Telemarketers and charities—follow the money—it goes to the telemarketer

https://www.salon.com/2018/01/13/when-charities-let-telemarketers-gouge-donors_partner/

This article by OSU professor Brian Mittendorf can help you sort your way through the good, bad and ugly, mostly ugly, of those phone solicitations you receive for worthy causes.  Police.  Abused animals. Women’s needs. Veterans. Cancer.  CAUTION!  Two problems:

“One is legal: State and federal authorities have a limited ability to regulate charities and their fundraisers.

The other is cultural: Charities fight new regulations, arguing that they can police themselves. Yet, they are reluctant to call out their peers who abuse the public trust.”

Charities are making things worse by not policing themselves and by becoming dependent—I guess they figure 10% of the take is better than nothing.

You the donor can police what you do.  I try to know the organization and donate directly.

Do good now, not from the grave

WSJ today reported financially strapped colleges are auctioning the goose that use to lay their golden eggs--their donors' gifts and good will. Link. This is not a new travesty. It's an old sin. One of my first jobs when I returned to work in the late 70s was purchasing for a for a small "subject collection" within a library, which had already lost its physical space and had been folded into another library as a line item in the budget. They did hang the portrait of the donor in that larger library near the classification number of his interest, but I have no idea where it is now (30 years later). Not that it will matter--I think that library is also going to be closed and his heirs probably are deceased.

In general, family fortunes accrue from entrepreneurship or investment of resources in someone else's idea--capitalism, as it were. Some of these guys weren't very nice, either, and after their children, step-children and grandchildren weren't able to run through it all, it is donated for a tax break to a church, college, research organization or museum. Then the liberals take over, and often they are not ethical about meeting the fine print, or the intended mission. Let's say it's an endowed chair from a railroad magnate and the money is shaved a bit to support research in wind energy because the land on which the tracks were laid in the 19th century, is open again. Or there is a fund to support a Christian program, but there's no one around who is familiar with that religion, so it goes into the general pot of "spirituality" so a Methodist pastor who saved every penny is funding the Bahai faith. Or the Cuyp paintings are auctioned to save the Van Dyck because the roof is leaking which might damage them all, so the less popular are sold to save the others. I think their reasoning is, "Well, this was ill-gotten gain anyway, now I'll do some good as pay back."

It wouldn't hurt some of these progressives to only have control of the money for 5 years to use it as it was intended so you can keep an eye on it. No one will do what you wish 50 years from now.