It is hard to disavow that if people could decide how their money could be used when they make donations, they are more likely to trust charitable organizations that their money would be used in proper ways. Some credulous people thus generate the opinion that donors should choose how their donations are going to be used. However, before reaching a conclusion, a conscientious examination must be conducted. Considering efficiency, feasibility, and governmental regulation, I strongly hold the view that to make charity more effective, donors should leave such a decision to the organization.
First and foremost, decisions made by charitable organizations are more efficient since philanthropy is a complex work, and division of labor and cooperation will make it more efficient. Charitable organizations and donors should play different roles in this significant task. Organizations are more professional when it comes to managing funds and evaluating beneficiaries, and they can focus on the big picture. Meanwhile, donors are the source of funds, and their task is to provide extra money to professional people for wealth redistribution. If donors do not trust the operation of organizations, they might negatively influence the outcome of the charity, by selecting recipients based on their experience while neglecting those most in need.
Second, most charitable endeavors are impractical if every donor may choose how their money is spent. I formerly worked for a state charitable organization, one of more than fifty of its kind in the entire nation, as an example. We provided donors with many options to decide how their money can be used. However, the result discouraged us because most people chose to spend their money on a few well-known fields, such as redressing the homeless, support for the unemployed and construction of schools. Most other options received only hundreds of dollars that was insufficient to make an impact, like saving an endangered and unknown species. Such a result makes it difficult for charitable organizations to continue most of the projects. Therefore, partial and conformist decisions from donors would make philanthropy infeasible.
A voice arises that if donors could not select how their money would be used, they would not trust charitable organizations to use their donations properly. Ironically, this concern is totally unnecessary due to the regulations and provisions from the government. Actually, every month a team of administrators from the state government audits accounts of every charitable organization thoroughly, and every organization has its website on which how much money it has received, how much it has spent and how it has been spent are illustrated lucidly. Donors should thus trust these organizations with their money while also making donations to them.
In conclusion, I firmly hold that there is no need for donors to choose how their money will be used, especially when it comes to efficiency, feasibility, and regulation from the government. I believe everyone who has read my article will agree with me.
- Do you agree or disagree These days children spend more time on doing homework or participating in school related activities or sports However they should be given more time to do whatever they want 83
- Traditions are defined as customary or established ways of doing things in a family community or culture Some people believe that it is important to follow traditions even when those traditions conflict with or are quite different from their own individua 90
- When making major purchase for example car or laptop our decisions can be influenced by different sources of information Explain how each of the following sources of information can influence your decision 1 Recommendations from friends or colleag 70
- Which would you choose a higher pay job with long hours or an average pay job with normal work hours Explain your choice using specific reasons and details 73
- Because the use of technology such as computers in classrooms for young students has led to many improvements in learning some people believe that there should be no limits on the number of hours that young students spend using technology during school da 95
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e such a decision to the organization. First and foremost, decisions made by ch...
^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e while neglecting those most in need. Second, most charitable endeavors are im...
^^^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...rs would make philanthropy infeasible. A voice arises that if donors could not ...
^^^
Line 8, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...y while also making donations to them. In conclusion, I firmly hold that there ...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, however, if, may, second, so, therefore, thus, well, while, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 15.1003584229 146% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 21.0 9.8082437276 214% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 15.0 13.8261648746 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.0286738351 109% => OK
Pronoun: 47.0 43.0788530466 109% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 52.1666666667 96% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 8.0752688172 198% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2622.0 1977.66487455 133% => OK
No of words: 488.0 407.700716846 120% => OK
Chars per words: 5.37295081967 4.8611393121 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70007681154 4.48103885553 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.1190624862 2.67179642975 117% => OK
Unique words: 240.0 212.727598566 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.491803278689 0.524837075471 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 826.2 618.680645161 134% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 9.59856630824 104% => OK
Article: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => OK
Conjunction: 6.0 1.86738351254 321% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.6003584229 107% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.1344086022 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.7860602407 48.9658058833 112% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.181818182 100.406767564 119% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.1818181818 20.6045352989 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 5.45110844103 92% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.5376344086 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 11.8709677419 126% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.85842293907 52% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.88709677419 102% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.320544417822 0.236089414692 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0971480477326 0.076458572812 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0861172964369 0.0737576698707 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.199564076862 0.150856017488 132% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0839099346521 0.0645574589148 130% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.0 11.7677419355 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 58.1214874552 70% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.10430107527 183% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 10.1575268817 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.87 10.9000537634 127% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.64 8.01818996416 108% => OK
difficult_words: 121.0 86.8835125448 139% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 10.002688172 120% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.0537634409 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.