According to the Washington Post, the problem was associated with a system "cobbled together" to get aid to the Katrina victims on very short notice. Given that the very purpose of the Red Cross is to provide this type of assistance after a disaster, one must wonder why any aid distribution would be "cobbled together". Isn't that what this organization does for a living?
This is certainly not the first time the Red Cross has come under fire. The agency spearheaded a very successful fund-raising campaign in the days following 9/11, but then announced that not all of the money collected would go to the 9/11 victims. Rather, they announced that the money would be used for a number of Red Cross initiatives, including preparation for future disasters. Clearly that did not sit well with an American public that donated close to $1 billion after the 9/11 attacks, and the Red Cross was forced to retract that plan after a wave of negative publicity.
Suffice it to say that the Red Cross is very low on my list of charities. The reputation of the agency has suffered significantly of late, and I've lost confidence in their ability to deliver donated funds where they are needed most. The latest corruption scandal is merely the icing on the cake. When faced with a natural disaster, there are plenty of other organizations that are far better equipped than the Red Cross to deliver the necessary funds, equipment, and supplies. Some do it as a matter of routine on a daily basis. The bottom line is, do your research before sending in any donations to an aid organization. Not all are created equal.
Technorati: Red Cross news Katrina
IceRocket: Red Cross news Katrina