Question

Prompt
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

Many clear benefits flow from charitable giving—to people in need, to communities, and often to the donors themselves. Donated dollars fund services (food, shelter, medical care, education) and, when directed to evidence-based programs, can produce measurable, large-scale improvements (see GiveWell’s reviews of high-impact charities and interventions: https://www.givewell.org/charities/top-charities). Volunteering and community support also create economic value and strengthen local networks: Independent Sector estimates the economic value of volunteer time and documents how volunteerism supports services that governments and markets might not provide (https://independentsector.org/resource/the-value-of-volunteer-time/). Donating strategically—e.g., to vetted, evidence-focused organizations—lets a relatively small gift multiply into meaningful, measurable results.

Two common objections—“I wouldn’t receive any personal benefit” and “most charities waste donations on salaries/administration”—are understandable but incomplete. Research shows that giving can produce personal benefits: experimental studies find that spending on others reliably increases happiness compared with spending on oneself (Dunn, Aknin & Norton, Science, 2008: https://science.sciencemag.org/content/319/5870/1687), and volunteering often improves social ties and mental well-being (Independent Sector). As for administrative expenses, reporting a low overhead ratio does not guarantee impact; some administrative and program-management costs (staff, monitoring, evaluation, fundraising) are essential to run effective programs. Leading evaluators and transparency initiatives (Charity Navigator, GuideStar/BBB Wise Giving Alliance) urge donors to focus on outcomes, transparency, and financial stewardship rather than raw overhead percentages—the “overhead myth” campaign explains why overhead alone is a poor measure of effectiveness (https://overheadmyth.com/; https://www.charitynavigator.org/).

If your relative is hesitant but open to experimenting, there are practical ways to give wisely and see the benefits. Start small—a modest recurring donation or a short volunteer commitment—while checking charities’ impact, transparency, and reviews on sites like GiveWell, Charity Navigator, and GuideStar (https://www.givewell.org/; https://www.charitynavigator.org/; https://www.guidestar.org/). For people who want maximum measurable impact, The Life You Can Save and GiveWell curate evidence-based giving options (https://www.thelifeyoucansave.org/; https://www.givewell.org/). That combination—research, modest personal involvement, and attention to demonstrated outcomes—answers both objections: donors can experience personal and community benefits, and they can avoid charities that genuinely misuse funds by choosing transparent, results-focused organizations.

Sources
- GiveWell, “Top Charities” and research: https://www.givewell.org/charities/top-charities
- Charity Navigator: https://www.charitynavigator.org/
- Overhead Myth (GuideStar / BBB Wise Giving Alliance / Charity Navigator campaign): https://overheadmyth.com/
- Independent Sector, “The Value of Volunteer Time”: https://independentsector.org/resource/the-value-of-volunteer-time/
- Dunn, Aknin, & Norton, “Spending money on others promotes happiness,” Science, 2008: https://science.sciencemag.org/content/319/5870/1687
- The Life You Can Save: https://www.thelifeyoucansave.org/