I found this link online. I'm not familiar with the website, so I can't vouch for it, but the article makes me wonder.
|Residents across Texas are expressing their outrage at The Red Cross after Hurricane Harvey victims and relief volunteers witnessed mismanagement and apathy from Red Cross workers. One of the most dramatic stories came from Lindsey Scott, who brought 400 warm hamburgers to a shelter, but was not allowed to distribute them by Red Cross workers, who put the hot meals on ice, despite the fact that evacuees in their shelter had only had so much as a sandwich in 24 hours.
At Wednesday morning’s Houston City Counsel meeting, Councilman Dave Martin, who represents flood-ravaged Kingwood, had a very clear message to prospective donors of The Red Cross.
“I beg you not to send them a penny,” he said. “They are the most inept unorganized organization I’ve ever experienced. Don’t waste your money. Give it to another cause.”
Harris County Judge Ed Emmett was also uncomplimentary of the organization. Judge Emmett admitted that he asked a local nonprofit to manage the shelter at NRG Park, because he didn’t trust The Red Cross to do a good job....
- ( New Window
after Sandy to know to donate elsewhere. Much better ways of getting money into the hands of those in need than the Red Cross.
after 9/11...but yeah, they're shady at best.
I'm glad the internet has unveiled these scam artists at work after years of misinformation and down right thievery
after the scam they pulled with Sandy. They are hated here and for good reason.
really intriguing. I saw a reputable news article a few weeks ago saying much the same thing. I know a guy who works at Red Cross HQ in DC, and he's about as good a guy as you'll meet.
I give to them on both Hurricane Irma and Harvey.
They are down in the Caribbean and Texas already and are on the way to Florida
Text "55555" to red cross to donate $10 now automatically
They have too much influence and branding
Great marketing but thats all there is
My aunt is the school nurse for a high school in the Houston suburb of Conroe. She is spearheading a donation effort for the families at her school who have lost everything. No middleman, no bullshit - send a gift card to the school and it will be distributed directly to the families in need.
The Red Cross is a joke. I NEVER donate to them. They spend the money on themselves. A very uncharitable charity unless you work for them!
You will discover that the Red Cross is run very poorly and little money goes to the people that need the help. Not a good group to donate to.
That the president of that "non-profit" makes 900k a year. Fuck that organization.
is the way to go. I think they give 95% of what they receive to the cause.
$50 wasted I guess...shit!
I need to pay better attention
about the Red Cross.
I've heard and read similar things for years.
That said, I personally went around with a small Red Cross team and some media after the floods of 2011 upstate, and the handful of people in the two Red Cross vehicles were great. They went far beyond reasonable efforts to helps many people over the 2 days I was traveling around with them.
The cynic in the crowd might say, well, there was media with them, so ...
And I get that.
But these were front-line people. They actually were not thrilled to be the focus of any attention. They just worked, and helped, and were there for folks who needed someone, something, anything, in a really rough time.
Like with anything, the Red Cross may suck, broad stroke. But it's not all bad.
you will find pockets of caring and competence at the Red Cross. Their batting average sucks, though, and this has been true since World War Two. I have read too many stories where they directly interfere with charitable efforts of others that invade their "turf." I think Charity Navigator's lists of charities for specific events are extremely useful--I link the Florida one below, and the Harvey one is here:
However, their methodology over-ranks the Red Cross at three stars, because it doesn't take into account the extent to which the Red Cross reduces the effectiveness of other organizations. That is outside their algorithm.
By the way, some places that would have seemed to be outside of the Irma target area are getting their teeth kicked in by storm surge. That includes Jacksonville inside Florida, but also much of the South Carolina coast, including Charlotte. Economic damage and need for relief is going to be extremely wide as well as deep.
I like the idea of gift cards that go to specific local organizations who will almost spend every dollar on program expenses. By the way, GoFundMe is starting targeted sites in connection with The Direct Impact Fund. Here is the one for Irma:
|The Direct Impact Fund, an independent, registered 501(c)(3) non-profit organization, has partnered with GoFundMe to deliver tax-deductible donations to support victims of natural disasters.
All beneficiaries selected to receive donations will be fully vetted and certified by GoFundMe's Trust & Safety Team and are backed by the GoFundMe Guarantee.
I don't see one for Harvey, though. Link
- ( New Window
Not going to defend Red Cross
But Texans deserve to be chastised for attacking an aid organization. Without the Red Cross, where would they Be? Not better off. They would have alot less aid, and instructing others not give put future relief work at risk.
I don't know that there a right and a wrong here, but f them for there total lack of understanding.
In addition to consistently doing a mediocre to poor job and getting in the way of other charitable efforts, the Red Cross sucks in money that would otherwise go elsewhere and be used more effectively. If I am in the ravaged part of Texas, and can expect that $x in charitable donations will be available in my area, my hope is that .90x or more will be used effectively, not .70x or less. And that .20x doesn't go to interfering with the efforts of other charitable organizations, which does happen, pulling Red Cross's efficiency roughly down to .50x.
So, yes, in that situation, I would scream, "please help, but don't do it through the Red Cross." This is an absolutely rational response, and is far from being ungrateful.
That there are many good people working there I have no doubt. But there are many instances of them doing just as much harm as good.
I understand the criticism. Your assumption that the void created by reducing the role of the Red Cross would be quickly filled by someone better is pure speculation. Probably not true too, because in order to scale up that organization would have build infrastructure that the Red Cross already has. And if you are wrong people will suffer.
People in need do not succeed by telling others what to do with their money. Chances are they decreased donations to the Red Cross without gaining contributions elsewhere.
Texans (there are a lot) and the Red Cross (big organization). Sorry to ruin a good rant, but come-on... Do you really believe this is Texans vs. Red Cross?
Shit-heads abound in clusters; never is anything all-good or all-bad. Characterizing an entire state and a very large charity organization is a bit of a stretch...