Businesses and charities are not “out of the woods” yet by a long shot, but it appears the business cycle is improving.  The deep recession may be coming to an end and growth may return to various industrial and consumer markets across the globe.   Housing has a long way to go before any recovery is truly seen however, and millions may still face foreclosure this year. 

While the stock market makes it appear that the economy is recovering quickly, there are still millions of people struggling each day to find a job, keep their families in a home, and even find enough money for food.   We believe it’s time once again to focus on charitable giving, and to expand our focus a little.   So if you tightened your belt this past year as most of us did, perhaps it’s time to think about giving once again to your favorite cause or charity?

We will continue to look for stories across the nation about charitable giving, and ways to simply help others.  If indeed the global economy may see a recovery this year, with the ideal that “a rising tide lifts all boats,”  then now is a perfect time to help those who need it along the way.   Because as surely as the tide comes in, there are those who simply won’t be able to climb in the boat.   A helping hand can go a long way!

It’s certainly affecting business and employment at all levels, and in many communities it’s also affecting charitable causes. Yet at least on a larger scale,  charities seem to be weathering the storm of the recession fairly well.

“Charitable giving by wealthy individuals and endowed foundations in the United States has proven resilient during the economic crisis, with some foundations increasing donations in response.”

“Experts fear a drop-off in 2010 because philanthropy is something of a lagging indicator. Many corporations donate to the arts, education and social services based on a three-year average of profits.”

“I hear from (wealthy) people that they’ve got a tough situation this year,” Tuohey said. “My reaction is, ‘You can afford to lose some.’ Think about the less fortunate, the people who have tough situations every year.”

“Since the heavy economic turbulence of September and October, nearly 50 grant-makers — primarily endowed foundations and corporations ” have pledged more than $100 million in response to the crisis, according to the Foundation Center, which collects grant data from about 1,000 charitable foundations.”

Yet even more challenging for many non-profit organizations are the fragile links within the community for helping people with the basic essentials such as food, clothing and shelter.  Some indications are that more and more people are relying on the same basket of charitable goods and services that these agencies provide, and they may be finding less resources available at critical times. 

Fortunately we’ll be transitioning to warmer months soon, and government leaders are working hard to focus on shortfalls in financial support for key programs and services.  President Obama has asked Americans to step up to the plate to help our fellow citizens and it appears many people have heard that call.  But not eveyone believes charitable organizations are handling the financial crisis well, or receiving enough support from all reaches within the nation. 

“What is required of us now,” President Barack Obama said in his inaugural address this week, “is a new era of responsibility — a recognition on the part of every American that we have duties to ourselves, our nation and the world.” It is a message that nonprofit organizations would like our nation to take to heart, as 2009 fund-raising begins.

“Unfortunately, we nonprofit leaders, like our for-profit counterparts, are laying awake nights. The end of 2008 was disappointing for philanthropy, and some believe that 2009 will be difficult as well. Indiana University’s Center on Philanthropy publishes the Philanthropic Giving Index (PGI), which tracks the predictions of nonprofit leaders about charitable giving. Like the more-famous Consumer Confidence Index, it shows a level of gloom not seen in years, falling from 83 to 65 (on a 0-100 scale) in just six months.”

Charitable causes should not depend on political leanings, but obviously some researchers believe it matters and that non-profit groups can capitalize on these trends.

“Reasonable people can disagree on politics, but the numbers on giving speak for themselves. Nonprofit executives, disproportionately politically progressive, do well to remember that many of the folks they will count on in hard times are not necessarily those who share their political views. Understanding this might make for better fund raising in a scary year — and help us all to give credit where it is due.”

Perhaps that’s sage advice for trends in fundraising during challenging times.  Other non-profit experts believe we can equally learn from the mistakes of our political leaders, especially as it relates to fund-raising and non-profit administration.  Goodness knows that learning from the mistakes of others is rule #1 in achieving excellence.

One thing is for sure however, Non-profit organizations are playing an increasingly important role in supporting the needs of millions of Americans.  To that end the Congressional Philanthropy Caucus, stood up in Congress and the Senate in 2007 and 2008 respectively, was formed to help our elected leadership better understand the role that foundations and corporate giving programs provide to the nation.  Hopefully legislative issues such as taxation and public policy programs will better consider the needs and structure of non-profit organizations in society and help them become more effective where appropriate.

That may give you some indication of the storyline.  Based on the research, it looks like conservatives give a lot more of their personal wealth to charitable causes than do liberals.  It bothers me to stereotype people, but that’s basically what the article, and the research has stated.

“Liberals show tremendous compassion in pushing for generous government spending to help the neediest people at home and abroad. Yet when it comes to individual contributions to charitable causes, liberals are cheapskates.”

“Arthur Brooks, the author of a book on donors to charity, “Who Really Cares“, cites data that households headed by conservatives give 30 percent more to charity than households headed by liberals. A study by Google found an even greater disproportion: average annual contributions reported by conservatives were almost double those of liberals”

 The data is surprising, especially given the research when the results didn’t come back as expected. 

“When I started doing research on charity,” Mr. Brooks wrote, “I expected to find that political liberals — who, I believed, genuinely cared more about others than conservatives did — would turn out to be the most privately charitable people. So when my early findings led me to the opposite conclusion, I assumed I had made some sort of technical error. I re-ran analyses. I got new data. Nothing worked. In the end, I had no option but to change my views.”

So assuming the research is accurate, then what is really going on?  Why do liberals give less of their personal wealth than conservatives?  And what does it really tell us?  Mr. Brooks indicates that religion plays a large role in charitable giving, and that religious liberals and conservatives give about the same.  But it’s interesting that conservatives came out ahead on other charitable giving approaches- themselves.

“Conservatives also appear to be more generous than liberals in nonfinancial ways. People in red states are considerably more likely to volunteer for good causes, and conservatives give blood more often. If liberals and moderates gave blood as often as conservatives, Mr. Brooks said, the American blood supply would increase by 45 percent.”

We all have our own opinions of these matters, but personally I believe the values that conservatives and the red states have, especially regarding religious convictions, leave them much more inclined to give of their wealth and time.  It’s something that is instilled within families as children are raised, and it speaks toward a sense of community.   And when your peers (and congregations) are giving, maybe it leaves one more inclined to do the same.

One thing does bother me though- the seeming indifference to the degree of charitable giving that Americans provide internationally.  In the history of the world and all mankind, there has never been a nation that has given so much to others as does the U.S. in foreign aid, food, programs and the help of our people.  Mr. Brooks’ research found the same thing.

“Something similar is true internationally. European countries seem to show more compassion than America in providing safety nets for the poor, and they give far more humanitarian foreign aid per capita than the United States does. But as individuals, Europeans are far less charitable than Americans.”

“Americans give sums to charity equivalent to 1.67 percent of G.N.P., according to a terrific new book, “Philanthrocapitalism,” by Matthew Bishop and Michael Green. The British are second, with 0.73 percent, while the stingiest people on the list are the French, at 0.14 percent.”

This OP-Ed article has generated a lot of interest by readers of course, and Mr. Kristof’s blog, On the Ground, has generated hundreds of “Comments on Stinginess“ by supposed conservatives and liberals espousing their beliefs and opinions.

I am not in agreement with those who believe fostering government policies that increase spending to help the needy is “being charitable.”  For one thing, that’s spending other people’s money, namely taxpayers, and does not reflect a degree of individual charity.  But what about giving to the arts or sciences, or other worthy causes such as the environment?  Well, I agree that may qualify as charitable giving, but does it really help people in need?  I don’t think so… and for me, that’s where charitable giving really makes a difference- in the lives and welfare of our fellow human beings.

All in all, it would be far better not to worry about “who gives more” and to work harder instead on ways to help those really in need.  Liberal or conservative, it really doesn’t matter.  Especially during the holiday season, and the challenging times we face.  Donating more of our money, time or personal attention to helping others is something that can really make a difference.

There are many charitable organizations that help military veterans and active duty service members.  Too often these organizations barely make ends meet, but they fulfill a critical role in supporting injured veterans and those trying to get a new start on life as civilians.

One of the best things we can do when considering a charitable donation to a veteran’s or public service organization is to make sure our contribution will be used effectively.  Charity Navigator is one of the best sites for exploring charities, and they rate non-profit organizations on the basis of how effectively they put donations to work, as compared to how much money is spent on actual charitable efforts rather than administrative expenses.

“Any charity that spends money inefficiently is doing a disservice to both its donors and its intended beneficiaries, but the fact that these charities are using the good name of America ’s heroes to raise donations and then end up spending most of these donations on fundraising or administration is especially sad. Donors become victims when their donations are not used to benefit their local police, firefighters or service men and women as they had thought. Police, firefighters, and veterans are doubly hurt both because they don’t receive the assistance they need, and because people who give to a poorly-run, inefficient charity once, may be hesitant to donate to a well-run police, firefighters, or veterans charity in the future.”

What else can we do to make sure our money will be used effectively?  Charity Navigator has three primary recommendations:

• Give locally. Don’t trust a charity based in another state that promises that it will give money to police, firefighters or veterans in your state. If you want to support your local or state police, fire station, or military unit contact them directly and find out where they prefer to have donations given.
• Never give over the phone. Of the charities with high fundraising expenses, much of their money is spent on for-profit telemarketing companies. These companies often charge the charity 20 to 90 cents of each dollar raised. That’s more of your money not going to those protecting you.
• Look at the charity’s finances for yourself. Ask to see a copy of the charity’s annual report or a brochure describing its mission, accomplishments and a current financial statement. You can also request a copy of the organization’s IRS form 990. Federal law requires nonprofit organizations to provide their last 3 IRS form 990s (tax returns) within 30 days of your request. Charity Navigator has detailed analysis of the financial records of many police, firefighters, and veterans groups on our site. The lists below show some of the best and worst police and firefighters, and veterans’ charities that we currently evaluate.

We can be thankful for all who serve.  Yet on this day, we remember our military veterans and those who serve far from home. 

But how much is too much?  In other words, when does the ubiquitous nature of pink ribbons and focusing on breast cancer begin to take away from other charitable needs, research and awareness?  That’s precisely the question that a recent MSNBC article has investigated, revealing some startling statistics in The Politics Behind the Pink Ribbon.

“Some advocates for research into other diseases, and some scientists, worry the breast cancer movement is hogging the spotlight — and the money — at the expense of other worthy causes.”

“In the world of cancer charities and government funding, breast cancer is queen. The top four breast cancer charities take in a combined annual revenue of roughly $256 million according to their tax returns. The largest breast cancer charity, Susan G. Komen for the Cure, had a total revenue of $161,974,711 for the year ending March 31, 2007 according to its tax return.”

“The National Cancer Institute (NCI) devoted $572.4 million researching breast cancer in 2007. Other National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding for breast cancer boosted the total spent on the disease to $705 million. Plus, the Department of Defense operates its own breast cancer research outfit at a cost of another $138 million in fiscal 2008.”

Let’s see… that’s over $840 million on breast cancer research in 2007…

“By way of comparison, in 2007 the NCI spent $226.9 million studying lung cancer, the leading cancer killer in the U.S., and $73.3 million studying pancreatic cancer, which kills nearly as many patients as breast cancer, usually within a year of diagnosis. Cardiovascular disease, the biggest killer of both men and women, received $381 million.”

The article goes on to show how lobbying efforts provide rich rewards to research groups where “disease advocacy” is important to bring in funding.  But why does breast cancer research funding reach such greater levels of awareness and engagement?   Suprisingly they state it’s because breast cancer victims live a lot longer than other cancer victims.

“Breast cancer organizations have another advantage: many breast cancer patients live to become an army of walking, letter-writing, TV-appearing advocates. Nearly 90 percent of women with breast cancer survive the disease at least five years.
On the other hand, “pancreatic cancer patients are dead,” points out Barron Lerner, professor of medicine and public health at Columbia University, author of a book called “The Breast Cancer Wars.”

It does leave one wondering why there isn’t more balance across America for these needs.  And no one dare questions the feminist aspect of that matter either.  But are prostate cancer needs any less?  Pancreatic, lung, or colon cancer?   It might seem that many cancer diseases are simply not as fashionable.  People don’t want to talk about colon cancer or prostate cancer as readily.  And what about lymphoma or the various childhood cancers and diseases?  Let’s face it, in a world where “what we look like” reigns supreme, breast cancer awareness is going to have the largest share of media attention.  But perhaps the focus has reached a point where many people have begun to question this attention.

“The saturation of breast cancer awareness has left even some survivors dismayed. Writer, social critic, and former breast cancer patient Barbara Ehrenreich has called the movement “an outbreak of mass delusion,” and “a cult.” 

The products — teddy bears, pink-ribbon brooches, and so forth — serve as amulets and talismans, comforting the sufferer and providing visible evidence of faith,” she has written.

That sounds a bit strong if you ask me.  But how can any other cancer disease advocacy group compete with that?  Some say it doesn’t matter, and that any gains in breast cancer research are bound to help other cancer research efforts.  Hopefully that is true.  Yet maybe in a world where curing cancer is the primary goal, regardless of the type, we will focus more on all the needs rather than just one, bright pink ribbon.  

Those are questions that NPR recently examined, interviewing many non-profit and corporate represetatives to try and understand how the nation’s economic climate impacts non-profit operating budgets.   If you run a charity or non-profit organization, then you depend on the philanthropy and gift-giving of both individuals and corporations.  In challenging economic times, it’s not surprising that financial donations are reduced.

From an individual perspective, it makes sense.  If you’re struggling with a budget at home, cutting back means a little bit everywhere.  I certainly applaud those who try very hard to keep giving to charity even while they’re struggling financially at home.  One of the keystones to philanthropy in America however is that the greatest amount of financial assistance usually comes from the wealthy and bigger corporations in local communities. 

One example: Washington Mutual Bank, that was taken over by the FDIC and sold to J.P. Morgan used to give over $50 million dollars each year to the local community in the Seattle area to help with homelessness, kids and community outreach.  Will J.P. Morgan continue to provide such enormous charitable donations?  They’re closing over 400 branches and are sure to conduct extensive layoffs.  More importantly, they have little allegiance to the west coast since they’re an east coast bank, formerly the giant investment institution.  It is doubtful that they will consider a similar degree of philanthrophy which is a shame. 

I have another concern.  In recent years, opponents to “globalization” have taken a politically charged viewpoint that large corporations are the enemy, or institutions to be feared.  They have been blamed for everything from global warming, to poverty and to making slaves out of their employees.  And there may be aspects of truth depending upon what part of the world those corporations have operations or factories in.  But demonizing the corporation devalues the positive aspects of what that corporation brings to society, and in my view makes it less likely to achieve necessary reforms.

Many communities are also now realizing is that these large corporation not only are the largest donors from a philanthropic perspective, but that the jobs and services they support have immense value for that community and the state or region in which they are based.  When a company like Washington Mutual goes bankrupt or is sold to another company, all of those relationships change.  And the communities may later suffer without the jobs, services and charitable outreach that once existed.

I believe one of the basic strengths of capitalism begetting jobs growth is the support it provides to people and communities in a myriad of positive ways.  Rather than finding out the hard way how important these corporations are to a local region, we must find a way to balance corporate profits and community conscience.  They are not as bad as anyone might make them out to be, nor are they perfect citizens. But business and corporate development are necessary essentials to growth, and as we are realizing more than ever before, they are essential to a vast array of charitable community services and outreach support.  Let’s work with businesses in our local communities to improve relationships and philanthropic goals, and work with state and local government in order to foster strong business growth. 

Something we must not forget is that in times of great financial challenge it is those at the margin of economic struggle that suffer the most.  Those living in poverty and near the margins of poverty such as the elderly and children are challenged greatly in the best of times, and we must remember to support those organizations and community structures.

Mr. Newman was never a flamboyant actor and spokesperson like many others in Hollywood, but he was a leading figure within his profession that made a choice in life to help others.  It’s as simple as that.   Thank you Paul! We wish you a fond farewell and to your family and friends.  And we’re sure to think of your good will the next time we buy one of your products.  The Newman’s Own Foundation will live on.

We may not see as much media coverage about the aftermath of hurricanes when a major city isn’t involved, but Ike has shown that beachfront communities can be wiped clean off the map.  They’ve got a crisis in south Texas happening right now, and getting food, water and medical care to those folks is the greatest priority.

Many of us cannot help much beyond donating money to a good cause, and with that in mind here are the links to both the American Red Cross Donation page, and another one for the Salvation Army’s donation page.   Both of these organizations provide an essential role in leading relief efforts, and getting food, water and coordinated shelter for people who need it.  Our thoughts and prayers are with them all.

That doesn’t mean it’s not a great idea, or that charities could use the vehicle.  But there are some things to watch for if you are considering donating a car, boat, plane or other vehicle.   MSNBC has a nice overview of 10 Tips for How to Donate a Car to Charity.   This is great information, although it makes the process look somewhat cumbersome for the average person.  

1. Avoid Middlemen
2. Find a worthy charity.
3. Check the math.
4. Know the (tax/business) status of your recipient.
5. Do the delivery yourself.
6. Transfer the vehicle (title) with care.
7.  Your estimate of the vehicle value is probably wrong.
8.  Know when you can really report fair market value (FMV).
9.  Keep thorough paper records of the transaction.
10.  Pay attention to the details.

That’s a pretty good list of considerations, and the article discusses them fairly well. The Wall Street Journal also has some excellent advice, and Tom Herman from the Tax Report discusses how Car Donations have Taken a Hit in recent years because of the tax law changes, and some important considerations:

From the WSJ article: “If you do decide to donate your car, boat or plane, rather than selling it or trading it in, consider shopping around among charities. First, check to make sure the organization is legitimate. Then ask what it plans to do with your gift — and, if your vehicle, boat or plane is valuable enough, consider trying to find an organization that fits into one of the exceptions outlined above.”

“Choosing a charity is a very personal choice,” says Mr. Rosica of Ernst & Young. “For example, you may want to consider finding one that will use your car for its charitable purpose, such as delivering food or clothing to the needy.”

“Whatever the case, be sure to pay attention to the record-keeping and substantiation requirements. Also remember you’re eligible to deduct donations to charity only if you itemize your deductions on Schedule A of Form 1040, instead of claiming the standard deduction, the IRS said. And if you make a gift and get something significant in return from the charity, such as tickets to a sporting event, you can deduct only the amount that exceeds the value of what you received.”

Donating a vehicle can still be a very good idea, but it’s important to do a little legwork to make sure it works out the way you intended, especially regarding tax considerations.

The GOP convention was mostly cancelled for its first day, and instead Mrs. Cindy McCain and Mrs. Laura Bush have spoken about helping those who have been affected by the hurricane and related storm damage. 

There is a “Country First” website called CauseGreater.com that lists various aid agencies by state.  That’s a good start to a political event in a time when many people are worried about their families and homes.   Although the convention will pick up as the week goes on, there are other storms out there, including Hannah that may impact the east coast.

Regardless of one’s politics, it’s nice to see people making the effort to help others.