Heifer International calls it "the most important gift catalog in the world." Inside the colorful brochure you will not find slippers, ties, chocolates or jewelry.
Instead you will find goats, alpacas, heifers and chickens. “Surprise someone special in your life with a gift like no other,” reads the copy.
You may have already received such a gift. The group encourages charitable donors to forgo traditional Christmas gifts and send their friends a certificate that says a goat (or chicken or other animal) has been sent, in their name, to a family in a developing country.
Charitable giving peaks at the end of the year, making this season crunchtime for groups like Heifer International.
The organization has been around since 1944, started by an Indiana farmer who worked to send cows overseas to a war-ravaged Europe. It placed 244,551 animals just this year, three-quarters of which were dairy cows, poultry and small ruminants such as goats.
Many other charities also place livestock. World Vision, the evangelical Christian charity, will, for $200, send 10 rabbits to a family in need. Episcopal Relief will send a goat for $80. At Food for the Hungry, a sheep costs $65 and is touted as a source for wool and fertilizer.
Most groups are concerned with providing independence, economic stability and a steady food source for poor families. The idea of giving an animal also helps to put a face on the monetary gift from donors, though in some cases (such as with Heifer International) the gift of an animal is an abstract concept. What’s really happening is the donor is supporting the relief efforts in general, rather than sending a specific animal to a specific family.
Is it always good idea to send a goat?
GiveWell, an organization that rates charities, published a blog a few years ago titled, "Please don't give me a goat for the holidays."
GiveWell’s point was that there are better ways to help people, and that the identification of the gift with a cute animal was there mostly to make the giver happy, not to maximize results for the receiver.
“The questions to ask are: How do you know that the livestock donations are having the impact that you want to have?” said Catherine Hollander, a senior research analyst at GiveWell. “Are the livestock in good health? Will they meet the recipient’s expectations? Does the recipient have the resources to take care of the animal?”
Instead, she said, a donor could choose to simply give cash through a charity like GiveDirectly.
“One overarching question that comes to mind is, ‘Am I in position to assess and decide what would be most helpful to the people I’m reaching with my charitable donation?’” she said. “What appeals about cash transfers is it enables the recipients to be in the driver’s seat, to choose funding in a way that will be most effective for them.”
Chris Coxson, director of public relations and strategic communications at Heifer International said the group has supported more than 35 million families, concentrating on creating ways for local farmers to generate a living income and a local source of food.
Coxson said the group works with local experts in every community they help. He said when Heifer International places an animal, it also provides the training to families, shelter for the livestock and the infrastructure needed to ensure success.
As an example, he said, in Tanzania some communities have minimal access to water. Heifer International help fit guttering to houses to create collection systems, so that during heavy rains water could be stored to keep livestock healthy.
A downside of providing direct cash transfers, said Coxson, is that men control the finances in most families, whereas women are more likely to be in charge of livestock. “If you focus on supporting women in these communities, they have a bigger impact on family, will invest back into family and the whole family prospers.”
One should not discount the power of the friendly creature, said philanthropy expert David King. It has driven the success of charities that place livestock.
King, author of “God’s Internationalists: World Vision in the Age of Evangelical Humanitarianism,” is assistant professor of philanthropic studies at the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy, and director of the Lake Institute on Faith and Giving. Both are part of Indiana University.
Using livestock has been effective tactic, he said, not just because it helps alleviate poverty but because it helps lure donors. “It does have a tangible connection. You can think about giving a goat, giving a flock of geese, giving a chick, [and] you make that connection. Research has shown that people like to have that connection with their gift.”
In the final analysis, donors should examine the charities that they support, using advice from such evaluators at GiveWell and the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy, and then make their best choices. And if your instinct tells you to send a goat, by all means do so. Most of us have enough neckties.
About the Author
