OT: Wolverines for Haiti fundraiser

Submitted by zohizzle101 on January 25th, 2010 at 1:03 PM

Hey guys,

I apologize for spamming mgoblog but I wanted to let you guys know that my fraternity started a fundraiser for the Haiti relief efforts called "Wolverines for Haiti". We've managed to raise close to $3,000 in the past week and have worked out a deal with JP Morgan to match the amount we raise!

I wanted to ask you guys to donate a dollar or two to help out with the relief efforts. We also have wristbands for a donation of $2 minimum that say "Wolverines for Haiti" and Michigan hats for a donation of $10 minimum. The link to donate is at http://omegagammapi.com/haiti.html. Please help us out in our effort to raise money as Haiti has suffered a lot of destruction and any help would be helpful

Thanks!

Comments

Papochronopolis

January 25th, 2010 at 2:09 PM ^

Who are you donating to? Pls not Red Cross. I work for a humanitarian organization and I Can tell you that there are other places you can donate to that don't have donations going to administrative costs (eg. UNICEF )

OuldSod

January 25th, 2010 at 2:41 PM ^

http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=content.view&cpid=1004

Charity Navigator has a page devoted to Haiti charities their "efficiency" rankings, and a synopsis of what some of them are doing. Yes, the Red Cross has higher administrative costs (6% compared to Unicef's 3%), but they also have infrastructure and access. I personally believe the best strategy is to split donations, for example, between the Red Cross, Unicef, and Doctor's without Borders, because they all have weaknesses and limitations in what they can do but also different strengths, they are all helping in some capacity, and they all need our support.

panthera leo fututio

January 25th, 2010 at 2:35 PM ^

What do you think of the general advice given here?

http://informationincontext.typepad.com/good_intentions_are_not_e/2010/…

One of the advice points is to not base your donation choice on administrative costs, with the rationale being that extremely low such costs can lead to under-funded and under-qualified staff and a disproportionate focus on low-cost projects.