Skip to main content

Diluted Donations

The Bingham Canyon Mine in the southwest corner of the Salt Lake Valley in Utah where I live is said to be the deepest open-pit mine in the world. So deep you can see it from space. On the lip of the pit they have a visitor’s center along with spotting scopes to look into the void and at the mining activity. (The photo at left was taken from the International Space Station).

The mine, owned by Kennecott and its corporate parent Rio Tinto, charges a modest vehicle entrance fee that goes to the Kennecott Utah Copper Visitor’s Center Charitable Foundation, a 501(c)(3) private foundation which divvies it up the proceeds among local charities. There’s also a gift shop in the visitor’s center and proceeds from the sales of items there also benefits the Foundation.

The Foundation’s board, comprised of community members who serve without compensation, gets together annually to divvy up the proceeds among local charities which apply for grants. The year 2010 was a record year for the Foundation, it donated $186,000. To 106 local charities!

I’ve done the division and that amounts to an average of $1754.71 per charity. Except it’s not even that much since a few get larger grants than the average. The 2008 990, for instance, shows that the largest local food bank got $18,256. The local Volunteers of America chapter got $10,000 and the St. Vincent de Paul Center got $15,500, meaning there a lot of other local charities that got $1,000 or $500.

I’m not trying to paint Kennecott as a miserly corporate giver. On the contrary Kennecott is fairly generous corporate donor giving about $1 million per year apart from the Kennecott Utah Copper Visitor’s Center Charitable Foundation.

Kennecott is also the largest taxable entity in the Salt Lake Valley. Between taxes, wages and benefits, the company puts $900 million into the local economy. Moreover, by itself the mine produces 25 percent of the refined US copper production, 7 percent of the country’s refined gold, 10 percent of its refined silver and 23 percent of its molybdenum. Tiffany and Walmart buy their gold from Kennecott because on balance they think it’s the most responsibly-mined gold in the world, although local and national critics disagree.

The tax money is equalized among government entities and school districts across the Valley. In other words, the homeless shelter that receives money from local city governments probably benefited more financially from Kennecott’s taxation than from the grant they got from the Bingham Canyon Mine Visitor’s Center Foundation.

My question is, why does the Board divide its grant money so broadly? Why don’t they pick just one or maybe two recipients a year to receive the whole sum? The winning charity or charities would then be out of the running for another grant the next 50 years or so.

We all know that charities are hurting these days, but not many of them are going to miss $500 or $1,000, or even $1754.71, especially since they probably paid someone to write the grant.

By the same token, which of those 106 charities couldn’t figure out a way to effectively deploy a one-time grant of $186,000?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Cause Marketing: The All Packaging Edition

One way to activate a cause marketing campaign when the sponsor sells a physical product is on the packaging. I started my career in cause marketing on the charity side and I can tell you that back in the day we were thrilled to get a logo on pack of a consumer packaged good (CPG) or even just a mention. Since then, there’s been a welcome evolution of what sponsors are willing and able to do with their packaging in order to activate their cause sponsorships. That said, even today some sponsors don’t seem to have gotten the memo that when it comes to explaining your cause campaign, more really is more, even on something as small as a can or bottle. The savviest sponsors realize that their only guaranteed means of reaching actual customers with a cause marketing message is by putting it on packaging. And the reach and frequency of the media on packaging for certain high-volume CPG items is almost certainly greater than radio, print or outdoor advertising, and, in many cases, TV. More to

Why Even Absurd Cause-Related Marketing Has its Place

Buy a Bikini, Help Cure Cancer New York City (small-d) fashion designer Shoshonna Lonstein Gruss may have one of the more absurd cause-related marketing campaigns I’ve come across lately. When you buy the bikini or girls one-piece swimsuit at Bergdorf-Goodman in New York shown at the left all sales “proceeds” benefit Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center . Look past the weak ‘ proceeds ’ language, which I always decry, and think for a moment about the incongruities of the sales of swimsuits benefiting the legendary Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. Cancer has nothing to do swimming or swimsuits or summering in The Hamptons for that matter. And it’s not clear from her website why Shoshanna, the comely lass who once adorned the arm of comedian Jerry Seinfeld, has chosen the esteemed cancer center to bestow her gifts, although a web search shows that she’s supported its events for years. Lesser critics would say that the ridiculousness of it all is a sign that cause-related marketing is

A Clever Cause Marketing Campaign from Snickers and Feeding America

Back in August I bought this cause-marketed Snickers bar during my fourth trip of the day to Home Depot. (Is it even possible to do home repairs and take care of all your needs with just one trip to Home Depot / Lowes ?) Here’s how it works: Snickers is donating the cost of 2.5 million meals to Feeding America, the nation’s leading hunger-relief charity. On the inside of the wrapper is a code. Text that code to 45495… or enter it at snickers.com… and Snickers will donate the cost of one meal to Feeding America, up to one million additional meals. The Feeding America website says that each dollar you donate provides seven meals. So Snickers donation might be something like $500,000. But I like that Snickers quantified its donations in terms of meals made available, rather than dollars. That’s much more concrete. It doesn’t hurt that 3.5 million is a much bigger number than $500,000. I also like the way they structured the donation. By guaranteeing 2.5 million meals, the risk of a poor