Several years ago, I pulled together a benefit concert for a local charity: a small city about 10 miles north of the town I work in is in complete failure. Highest teenage pregnancy rate in the county, about 75 percent of the population living at or below the poverty level, high school dropout rate around 70 percent. The figures were (and still are) mind-boggling. Our short-term, practical goal was to establish a middle school for some of this community's most vulnerable residents - girls in the 5th to 8th grades.
The concert was a success by many standards. We spent very little money - our reception after the concert was pulled together by a couple volunteers who love to cook. We had a full house: most of the people there were introduced to the school, and many have, since then, become dedicated supporters of the school As a side benefit, we raised about 5K - a small dent in the annual 2M+ budget to be sure - but that was not our primary goal. Fund-raising is always a challenge, but this year, the school graduated its first class, and is by all accounts, thriving.
Now, from the NYT comes this article. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/18/arts/music/18benefit.html
It seems that the charity was really for the concert hall and the union workers. Sure, UNICEF and other recipients thought that the most important part of the concert was to keep Haiti in the news, but honestly, how many of us remember the earthquake? I'm more than ever convinced of the importance of grass-roots community involvement, rather than gigantic p.r. events.
No comments:
Post a Comment