Operation Christmas Child In Country Issues PSA

[cintinative]

I have not done much over the years except perhaps donate things to go into a shoebox, so perhaps this doesn't impact me as much as others.

About a year ago, this blogger (see below) noted that in Zambia, the churches were being asked to pay to receive the boxes.  Basically, they had to pay for in-country transportation of the boxes to them.  A lot of people did not realize that in-country transportation was not included in the $9/box donation that OCC recommends.  OCC's parent organization has since responded, and then the pastors/ministry within Zambia have responded to their response (see link).  https://bushbabycolvin.blogspot.com/2018/10/pastors-response-re-occ.html?fbclid=IwAR28g6M033Z520rbPVWvR98ANNZ7EYkWKBBqBhcb22922l1nfvCDMHa1QWo

You can read the blogger's original post, OCC (parent) organization response, and the local (ministry) response at the link.

I am not trying to start something controversial, but I am very disturbed by these reports of corruption with the in-country implementation of OCC (their "national" team).  I wanted to get this information out there so that any of you who contribute can be fully informed in your decision. 

I cannot speak to if this issue exists in other countries/regions and this blog does not address that, although I had heard some comments (on the blog? on OCC FB??)  indicate a similar issue elsewhere. I cannot confirm that as I have not read the comments. 

 

 

[Zoo Keeper]

Interesting....  and food for thought.

Thanks for posting.

[TechWife]

Thank you for posting this.

[Liz CA]

So I flew over the article and may have missed something...but it sounds to me like they are unsure if OCC stateside is aware of churches being charged? This would seem a very simple thing to investigate and it would also be in their best interest to make sure their in country crew is not cashing in on the side which does not surprise me that much as corruption is common everywhere.

And I am sitting here now looking at that OCC cardboard box...

Edited November 3, 2018 by Liz CA

[J-rap]

This is very interesting.  It's hard to believe that the OCC stateside would support this, or "blindly" let it happen.  It sounds like much closer supervision is needed.  I really hope they do something about it.  I'm already on the fence about OCC because of the questionable leadership (who I have a lot of problems with), but still have supported the project.

[cintinative]

1 hour ago, Liz CA said:

So I flew over the article and may have missed something...but it sounds to me like they are unsure if OCC stateside is aware of churches being charged? This would seem a very simple thing to investigate and it would also be in their best interest to make sure their in country crew is not cashing in on the side which does not surprise me that much as corruption is common everywhere.

And I am sitting here now looking at that OCC cardboard box...

 

OCC Stateside sent the "national" team (inside Zambia) to investigate the issue. The national team is the one responsible for charging for the in-country transportation of the boxes. The national team reported that the issue was resolved, but the local (pastors, churches) are saying they were told because they complained, they will not get boxes now.  The blogger is arguing an independent person should have been sent. The locals are saying the national team is corrupt.  It's on the transcript on the blog post. Does that help?

 

Edited November 3, 2018 by cintinative

[cintinative]

1 hour ago, J-rap said:

This is very interesting.  It's hard to believe that the OCC stateside would support this, or "blindly" let it happen.  It sounds like much closer supervision is needed.  I really hope they do something about it.  I'm already on the fence about OCC because of the questionable leadership (who I have a lot of problems with), but still have supported the project.

 

The hard thing is, this has been out there for a year, and OCC has only sent the "national" team to check in--and all appearances are that the "national" team is the problem, and has been from the beginning. 

If you have time, read her original blog post where she goes into how they could spend the average of $30 U.S. spent on each box (not including the handling) if the money was donated more directly. It's pretty eye opening when she talks about being able to buy 10 toothbrushes there for the price of one in the U.S. Also she has some thoughts about why people don't realize/are struggling to accept that these issues are going on. Note the blog post came about a year before this response (in OP). 

[creekland]

Thank you for posting this.  I'm another who quit supporting Samaritan Purse in general once I found out just how much the leader is profiting from it and his other "charity" organization (his income from them).  Still... we sent a box last year because it "was for the kids" and tough to let go.  I have an empty box on my table now with plans to go fill it this coming Tuesday after voting.  Now I will take that money and send it elsewhere to something far more charitable.  There are oodles of fine charities - most small scale.  The love of money is indeed the root of all evil.  I don't need to knowingly support it when there are oodles of other options that will hopefully fit my intent better.

[Heatherwith4]

This is the first year in a while that we haven’t done a couple of boxes.  I haven’t felt great about the organization for a while now, but I just cannot support them anymore.  

[Liz CA]

36 minutes ago, cintinative said:

 

OCC Stateside sent the "national" team (inside Zambia) to investigate the issue. The national team is the one responsible for charging for the in-country transportation of the boxes. The national team reported that the issue was resolved, but the local (pastors, churches) are saying they were told because they complained, they will not get boxes now.  The blogger is arguing an independent person should have been sent. The locals are saying the national team is corrupt.  It's on the transcript on the blog post. Does that help?

 

 

I wonder if OCC gave little credence to the charges and therefore did so little exploring / investigating. That's disappointing. One would think they can figure out that they need a neutral party to investigate. And now some areas don't get any boxes at all which is sad. I wonder if we need to start some kind of emailing / calling campaign to draw their attention to the fact that this issue is NOT resolved.

[cintinative]

2 minutes ago, Liz CA said:

I wonder if we need to start some kind of emailing / calling campaign to draw their attention to the fact that this issue is NOT resolved.

 

I think that questions and complaints are why it was investigated originally, so yes, that would be an appropriate response.

[creekland]

I think it's important to read the comments to the post - especially the very recent ones that talk about this very likely happening in other areas too.  Zambian pastors reported it, but others seem to have raised their hands saying, "it's happening here too."  That, to me, is what clinches my plan to support something else with my money.  I'd rather take a chance on something else than support something with several red flags and an organization that isn't desiring a real investigation.

[cintinative]

3 minutes ago, creekland said:

I think it's important to read the comments to the post - especially the very recent ones that talk about this very likely happening in other areas too.  Zambian pastors reported it, but others seem to have raised their hands saying, "it's happening here too."  That, to me, is what clinches my plan to support something else with my money.  I'd rather take a chance on something else than support something with several red flags and an organization that isn't desiring a real investigation.

 

Thanks for taking the time to read them and report back. I have only read some of them, but not all, and I know her FB post had a lot of traffic also.

 

[Liz CA]

2 minutes ago, creekland said:

I think it's important to read the comments to the post - especially the very recent ones that talk about this very likely happening in other areas too.  Zambian pastors reported it, but others seem to have raised their hands saying, "it's happening here too."  That, to me, is what clinches my plan to support something else with my money.  I'd rather take a chance on something else than support something with several red flags and an organization that isn't desiring a real investigation.

 

You also mentioned the articles about Graham's income. I did read one back when we had another thread on this focusing on the issue of profit - not corruption so much. It's always been difficult for me to find the time to read and investigate a lot and frequently I am left wondering which article is closest to the truth or if some of it is just plainly smearing some organization. Sounds like there are more credible sources reporting on this than I am aware of.

[creekland]

24 minutes ago, Liz CA said:

You also mentioned the articles about Graham's income. I did read one back when we had another thread on this focusing on the issue of profit - not corruption so much. It's always been difficult for me to find the time to read and investigate a lot and frequently I am left wondering which article is closest to the truth or if some of it is just plainly smearing some organization. Sounds like there are more credible sources reporting on this than I am aware of.

 

One never really knows when they can't hop on an airplane and go straight to the source to see, but I know I have limited money so opt to go with my best odds for that money doing the most good based upon what I want it to do (education, health, anti-poverty, and Christian causes being our top interests).  Graham's income was reported by World Magazine back in the day when that influenced my decision. They reported what other organization leaders made too.  I doubt they were out to get SP.  That one is an income deal - not corruption.  We don't donate to any charity where the leader is making in the Top 1% for income.  It doesn't matter if they are Christian or not.

ETA:  It doesn't change the amount we donate.  It only changes where that money goes to.  We're definitely in favor of sharing the blessings we have income-wise to help others who didn't have as much luck with the birth lottery.

Edited November 3, 2018 by creekland

[iamonlyone]

I looked at the website the Zambian pastor mentioned as a place where donations would more greatly benefit the people. It looks interesting: https://www.choshenfarm.org/

[creekland]

On 11/3/2018 at 7:14 PM, iamonlyone said:

I looked at the website the Zambian pastor mentioned as a place where donations would more greatly benefit the people. It looks interesting: https://www.choshenfarm.org/

 

I thought about this, but honestly, the situation in Venezuela has caught my attention a ton lately and the church we belong to (denomination) supports missionaries there who are in the thick of it.  Normally contributions to them goes toward church planting and general "missions," but this year in a newsletter I just read they are distributing food, clothes/shoes, and supporting medical needs serving the lowest income communities. I think they'll be able to use our money in ways that surpass a toothbrush made in the US.  We're definitely redirecting - 100% vote among family members.

I really think everyone who normally does a shoebox (or 8  ) can find something worthy somewhere.  The sad part would only come in if folks didn't redirect their funds and just pocketed them instead.  We are keeping all of our other donations intact (or increasing them).  We've redirected in the past for various reasons - almost always to match what we want to support vs something we've discovered about a previous place.