Giving Machines

[hope_for_things]

The skeptic in me is wondering whether there is any way to verify if the contributions people make using the church’s giving machines actually are donated as advertised.  Does anyone know if this is possible to validate or verify?  

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900047090/cows-goats-meals-givers-make-52000-contributions-at-light-the-world-giving-machines.html

 

[JAHS]

I think the skeptic in you needs to take a vacation from this one. Your are assuming the church is lying about what they are doing with the donations. 
According to the church, "The machines will be available through the Christmas season and partner with global charities such as CARE, UNICEF, WaterAid, Water For People, Eye Care 4 Kids, Utah Food Bank and Utah Refugee Connection." https://www.thechurchnews.com/global/2018-11-28/lighttheworld-goes-global-with-new-giving-machines-in-new-york-london-philippines-48528
Do you not trust those organizations as well?

[hope_for_things]

14 minutes ago, JAHS said:

I think the skeptic in you needs to take a vacation from this one. Your are assuming the church is lying about what they are doing with the donations. 
According to the church, "The machines will be available through the Christmas season and partner with global charities such as CARE, UNICEF, WaterAid, Water For People, Eye Care 4 Kids, Utah Food Bank and Utah Refugee Connection." https://www.thechurchnews.com/global/2018-11-28/lighttheworld-goes-global-with-new-giving-machines-in-new-york-london-philippines-48528
Do you not trust those organizations as well?

All I’m asking is if there is a way to verify.  

[Storm Rider]

2 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

All I’m asking is if there is a way to verify.  

Why would a good, upstanding individual such as yourself assume the Mormon Church ever does anything it says. Of course, they are ripping off people. It is their very nature to lie, steal, and make buffoons of all the stupid people in the world that give money to charities.  So glad you are there seeking the wonders of "transparency".  You cannot prove it and therefore it is a lie and a con.  I just feel so uplifted with these types of comments. Thank you.

[JAHS]

19 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

All I’m asking is if there is a way to verify.  

What kind of verification would satisfy? This sounds a lot like the critics who want the church to be more transparent with what it does with the donations it receives. 
Like our tithing, I think the fruits that come from the collecting of these donations can serve as verification. I am sure there will be news articles reporting the success of the campagne  and the things that were purchased and given away. But then many will not believe what they read in such reports.  In 2017 the machines raised more than $550,000 for local and global charities. 
Besides the global charities the machines in the US  have specific, local charities that they work with. Can you imagine how upset those local charities would be if they don't actually get the money for the items donated? There were no complaints from last year's campaign. 

Edited December 19, 2018 by JAHS

[Hamba Tuhan]

Mate, I can only imagine the kinds of personal issues that must get you to positions of extreme paranoia like this ... 

[let’s roll]

1 hour ago, hope_for_things said:

The skeptic in me is wondering whether there is any way to verify if the contributions people make using the church’s giving machines actually are donated as advertised.  Does anyone know if this is possible to validate or verify?  

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900047090/cows-goats-meals-givers-make-52000-contributions-at-light-the-world-giving-machines.html

 

If your concern is genuine, I trust you’ll spend the necessary time and resources to satisfy yourself that you have an answer to your concern.

I also trust that you understand that it’s not likely that any of us who don’t share your skepticism would deem it useful to spend any time or resources trying to satisfy that skepticism.

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, hope_for_things said:

The skeptic in me is wondering whether there is any way to verify if the contributions people make using the church’s giving machines actually are donated as advertised.  Does anyone know if this is possible to validate or verify?  

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900047090/cows-goats-meals-givers-make-52000-contributions-at-light-the-world-giving-machines.html

The article states that the LDS Church can use any of the donations for other charitable purposes, if necessary.  And that notification is made on the vending machines.  This is true of all charitable organizations, including Catholic Relief -- which the LDS Church sometimes uses to make cash contributions which will help the needy worldwide.  Cash is preferred, since it costs a lot to ship goods into areas where it is cheaper to simply purchase them locally.  All aid agencies understand this and act accordingly.

As to criminal misuse of such funds, the method used by the LDS Church and other such charitable agencies is to have auditors analyze all records, just as they regularly do at the ward and stake level for tithing and other donations.  The LDS Church long ago adopted the notion of "trust but verify."

The IRS has found that the LDS member claims of charitable giving average much higher than other U.S. groups.

[cinepro]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

The article states that the LDS Church can use any of the donations for other charitable purposes, if necessary. 

Uh, if the Church puts out a vending machine and there's a card that says "Pay $10 and buy a goat for a village", then if someone puts in $10 and buys that card then the Church better be dang sure there's a village getting a goat somewhere. 

If there's fine print that let's the Church use that money for other charitable purposes instead of actually buying a goat (say, shampooing the carpet in the Houston Temple after it's flooded), then we should just go back to calling ourselves "Mormons" because I'm not sure Jesus would want his name on a church that did that.

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

All I’m asking is if there is a way to verify.  

Hire a group of professionals (safecracker, muscle, pickpocket, scam artist, etc) and launch a daring heist to procure the information.

Then you discover the money is being funneled into a strange research initiative to find a way to tunnel through the Arctic icecaps to find the lost Ten Tribes and you mount an expedition of your own to find them first in the sequel.

[Tacenda]

20 minutes ago, cinepro said:

Uh, if the Church puts out a vending machine and there's a card that says "Pay $10 and buy a goat for a village", then if someone puts in $10 and buys that card then the Church better be dang sure there's a village getting a goat somewhere. 

If there's fine print that let's the Church use that money for other charitable purposes instead of actually buying a goat (say, shampooing the carpet in the Houston Temple after it's flooded), then we should just go back to calling ourselves "Mormons" because I'm not sure Jesus would want his name on a church that did that.

Sounds a bit like the tithing donation slip. But I really like the idea the church has here, I was excited to try the clean water one!

[Robert F. Smith]

18 minutes ago, cinepro said:

Uh, if the Church puts out a vending machine and there's a card that says "Pay $10 and buy a goat for a village", then if someone puts in $10 and buys that card then the Church better be dang sure there's a village getting a goat somewhere. 

If there's fine print that let's the Church use that money for other charitable purposes instead of actually buying a goat (say, shampooing the carpet in the Houston Temple after it's flooded), then we should just go back to calling ourselves "Mormons" because I'm not sure Jesus would want his name on a church that did that.

All charitable organizations worldwide operate on that same principle.  If the goat or cow you opted for is not needed, then some other equally worthy expenditure will be made, and these funds are not mixed in with facilities maintenance for an LDS temple somewhere.  That would not even be legal.  When he told the Parable of the Talents,  Jesus wasn't so much concerned with the way in which his principle was invested as that it be invested and grow.  Those with no sense of propriety would no doubt insist on keeping the principle safe by not investing it, which is exactly the opposite of Jesus' intention.  There is always risk and faith involved.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, cinepro said:

Uh, if the Church puts out a vending machine and there's a card that says "Pay $10 and buy a goat for a village", then if someone puts in $10 and buys that card then the Church better be dang sure there's a village getting a goat somewhere. 

I think there could be a problem if everyone chooses the goat and other needed options are neglected.  Enthusiasm for donating might be dampened if they put a limit on how many goats could be purchased, etc. and at the end of the weekend all that was left in the vending machine was the boring stuff (kind of like the dorms' vending machines always having the blah fake cheese and  crackers available Sunday night even if everything else had been stripped), so not seeing that method being used to ensure they get what they donated as being allthat wise.

A village might not benefit from getting a thousand goats, after all.  There should be some discretion about the use of funds over what type of necessities are bought imo to avoid overpurchase of a particular need while not providing other more important necessities though the target of the donations should be kept consistent (only villages in a defined area at a certain level of general need eligible, for example).

Edited December 19, 2018 by Calm

[bluebell]

5 hours ago, cinepro said:

Uh, if the Church puts out a vending machine and there's a card that says "Pay $10 and buy a goat for a village", then if someone puts in $10 and buys that card then the Church better be dang sure there's a village getting a goat somewhere. 

If there's fine print that let's the Church use that money for other charitable purposes instead of actually buying a goat (say, shampooing the carpet in the Houston Temple after it's flooded), then we should just go back to calling ourselves "Mormons" because I'm not sure Jesus would want his name on a church that did that.

It’s not fine print. It says this right in the middle of the article hope linked to. 

“The charities reserve the right to use the money donated through the vending machines for items or services of greater need”

[Amulek]

7 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

All charitable organizations worldwide operate on that same principle.  If the goat or cow you opted for is not needed, then some other equally worthy expenditure will be made [...]

Exactly.

It strikes me as more than a little be strange to say to a dying child in a third world country, "Sorry buddy. I understand that what you really need is life saving medicine, but...you know, I bought you a goat, so you're getting a goat." 

 

[hope_for_things]

10 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

The article states that the LDS Church can use any of the donations for other charitable purposes, if necessary.  And that notification is made on the vending machines.  This is true of all charitable organizations, including Catholic Relief -- which the LDS Church sometimes uses to make cash contributions which will help the needy worldwide.  Cash is preferred, since it costs a lot to ship goods into areas where it is cheaper to simply purchase them locally.  All aid agencies understand this and act accordingly.

As to criminal misuse of such funds, the method used by the LDS Church and other such charitable agencies is to have auditors analyze all records, just as they regularly do at the ward and stake level for tithing and other donations.  The LDS Church long ago adopted the notion of "trust but verify."

The IRS has found that the LDS member claims of charitable giving average much higher than other U.S. groups.

Thanks, I didn't catch the part about the donations possibly being used for other charitable purposes and that this notification is on the vending machines.  That sounds similar to the fine print at the bottom of the tithing submission slips.  

I wasn't at all suspecting criminal misuse.  I'm not sure what an auditor would review to make sure they are compliant with IRS regulations.  I'm more interested in knowing how much of the funds donated actually end up helping people in need.   I know many charities report on this kind of information so that those contributing can now how much of the funds donated actually go to helping people. 

[hope_for_things]

8 hours ago, cinepro said:

Uh, if the Church puts out a vending machine and there's a card that says "Pay $10 and buy a goat for a village", then if someone puts in $10 and buys that card then the Church better be dang sure there's a village getting a goat somewhere. 

If there's fine print that let's the Church use that money for other charitable purposes instead of actually buying a goat (say, shampooing the carpet in the Houston Temple after it's flooded), then we should just go back to calling ourselves "Mormons" because I'm not sure Jesus would want his name on a church that did that.

Yes, this is a good point.  There is a certain amount of trust in the vending machine model that the donor expects the item they are paying for is a very specific item for people in need.  So using the funds for other things could create a problem from that perspective.  

[Rain]

The charity I am working with right now has this problem. We are helping asylees with travel by bus and plane. One thing we do with the asylees is give a backpack with a notebook, pens, water bottle, travel size hygiene, snacks etc. All of these items could be "in" a similar machine.

What we are finding is that a person or group may be very excited about giving water bottles and deliver 1000 of them to us. That is wonderful and they will be used by next week, but today we have 250 backpack to put together and no snacks or even backpacks to put the waterbottles in. So if someone gives us a donation of money for waterbottles and ties us to that then it makes it harder to put them together because we still have 250 backpacks to get out, but we also need to find room for all the waterbottles. Having a statement like that on the machine would be so helpful, though we find very few people designate what money should be used for.

It is the same with our Amazon wishlist. I have to daily go in a check the amounts available to buy off the list. If we get a pallet of notebooks donated then I need to take them off the wishlist for a while so we are balanced in what we are receiving. With so much coming in and out of the warehouse it is trickier than you might think, especially with the technical difficulties of using the website.

[hope_for_things]

19 minutes ago, Amulek said:

Exactly.

It strikes me as more than a little be strange to say to a dying child in a third world country, "Sorry buddy. I understand that what you really need is life saving medicine, but...you know, I bought you a goat, so you're getting a goat." 

 

I understand this point, but I wonder if this isn't kind of like bait and switch advertising then.  Why even give the impression that the people at the vending machine have any choice in what they are giving to the people in need?  I have seen multiple people in my circle of family and friends posting about how excited that they are that a certain item was purchased for people in need somewhere.  It seems it would be more transparent if they didn't give the impression that you are purchasing a very specific item for someone in need.  

[Rain]

4 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Thanks, I didn't catch the part about the donations possibly being used for other charitable purposes and that this notification is on the vending machines.  That sounds similar to the fine print at the bottom of the tithing submission slips.  

I wasn't at all suspecting criminal misuse.  I'm not sure what an auditor would review to make sure they are compliant with IRS regulations.  I'm more interested in knowing how much of the funds donated actually end up helping people in need.   I know many charities report on this kind of information so that those contributing can now how much of the funds donated actually go to helping people. 

It would be interesting to know. I suspect, that like other charity things they do and have made claims on that 100% is to help the people in need and the administration/costs of doing it are covered by the church. I know there are at least 2 areas that fit the church like this, but can't remember which they are at the moment. I'd have to poke around the websites to do that, but I am not interested in doing that right now. 

[Rain]

22 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

I understand this point, but I wonder if this isn't kind of like bait and switch advertising then.  Why even give the impression that the people at the vending machine have any choice in what they are giving to the people in need?  I have seen multiple people in my circle of family and friends posting about how excited that they are that a certain item was purchased for people in need somewhere.  It seems it would be more transparent if they didn't give the impression that you are purchasing a very specific item for someone in need.  

It's not bait and switch if it is clear on the machine. 

I can tell you that our family would have a lot of fun buying a goat as we have stories about my husband and goats from his childhood, but not one of us would care if it went for greater needs at the moment.

Edited December 19, 2018 by Rain

[hope_for_things]

42 minutes ago, Rain said:

It's not bait and switch if it is clear on the machine. 

I can tell you that our family would have a lot of fun buying a goat as we have stories about my husband and goats from his childhood, but not one of us would care if it went for greater needs at the moment.

I think something can be bait and switch even if the fine print has a disclosure.  Its about effectiveness of the disclosure and how many people really understand what is being advertised.  

[pogi]

2 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

I think something can be bait and switch even if the fine print has a disclosure.  Its about effectiveness of the disclosure and how many people really understand what is being advertised.  

I don't know, this just seems so ticky-tacky.  We are talking about people helping other people here.  What is more important, the effectiveness of the disclosure, or the effectiveness of the campaign?  Do you really think anyone with a giving heart would be that upset because their $10 candy bar money went to a clean water campaign instead of a goat campaign?    It just seems like there are bigger and badder fish we could be frying here.  Let's not nit-pick the do-gooders.  This effort should be applauded.   

[clarkgoble]

1 hour ago, Amulek said:

It strikes me as more than a little be strange to say to a dying child in a third world country, "Sorry buddy. I understand that what you really need is life saving medicine, but...you know, I bought you a goat, so you're getting a goat." 

This is actually a big problem with a lot of charities. In general the Church tends to work through the main Catholic charities which usually are regarded as putting most of the money towards the charity itself and also being efficient in where the money goes.

As for testing, I'm not sure how the Church is allocating things but it may be going through the LDS Philanthropies company. They have a building near campus in Provo. You could presumably call them to find out. Although if you're that nervous just give to the Catholic charity directly. I'm not sure they break things out in detail though.

Edited December 19, 2018 by clarkgoble

[Stargazer]

1 hour ago, Rain said:

It is the same with our Amazon wishlist. I have to daily go in a check the amounts available to buy off the list. If we get a pallet of notebooks donated then I need to take them off the wishlist for a while so we are balanced in what we are receiving. With so much coming in and out of the warehouse it is trickier than you might think, especially with the technical difficulties of using the website.

So, don't tantalize us, tell us how to help on the wishlist thingy!