Givey has recently had 3 great shout outs from various sources;
TechCrunch “Because of this model, Givey is free for charities and free for individuals, unlike JustGiving http://techcrunch.com/2014/07/16/givey-secures-cash-for-free-charity-giving-model-to-compete-with-justgiving/
BBC R4 “We’ve only found one site that sends the whole donation, Gift and Aid, and that’s Givey” There’s only one site that http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b054gnrk
BBC Radio WM “feature on Money box as the best giving site to use” http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02kgbkp
But are we asking the Wrong Questions?
Whilst it awesome that our business model is being recognised, I just don’t think it quite addresses or asks the right questions. Its not about whether a site charges or not, but about entering that relationship with full, distilled clarity.
Those that part with their money, especially for a charity, should be met with total clarity and transparency; total clarity on how the charity spends its money, but also the sites and tools they use to donate.
Its a fundamental requisite of mutual respect; the donor parts with payment details and a level of personal data, they should be met with glaring clarity regarding how much of their cash goes where and for what.
If the model is as clear cut as their ‘About’ or ‘Fees’ pages divulge (still tucked away, especially in VMGs case), then why not offer accessible transparency on the homepage? And more critically, within the paying stages?
As a donor myself, I would be grateful for live, reactive clarity over how much of my donation – whatever that may be – goes to the cause I want it to. Certainly if a friend has selected their giving site, I would want instant awareness and understanding of what this means for my donation if I have no choice over the site they’ve selected.
Considering these are the industry leaders, I don’t think the bar is set high enough….
Comments are closed.