Some babbling about money...

Corruption happens, right? It could be a bumper sticker or a trendy t-shirt in any company or organization in any country in this world. The safe but real answer to this reality is sin, of course—we live in a fallen world and the old axiom regarding “absolute power” and my own new slogan of “what else do you expect, anyway?” belie the roots and pervasiveness of this problem.

We would all like to think though, when watching bleeding heart commercials on television or those sentiment-inducing slide-shows in church, that when we send our money to an organization (missions, relief and development, etc) it always ends up in the right hands, with minimal percentages being spend on overhead and administration. We would hate to think, for instance, that 50% of the proceeds of our donations are allowing the workers for that organization to live in the lap of luxury (through either inflated salaries and benefits or from people “eating” the money) while the other 50% fails to cover the costs and therefore sends the organization back to your doorstep begging for more money. We would also hate to think that the money we faithfully send in order to fulfill our mandate to feed the orphans and widows could be used as a source of power to oppress persons who should have been helped.

Is there an acceptable level of corruption? In order for some of our money to reach those poor and needy, is it a necessity that some of it line the pockets of those pushing it along the way? We in the west cannot deny the cost of our own bureaucracy (and therefore cannot think we are immune to this problem). Although we might not have scandals the size of ENRON in all of our workplaces, we all know the slimy details of money spent here and there that isn’t necessarily flush with the budget line.

If the answer to this question is “NO,” as I sometimes am wont to think, what is the answer? We are all sinful creatures and prone to pursuing our own motley agendas at the expense of the greater good, and so the answer cannot be just to find the “right people.” A very ethnocentric/colonialist answer is that we westerners should be present in the administration of all of these organizations whom we in our benevolence support and with our superior spiritual/accounting/organizational skills we will assure that money donated gets to where it should go without any “funny funny” business going on. We, of course, do not include in our calculations the percentage of donations it takes to keep us comfortable—our hot showers, our high fences and night guards, our imported groceries and large vehicles—while we assure that the money is all used for those needy people for whom it is meant. Besides, I have already proposed that we are not immune to this corruption; just, perhaps, less likely to take obvious opportunities as often because we are not living hand to mouth or looking every month for money to put our children through school. In short, we live far from the edge of need and so it could be that it takes greater impetus to move us to such actions.

If the answer is “YES,” as in a certain degree of corruption is allowable in our Machiavellian world of getting done what needs to be done, then is there a percentage we should aim for? For instance, assume that at least 30% of the money we send will either disappear or be used for extraneous purposes, or both. We could consider that money the cost of avoiding having to do the leg work of turning that money into the food that goes into the child’s mouth in Darfur, or Bangladesh, or Honduras. Because, lets face it, it takes a lot of work for that transformation to take place. Instead, we let the “locals” do the work, and the money they may or may not eat is compensation for the work they are doing on our behalf.

What I really want to know is—do you care? Does this matter to you? Don’t assume, by the way, that just because I’m posing this question I have evidence against all your favorite charity recipients—I don’t, I have only seen enough to raise questions.

When you write a check to Sally Spiritual or Good Works Inc, is it to assuage some guilt in your soul or out of a genuine interest in helping these very real and very human people on the other side of the world? If it is the former, than it really doesn’t matter where the money eventually goes, the process of writing the check (or using paypal, etc) has been done on your soul. You can check James 2 off the list.

However, if it matters to you how many kilos of rice your money is going to buy, and how many mouths that rice will enter(or, for that matter, which farmers grew that rice and if they were paid for it properly in the first place), we have a serious need for some accountability. Hold your church, your missionaries, and your favorite relief organizations accountable for the money they receive. Read the annual reports they send you—do a little footwork and explore their operations, what percentage of their staff are nationals or expats. You have a responsibility beyond the checkbook if only because we do live in a fallen world, and it does matter where the money goes.

In addition, we need to take a good look at the money that our government sifts out of our taxes to send for foreign aid. Where is it going? Is it going to the countries with the most need, or the countries where the governments are favorably compliant to (or complicit with) our own government? Where are these governments putting the aid money? (Case in point, the global fund scandal 2006 here in Uganda, one of the results of which was preventing our clients from having drugs for about a month.)

Corruption happens. It is true, but as donors we have a responsibility. Further engagement with the recipients of our funds will not only hopefully lead to better use of those funds, but also increase our own awareness of what the money is doing, which parties it is helping, and give us understanding beyond the 30 second commercial that got us to drag out our checkbook in the first place.