December meme, day 28
Dec. 28th, 2014 10:07 am
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
I would go against the conventional wisdom that you should consolidate your gift into as large a donation as possible, and choose instead specific organizations and foundations that deal with problems at the local level. Too often, well-known charities have much higher administrative and public relations budgets; a smaller percentage of donations go to actually fund addressing need.
It would take some investigation and decision on my part, but I would address hunger first, shelter, and clothing. Shelter from domestic abuse, career counseling, and better daycare for both children and elder adults. Rather than giving to the ASPCA or The National Humane Society, both of which absorb a disproportionate percentage of donations, and do little to help at the local level, I would seek out and investigate local shelters and foster programs and spend that money bolstering systems that work. Helping more clinics remain, or become, no-kill would be a goal. If there are veterinarian clinics willing to treat and correct lifechanging problems, I would bolster a fund for them to draw against to make more of those occasions possible, as well as neighborhood spay and neuter clinics.
Smaller donations at the local level go much farther in addressing need, in changing or affecting lives, but it requires some investigation and research. I'd consider that effort part of an effective donation.
Thanks for the thoughtful question!