. At the end of a building project everyone can see what has been made although education programmes are often less expensive and more effective. Ask yourself as you prepare to give – am I really giving so I feel better or am I giving to do the most good I can?

4. Where does the money go?

I have heard some charities claim that 100 per cent of the money raised goes directly to the people they are working with. This claim seems to me to be unrealistic and unsustainable as we expect overheads, administration costs, marketing costs, salaries and so on. The issue is not that these costs exist, but that charities should be clear and transparent in their financial reporting. Registered charities have to declare their financial records and you can check them using the Charity Commission website. This financial accountability is vital.

I have been inspired by charities that are making a positive difference in the world. I have met leaders of small charities in remote places run and staffed by local indigenous people making a massive impact. I have seen the great work of huge global charities as they bring their economies of scale, professional excellence and global network to help those in need. I know it seems like a lot of hard work – but supporting charitable work is more than a conscience easer, it is an investment into the kingdom of God. We need to give wisely and we need to give generously.

Books worth reading to explore further:

When Helping Hurts, Brian Fikkert and Steve Corbett, Zondervan. This is an excellent book written by two Christian economists.

Doing Good Better, William MacKaskill, Fontana. This is a provocative and controversial book written by an atheist.