For answers to these issues we look to the Focused Community Solutions Urban Ministries out of Atlanta, Georgia. By valuing dignity, empowerment and neighboring strategies for nearly four decades, FCS has gone against the grain to achieve the results all need based organizations should seek. Over the course of those years they have developed an eight step code for helpers that can be adopted by businesses, non profit and faith based organizations as the litmus test that ensures profitable returns on investment.
1. Learn the difference between crisis need and chronic need. – Being displaced from your home because of fire or natural disaster is a crisis. Not having enough money each month to pay for utility bills and because you are underemployed is a ‘chronic poverty need.’ Free giving is a responsible to address housing, medical and other essential supplies in a crisis. Chronic needs are best resolved through ‘expert consultation,…practical plan[s] and a combination of grants and loans’ to help people become financially independent. NOTE: It is impossible to resolve chronic needs with short term commitments.
2. Investing is better than lending – Investing in the less fortunate ‘is the ultimate method of sharing resources (including expertise, connections, energy). [G]ood investment requires a sound business plan, reasoned risk/reward ratio, adequate controls and accountability.’
3. Lending is better than giving – ‘While giving may seem like the kind and Christian thing to do, it often ends up undermining the very relationship a helper is attempting to build. Anyone who has served among the poor for any length of time will recognize the following progression:
- give once and you elicit appreciation;
- give twice and you create anticipation;
- give three times and you create expectation;
- give four times and it becomes entitlement;
- give five times and you establish dependency.
Lending, on the other hand, establishes a mutually beneficial relationship characterized by responsibility, accountability, and respect. It is legitimate exchange that requires the lender to be responsible for assessing the risk while leaving the dignity of the borrower intact. Lending, done well, builds mutual trust and respect.’
4. Exchange is better than giving – ‘No one wants to be pitied as a charity case. One-way charity implies that the recipient has nothing of value the giver desires in return. Thus, a thrift store affords more dignity than a free clothes closet, and a food coop more than a free food pantry. To the extent that people in need have ownership in the systems intended to serve them, to that extent their self-worth is enhanced. The fair exchange of labor for goods and services is an honorable and responsible practice (though admittedly not as easy as give-away programs).’
5. Never do for others what they can do for themselves – While personal responsibility has social, emotional and spiritual benefits, doing for others what they can do for themselves is dis-empowering. Welfare, like many failed government and religious programs, penalizes people for making progress and instead promotes dependency and a sense of entitlement. ‘The effective helper can be a cheerleader, an encourager, a coach, a connector, but never a caretaker who assumes responsibility that the “helpee” is capable of shouldering.’
6. Make sure your good work is sustainable. – Sustainability is the buzzword of the moment, but when it comes to responsible community development, are the people being served able to sustain what we you started? If not, your work may be more dependency-producing rather than empowering. Thus, providing goods and services for people who do not have the training and/or resources to maintain these assets does not empower them.
7. Consider unintended consequences BEFORE you start your service work. – Just like Newton’s Law of Motion, every community action has an equal and opposite reaction. Giving free clothes may robe those in need with the latest fashions while at the same time put resident clothing entrepreneurs out of business. ‘While we cannot foresee all the potential consequences of our service, we should at least make some attempt to predict their impact. Are we supporting irresponsible lifestyles by indiscriminate giving from our clothes closets and food pantries? Before we embark on a mission venture we should conduct an “impact study” to consider how our good deeds might have consequences we never intended. As Hippocrates admonished: above all do no harm.’
8. Listen to what is not being said – People in need avoid full transparency for many reasons. Rather out of fear of judgment, fear of losing support, not wanting to appear unappreciative, or unintended intimidation. It might be difficult for a person to decline prayer at a church based food pantry if it seems like a condition for service. ‘Likewise, a single mother trying to clothe her children may be hesitant to tell the clothes closet volunteers that their hours of operation make it difficult for working parents to shop there.’ To be most effective, we must learn to observe, ask questions, use their intuition, and hear what is not being said.
While these principles may be new to most charitable organizations in the Charleston area, we as donors and advocates should do our part to encourage community development that is rooted in empowerment, dignity and self-sufficiency. Some area organizations that have started the work toward this goal include:
If you know of other organizations in the Tri-County area that promote responsible community development, please contact us so that we can spread the word.
Bob Lupton – FCS Founder, President and Author of Toxic Charity
