Selecting the Charities

When the Combined Charities Committee recently "dropped" the American Friends Service Committee from its list of recommended charities, the ensuing controversy revealed that University students are interested in choosing the organizations to which their money goes. Unfortunately, the present system of selecting recommended charities--in which only the several members of the Committee choose, principally from lists of organizations compiled in past years--offers little opportunity for student involvement.

Thus, a decision by a small group essentially determines the charities that divide a sum which last year exceeded $20,000. Although individual students may elect to give through the drive to a favorite charity not on the list, in practice they stick closely to those recommended. Last year over 80 percent of all contributions went to organizations chosen by the Committee.

In the past, the Committee has received suggestions by individual students for charities which they would like to see recommended. Often it has followed such suggestions. This year, for example, the Committee chose the Ethiopian National Literacy Campaign, on the urging of an Ethiopian graduate student. But few students realize that this opportunity is available, since the Committee has provided no organized and publicized channel for such initiative. In addition, last year, the HCUA failed to name the chairman for this year's drive until shortly before summer vacation. Consequently, most students had left Cambridge before the Committee began its work of research and selection and thus had little chance to affect the choice.

Several reforms are in order. First, the HCUA should select the new chairman early in the spring term, so that work might begin immediately. Second, the Combined Charities Committee should designate a certain period--perhaps two weeks--when interested students could talk with a Committee member about charities they would like recommended. The period should be well publicized and a regular system of appointments arranged to encourage outside initiative.

But most important, the Combined Charities Committee should develop a more flexible selection system which would take account of both student suggestions and student activities. If students suggest charities in one area--education, for example--there is no reason why the Committee should not recommend more than one charity in this field, even if it must cut back in another area. Similarly, preference should be given to an extra-University activity, like the Mississippi civil rights movement, in which many Harvard students are participating.

Finally, the Committee should seriously consider increasing the number of recommended and suggested charities. If each of these lists were double--making about 25 charities in all--a wider range of organizations would be presented. Although each would inevitably receive less money, total donations would probably be greater, because each student would be likely to find a charity of personal importance. Then, the Combined Charities Drive might become more than an annual ritual of conscience-purging.