Sponsoring a child

sounds like a lovely idea doesn't it? You know the sort of thing I mean don't you? A charity like World Vision or the Smith Family or someone else sends out a glossy brochure with "a child in poverty" on the front. They ask you to "sponsor" that child and make a regular donation each month so that the child can go to school after having dressed and eaten breakfast.
It sounds good doesn't it?
The problem is that it doesn't work that way. You aren't sponsoring an individual child at all. It might seem like that. You might even get "thank you" letters from the child. You might get photographs. I can hear you telling me now that this is proof that you are doing it. You aren't. Children don't get sponsored like that.
Think about it. How could you possibly pick and choose out of all the hundreds of thousands of children who need help? How could you choose one child out of one family? Even more importantly  how would that sort of sponsorship affect a child's relationship with the rest of his family and his community? The child would be the object of so much jealousy that his life would be unbearable.
On the rare occasions that people have insisted on meeting the children they are "sponsoring" charities have their means of handling the situation. 
There was a piece of "investigative journalism" in one of the papers yesterday. It was concerned about the alleged misuse of funds at World Vision's central office in Downunder. People were able to comment on the story and there were plenty of comments. A lot of those comments came from people who claimed they were going to withdraw from their "sponsorship" of individual children. Such comments were not helpful and I suspect that the majority of people will rethink and continue to donate. That is just as well.
But I do think there needs to be an intense review into how such charities operate. The idea of sponsoring an individual child needs to go. It sounds too good to be true because it isn't true. The salaries of the people at the top of such organisations need to be reviewed. Their "expenses" need to be reviewed too. Are those glossy brochures really necessary? Who has the printing contract? What are the mailing costs? How much are they paying in rent and wages for office staff? 
I had to point out to someone recently that the cause they were donating to was getting 18c in the dollar of the funds raised, not 80c. 
I am involved with a small fund which does give scholarships to individual girls in Africa. The girls must be "unaccompanied" - i.e. have no adult who can or is willing to be responsible for them. The girls need to earn those scholarships in a number of ways. They provide the bare essentials for a girl to go to high school and focus on science and mathematics. In return they are expected to put in some hours in the community in which they live. We have grown from one girl to five and then, next year, six at any one time. A conscious decision has been made not to exceed that number. All the money we raise is spent on the girls. The administration of the fund is done entirely by volunteers. It hasn't been easy, indeed it has been very challenging. It is the way we would like all aid to work but that can't be done. 
Don't stop donating please but do think about where and how you are donating. Question where the funds are really going too.