To think this is just getting someone else to pay for your holiday?

It's interesting hat you say this because I did one of those volunteer tourist challenges about 20 years ago when I was much younger. At the time I thought it was a win/win situation- I got a holiday to an interesting place and the charity got the help it apparently needed. What became abundantly clear when I was there was that actually all of the volunteers were essentially taking work away from locals - many of whom were actually skilled at what the volunteers we're aiming to do. It also gave the impression that the people who were being helped didn't deserve to be helped by professionals, they should be grateful for whatever a group of unskilled 20 year olds could muddle together.

Everything people are saying on this thread is true and I'm glad people are thinking much more critically about these things than I did all those years ago. After I returned, a colleague asked me if it wouldn't have been better to used the money raised to send me there, instead to pay a local tradesman to work for x amount of months then the charity still benefits and the work is done to an appropriate standard.

Sadly not

I've clearly misunderstood - I thought that people paid upfront for the activities and all the fundraised donations went to charity.

I agree, OP. Also consider the environmental impact of long haul flights for this kind of thing. They usually tell you it's being offset by planting 50 trees or whatever, but it would be far better not to have anything to offset - the trees don't instantly make it good.

Totally agree.

Yeah, it's a con really.

I have done a few fundraising 'activities' but I paid the cost in full myself so that 100% of sponsorship went to the charity.

Does it ever occur to the "charity tourists" that the money could do a lot more good among the actual locals, who after all know best what's needed, aren't too interested in training up a few westerners who'll disappear in a week or two and may well appreciate the employment?

Admittedly it would mean giving up the jaunt and all those pics for social media, but it's "the cause" they're supposed to be mostly interested in ... isn't it?

It’s paying for someone else’s jolly. No way.
someone I know is using crowdfunding to pay for her 18 year old daughter’s jolly in South America. She basically does a few days volunteering then has a holiday.

I think the only way this is acceptable is if it’s properly transparent eg person pays for what it actually costs and then anything on top that they are able to raise, goes to the charity . in a similar way when I’ve run long races for charity, I’ve got myself there and back and paid for the entry myself, then everything on top goes direct to the charity.

It's the same when people run things like the London Marathon. Bonded charity places cost around £500 each, so when the charity says minimum £1500 sponsorship, £500 is basically to cover the cost of your place.

I remember reading a comment on an article about these where a poster said that when asked by friends’ children to contribute to such a venture, he asked them how much they were hoping to raise for the charity, then offered to pay double that if they didn’t go. He said he had yet to be taken up on his offer, which speaks for itself!

I’m amazed anyone still has the brass neck to ask for money for these. Everyone knows they’re a narcissist’s ticket to get a holiday paid for by other people then look holy because it’s for ‘char-i-dee’.

Easy to give direct to a local food bank or a global charity and cut out the office Colin Hunt middle man.

I massively hate sponsored stuff anyway. If I'm giving ten quid to charity it makes no odds to me if you walk round the park 100 times, give up wine, climb a mountain, do 2000 star jumps...I'm still down £10 and the charity is still up £10

I agree. Years ago I did a sponsored (long) bike ride. We all paid any costs ourselves so any sponsorship went straight to charity. The only thing was we had a huge amount of cake baked and donated by the very kindly local WI. We all gave a donation to the charities we were fundraising in lieu of cake so that the charity as well as us were benefiting. I think it’s a massive piss take when I see messages to ‘sponsor me have this once in a lifetime experience’!

blaaa- whilst the person sponsored is cost covered and may benefit from the experience- the charity clearly gets what it wants from the deal. If you choose not to buy into it,thats fine. if they get to feel good about themselves,thats fine too.every little counts.

YANBU, Covid seems to have done away with all of these sponsored events at my workplace. They're not compulsory but some people feel like they have to cough up.

Yup! Has been going on for years. Hopefully it’s going to become frowned upon 😁 I’m all for a crowdfunder (donated to 2 just this week - local cricket club rebuild and another to search for a body, sadly), and I manage to volunteer for 2 charities without anyone funding anything for me 😅 I don’t mind donating to someone’s marathon for example either but these schemes where you go abroad and look good but are actually all a bit ‘white saviour’-ish is a no from me.

For me it depends on if the activity genuinely will be a challenge for them and if the charity has personal meaning for them.

Getting other propel to pay for your expensive adventurous holiday is exactly what this is. If they really wanted to raise money for the charity they could do it without the holiday.

I agree OP

I'd either ignore the request if it was sent to lots of people, or if it was personal, I'd say my charity budget is all accounted for on direct debits.

I do donate to things like where someone's mum has died of Alzheimer's and the grieving relatives are raising money for a charity that helped them or a related charity. But no, not to fund someone's jollies.

I think it depends.

I did one of these with a group of colleagues a few years ago. I had to pay £1000 towards the trip, which cost £2000. The other £1000 came from the money I raised, but I had to raise a minimum of £3500 or I couldn't go. You had to commit to raise at least £2500 for the charity after your own costs and there were 16 of us, so we had to raise 40k altogether. The only other thing I'd say is I was really honest about this. On my Justgiving page I put a full breakdown of the costs and how much was going to the charity etc. I also didn't just expect people to donate 2.5k, I organised fundraising events which people attended (golf tournament, bake sale, fun day in a local pub, raffles etc). So I did spend a lot of time and effort on it. Didn't get extra annual leave either as PP said someone they know did.

Nobody seemed to have any issue with it and I didn't put any pressure on anyone to donate. But I do think it's wrong when people are dishonest about how the trip is funded and just expect people to pay for it.

See also, sponsoring friends' chdren to eg volunteer in an orphanage overseas

Funnily enough, none of them volunteer at local youth groups

I might be happy to donate if they eg picked up litter or washed cars to raise cash, but they don't even do that. Just ask for the money

I agree OP

Challenge-type fundraising appeals to a younger demographic that is less likely to straightforwardly give cash.
It's not necessarily that profitable for charities, but it does build towards potential long term commitment of donors, so it's worth the hassle in the long run. Unfortunately the cost to the charity is often not made clear to potential participants.

That said - I work in fundraising but actively avoid community fundraising (as it's called) because I hate the guilt tripping voluntourism nonsense.

"The latest one takes the piss though - rowing the Atlantic not for charity but to raise awareness". Of what?! People's gullibility?

YANBU

This subject has been done inside out over the years on MN, and the vast majority have agreed.