Toxic Charity

I have made reference on several occasions to a must read book written by Robert (Bob) Lupton called “Toxic Charity: How Churches and Charities Hurt those They Help and How to Reverse it.” I had the good fortune to hear Lupton speak about his experiences and how he came to this view on toxic charity. To those who do not know his story, he felt called to move into the impoverished areas of Atlanta to live near and like the people he was trying to help. From this vantage point, he witnessed and gleaned a far better and more impactful way of helping people in need. His premise based on this first hand anecdotal evidence is well intended volunteers and donors often do more harm than good in their outreach.

In essence, they do for people what the people can do for themselves, both here and abroad. His mantra is we should help people climb a ladder, but do it in a way they can maintain their self-esteem and their efforts can be sustained. He notes that true charity should be reserved for emergency situations like Hurricane Sandy. A few examples may help.

– From the feedback from those being helped and his observations, it is far better to provide a discount store of donated goods which caters to those in need as customers. When clothes are just given away it creates an entitlement society and the relationship can be adversarial which is counterproductive to all parties. He told the story that everyone likes to find a bargain. So, why should we deny that opportunity to those in poverty. This will help people in need with budgeting and the pride in saving up money to purchase a good deal on something they need.

– Rather than giving food away, he has witnessed it is far better to have food cooperatives. They would have each family pay a weekly stipend such as $3 to join a food co-op. These funds would be used to buy discounted food to pool with the donated food. The co-op begins an association with others that usually proves fruitful with recipe sharing, neighborhood dinners, restaurant development, etc. It also allows the deployment of better food for the recipients.

– Rather than have parishioners donate time and energy on projects that are mis-prioritized, mismanaged and misimplemented, use the volunteers for more employment and entrepreneurial activities such as helping people set up a small business, learn a trade, understand a business plan or network to find a job. This will use the skills of the volunteers in a more impactful way. He also notes we should let the community leaders decide on what is most needed (community initiated), actually lead the efforts (community led) and allow time for mutual information sharing (how their faith is important to both giver and recipient).

– Find ways to invest in the community to improve on assets in existence. This Asset Based Community Development (ABCD) is critical to leveraging what is there (such as a school, playground, golf course, clinic, etc.) and works well with the community. Schools for example, are critical not only to the education of the kids, but after school programs for kids and adults, and a place where communities can gather. He noted an example where a developer in Atlanta bought a golf course and improved the neighborhood around it using a 50/50 mixture of market based and affordable housing. The golf course provided jobs and recreation to these mixed income families and gentrified a run down neighborhood.

The charity I am involved with for homeless families follows his empowerment model. We try not to do for the families what they can do for themselves. The families receive rent subsidized housing based on their ability to pay, meaning they must pay a portion of the rent. They must also save money for their eventual exit from the program. We help them buy a car on more favorable terms than 23% interest, yet they have to pay for car, insurance and upkeep. They must work with our social workers to make better decisions, improve their education, attend career development and budget more wisely. We are helping them climb the ladder, but they have to do it. We cannot and will not push them up the ladder.

Lupton speaks of “The Oath for Compassionate Service” which builds off the Hippocratic Oath for Doctors and is as follows:

– Never do for the poor what they have (or could have) the capacity to do for themselves.

– Limit one way giving to emergency situations.

– Strive to empower the poor through employment, lending and investing, using grants sparingly to reinforce achievements.

– Subordinate self-interests to the needs of those being served.

– Listen closely to those you seek to help, especially to what is not being said – unspoken feelings may contain essential clues to effective service.

– Above all, do no harm.

One of the things I have observed about people in need is their network of people with connections or skills they need is very narrow or non-existent. In fact, homeless families or individuals may have exhausted their only network of friends and family. I often help friends or relatives of friends and family network to find a job or resource. Others would do this for my friends and relatives in need. Yet, who can someone in poverty reach out to except people who are also in poverty? So, church goers who sit in the pews every Sunday have an abundance of knowledge and connections that is better suited to help those in need. Following Lupton’s example, if we can provide more intersections of those in need and those who can connect the dots for them, more success would be witnessed. There would be more ladders out of poverty.

Lupton made a telling observation in his speech. We are a very generous nation of people. We donate billions of money and time to help, but what do we have to show for it? Poverty has increased. The key is to help people find the opportunities, the ladders out of poverty. We can look for ways to help them climb the ladders, but they have to do it to make it sustainable.

8 thoughts on “Toxic Charity

  1. I totally agree with Lupton’s ethos as you have outlined it here. Empowerment and the move towards self sustainability has to be the way to go. And when you are trying to do that in another country, the process becomes even more difficult as cultural issues need to be factored in. I am now working for one of Australia’s leading charities which runs some fantastic empowerment programmes and have learned a lot from that experience. Returning dignity and confidence and teaching skills is the way to go.

    Not sure if you have heard of the “Common Ground” concept – it originated in New York as a way of decreasing homlessness in Times Square – apparently it decreased it by more than 50%. We have adopted that model here in Sydney and operate a state of the art apartment complex which houses a mixture of the homeless, and social and affordable housing tenants and runs a variety of programmes to assist. The idea is that these tenants will work their way up the housing ladder – whether they end at the top rung or somewhere in between doesn’t so much matter.

    • Many thanks for writing Judy. I am familiar with the success in New York. They had a huge problems and made a difference. The mixed housing is the trick as it does not concentarte poverty. We use a scattered site model with landlords who are open to formerly homeless tenants. I think that model is more scalable as it builds off existing inventory. Yet, I think strategic housing starts or renovations with mixed use is also key. Thanks for offering your experience which sounds terrific. Best regards, BTG

  2. Eminently sound advice. “Empowerment” rather than hand-outs. I second the motion. I know how involved you are in this movement and I take my hat off to you. I wish there were more like you!

  3. Great piece, and I think it is the right concept, as well. In this day and age, support has to be extended I think, because of the economy. Training for a job or job skills is not enough, is it? Have to also train on how to look for work, how to interview, and particularly, perseverance. I also think there needs to be more of a “reach out” to employers, get their involvement in directing what training is required, perhaps even supporting training or apprentice programs.

    As to the housing, I wrote a few months back of our trip to Vancouver, and how much of the new housing, and it is scattered throughout the city, is mixed use in that parts are low-income housing, parts, normal rent housing, and part higher income/high priced condos. It has been working very successfully there for a number of years.

    I know that you work and are focused in this area. Your contributions are appreciated and very much needed. Thanks for your services.

  4. Pingback: The Anti-Charity Charity | musingsofanoldfart

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.