GET*OVER*IT!!!

[Sheldonrs]

As you may know, I work for a non-profit children's charity. It is in our charter that we cannot accept donations from organizations or groups that may be "offensive" to our wish children's families.
Well, a group near Seattle held a fund raiser with the intention of donating the proceeds to us. Unfortunately, the fund raising event was a bikini car wash.
Now, I understand that this would be fairly mild compared to other things that could have taken place but we had to have some guideline and this was it. The chapter in that area had to decline the donation.
Naturally, there being nothing else going on in the world (thank God there are no wars going on or anything like that!) the story made the local news and then got picked up by the national news.

You would not belive how many angry calls and e-mails we received just today from people telling us they will never donate to us EVER AGAIN, including my last call of the day who told me "you can take your charity and shove it up your ass!!!"
just because of this.

Agree with it; don't agree with it, that's up to you. In point of fact, I don't agree with it but I understand the reasoning.
But for God's sake, getting ANGRY at us and yelling at us over such a stupid thing just tells me that you have no life or perspective of what's really important.

We even had one caller say "I don't want to offend anyone but I'll bet the person who turned down the donation is in her late fortys and overweight." WTF!!!

[TexasT]

So because the organizers couldn't be bothered to get the ok ahead of time, which is something they should've done, you're the bad guys? I mean, really, would it have been that much trouble to call and say, "We'd like to do a fundraiser for your organization and here's what we had in mind."?

[Kheldarson]

I saw this on the news tonight! Thought it was kinda silly though. Completely understand why it had to be turned down, but still a very silly situation.

[bainsidhe]

Nice to hear what "charitable" reactions you received . Guess people forget that it's supposed to be for the children.

[Sheldonrs]

One woman actually e-mailed us that we are sending out the message that women should be ashamed of their bodies.

Perhaps if these people visited the car was sponsor's web site, and saw that the ladies also rent out for bachelor parties and poker parties and that they don't enforce the 4 foot rule of distance, they also think that, just maybe, this is not the sort of association that screams wholesome and natural for kids.

[Andara Bledin]

Gah, nothing gets people's moral dander up like getting half the information and then getting pissy over it without taking any effort to understand.

It always baffles me when people go to all that trouble to raise funds for a charity, and don't ever once think to contact the charity to make certain that their activities are in line with the charity's goals and image.

^-.-^

[Oberonsshadow]

I totally understand where you're coming from... Some people don't think... At least they intended to give you guys the money...

In a similar, but unrelated story, one of my favorite horse rescues was contacted a few years back by someone who wanted to do fund raising for them. The person seemed decent, so the rescue sent them an email saying it would be ok to fundraise for them, but the rescue never heard from them again. UNTIL, recently someone saw this person outside a store with a sign for the rescue, selling stuff.

Apparently, this person had been selling stuff (candles, dream catchers, the like) under this rescue's name and pocketing the proceeds and claiming the tax write-offs. Needless to say, the rescue was displeased. Legalities ensued and the person isn't doing it anymore, but how low can you sink?

Blog article from the rescue about the scammer...

You have to scroll down past other news to see it though.

[duckies4becca]

This may just be me being braindead. But, I have to ask the question of why the Wish childrens families would even care WHERE the money came from. It's strictly charity, shouldn't they just be grateful someone out there cares enough to donate so that their child can have their wish?

Please don't beat me!

[Sheldonrs]

This is our official reply:

"Thank you for sharing your views about the recent decision by one of our chapters not to permit the * * * name and logo to be used in conjunction with an upcoming bikini car wash in Seattle. Contrary to media reports, the chapter did not turn down a $3,500 donation – the event in question has not yet taken place.

We understand that some charities lend their name to anyone for any kind of fundraising efforts, especially during these challenging economic times. However, the * * * Foundation is not (and never has been) one of those charities. One of the reasons our organization has been so successful for the past 29 years is that we are selective about to whom we lend the * * * name and logo for fundraising and other purposes.

Our chapter chose not to be affiliated with the event after researching the company, which provides adult entertainment services. Given the nature of our mission – granting the wishes of children with life-threatening medical conditions – the chapter concluded it was not in the best interests of our organization, or the children we serve, to be associated with a company that compares its event pricing to the cost of “admission and a single 4-foot rule lap dance at a gentlemen’s club.”

The decision was not based on moral judgments about what the company does; it simply reflected the chapter’s assessment that affiliating with the company and its event was an unacceptable risk to the Foundation’s good name and reputation. The * * * Foundation also was not the only charity in Seattle that declined the opportunity.

Although we do not see eye-to-eye on this issue, we appreciate you taking the time to express your opinions. We certainly hope you will continue to support our organization, but we will respect your decision if you choose not to do so in the future."



I sent it out to all the e-mails we received. The 1st response re-stated "I will NOT donate to your organization ever again!"


I'd be willing to bet on Friday nights, he can break a $100.00 bill with all singles.

[Stryker One]

Riiiiiiiight

This is our official reply:

Ok, I gotta call bullshit on this one. If there had been 3 or 4 more zeros on that donation amount, I sure you'd be happy to lend your name.

[Balgram]

Shrug, that actually sounds reasonable to me. It's a silly situation--a company wants to do something nice for kids, and gets their money refused, but charities can refuse money and have every right to do so. People would get the wrong impression if they had an adult entertainment business with "Make A Wish Foundation" signs all over their activities.

Charities are free to refuse money. I've seen people refuse $1,000,000 because it came from an awkward or "unacceptable" source, so I don't think the amount is an issue.

It's sad if a company with a currently bad reputation wants to improve that reputation by doing something nice, but that's not the charity's fault. If the company really wants to just give the money regardless, they can make it an anonymous donation...can't they? They'll still have done something nice, and the kids get the money. The real issue is when logos and names are used.

The REALLY stupid people are the people who refuse to donate because a company refused a donation. That's cutting off the other arm for spite. It's totally uncalled for. What do they think will happen, the charity will change 29 years of standards and cave in? Even then people who claim they will never donate again probably won't come back. That's just overreacting.

I wouldn't blame people for voicing their disagreement, but people are just overreacting when they sulk and say they won't donate either.

[MoxisPilot]

I think it's pretty admirable that the *** Foundation turned down money from a source who didn't fit with their standards. It shows that they care more about the image and goals of the charity than the money they receive.

Incidentally, this is my favorite charity.

[Sheldonrs]

Ok, I gotta call bullshit on this one. If there had been 3 or 4 more zeros on that donation amount, I sure you'd be happy to lend your name.

Nope. We can't because it would violate the charter. And with non-profits, violations of the established charter can result in losing your 501(c)3 status.

[Arm]

I think the reason people decide not to donate is the perception that "You don't want MONEY, you just want MY money"

The idea behind most charities is, if we all give a little, then we can make the world a better place by advancing whatever that cause is. Refusing donations from some parties while accepting them from others is going to give people the impression that the burden weighs more heavily on those whose money is accepted.

It also taints the perception of future donation drives... "If we can just raise X amount, we'll be able to do so much!" ...well, if you'd taken Z's money, you'd be closer to the goal, wouldn't you?

People reason that if they donate to a less selective charity, then they won't have to donate as much, because the pool of potential donors is much larger.

Personally, I can understand why they did what they did- and if it violates their charter to accept, they have no choice. But, I don't particularly agree with the decision, and would question the charter. Fortunately for Sheldonrs's employer, I don't have any money to donate regardless, so nobody's losing out, there

You need to draw a line, always. I would not have drawn it there, but you have to draw it somewhere. And if it's in the charter, they can't go against it.

[Sheldonrs]

I can guarantee we'd lose a lot more than we'd gain if we started accepting donations from other questionable, sex-themed fund raisers.

What's next? "Wanking for Wishes"?