Question

A close family member explains that she does not give money to charity because she "wouldn’t receive any personal benefit from donating” and because "most charities waste their donations on salaries and other administrative expenses.”

Write a three-paragraph essay that formulates knowledgeable claims and counterclaims to explain the benefits of charitable giving and refute your relative’s counterclaims. Support your argument with reasons and specific evidence. Be sure to include sources from your research.

Answer 1

Charitable giving produces benefits that extend beyond the recipient and often come back to the donor in measurable ways. Psychologically, spending on others and volunteering increases happiness, lowers stress, and strengthens social bonds—effects documented in the behavioral-science literature and summarized for the public by sources such as Harvard Health (see “How giving makes you happier”) and original research showing that prosocial spending reliably boosts well‑being (e.g., Dunn, Aknin, & Norton). Financially, donors can receive concrete personal benefit through tax deductions for qualified gifts (see the IRS guidance on public charities). Socially and civically, regular giving and volunteering build networks and community resilience, and philanthropic dollars fund innovations and cost‑effective interventions—charities recommended by evaluators like GiveWell have demonstrated very high impact per dollar in areas such as malaria prevention and deworming.

Responding to the claim “I wouldn’t receive any personal benefit”: research and practice show otherwise. Multiple studies find that prosocial spending and volunteering improve mood and long‑term mental and physical health, so donors often experience greater life satisfaction and lower stress than they would without participating in giving (Harvard Health summary). Donors also gain social and professional returns—deeper social ties, volunteer experience that enhances skills and employability, and tax advantages for deductible donations (IRS). If a donor seeks more tangible impact-from-giving outcomes, evidence‑focused evaluators such as GiveWell and The Life You Can Save can point to organizations where donations achieve clearly documented, measurable results, aligning the donor’s desire for both personal and societal return.

On the concern that “most charities waste donations on salaries and administrative expenses,” the evidence does not support a blanket dismissal of nonprofits. First, reputable oversight and information sources (e.g., Charity Navigator, GiveWell, GuideStar/Candid, and IRS Form 990 filings) make many organizations’ finances and outcomes public so donors can assess efficiency and impact. Second, administrative and salary costs are not inherently wasteful—paid staff, monitoring, evaluation, and infrastructure are often essential to deliver programs at scale and ensure accountability; moreover, simple overhead ratios do not predict impact (the so‑called “overhead myth”). Finally, donors who worry about waste can choose evidence‑backed charities and use independent evaluators (GiveWell’s top charities; The Life You Can Save’s recommended list) or look at audited financials and program‑spending percentages on Charity Navigator or GuideStar to give confidently. For further reading and to compare charities, see GiveWell’s criteria (https://www.givewell.org/), Charity Navigator’s guidance (https://www.charitynavigator.org/), The Life You Can Save (https://www.thelifeyoucansave.org/), and IRS resources on public charities (https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/search-for-public-charities).