Under pressure from the Missouri attorney general, one of the nation’s largest child sponsorship organizations agreed Tuesday to sweeping changes in its marketing and advertising, which had promised a “miracle” in a poor child’s life for just $12 a month.
After several months of investigation, the attorney general’s office found that the emotionally charged appeals by Kansas City, Mo.,-based Children International, in the name of some of the world’s most destitute children, contained “deceptive” characterizations, including inaccurate depictions of the children’s living conditions and misleading claims about the impact of continued child sponsorship.
The investigation was prompted by disclosures in a Tribune special report, “The Miracle Merchants,” that examined the child sponsorship industry. A major segment of the report detailed the marketing techniques of Children International, a highly successful operation that brings in more than $65 million a year.
“It’s undeniable that there are children all over the world who are in great need of charitable help,” said Missouri Atty. Gen. Jay Nixon, in announcing the agreement. “Their circumstances, however, should not be distorted or deliberately misconstrued to obtain donations. Likewise, the sponsor should not be told that the child being sponsored will have benefits eliminated or delayed if additional payments are not made, when this is not true.”
The agreement, signed by Assistant Atty. Gen. Dale Youngs, who headed the investigation, and Children International President and Chief Executive Officer James R. Cook, was approved Tuesday by a Jackson County, Mo., judge.
Youngs said that under Missouri statutes, Children International’s advertising materials “would fall under the definition of being deceptive because they didn’t accurately reflect what was true.”
Noting that the Tribune special report prompted the investigation, Youngs added, “The hope is that charities who by their own statement do good work will let that good work speak for itself, and won’t feel the need to fudge or hedge or keep things from consumers.”
In a statement, Cook said: “Children International is pleased to provide the additional clarification in our marketing materials requested by the attorney general of Missouri.
“Children International’s activities have always been guided by the highest ethical standards and we are proud of the measures we have in place to ensure that our programs most effectively meet the needs of our sponsored children around the world. There were no concerns raised about the integrity of Children International’s programs or the benefits provided to our sponsored children.”
Under the terms of the agreement, essentially a negotiated settlement, Children International does not admit any liability or violation of Missouri laws. But the charity did agree to several fundamental changes in the way it solicits money and stewards its far-reaching child sponsorship program.
Under the terms of the agreement, which also calls for Children International to pay $30,000 to a qualified, tax-exempt children’s charity and $10,000 to the Missouri attorney general’s office as reimbursement for the cost of its investigation, Children International:
– Must not use any advertising in which it offers a child as “representative” of a class of poor children when that child’s circumstances may have changed dramatically, and is not even available for sponsorship.
– Must not tell sponsors that “children whose sponsors are late in making payments or who discontinue their sponsorship will stop receiving benefits or that such benefits will be delayed or interrupted, if, in fact, they will not.”
– Must revise its “Sponsorship Guidebook” to “clearly and conspicuously” advise sponsors that the charity will ask for additional solicitations for occasions such as the child’s birthday, Christmas, Easter and International Special Hug Day. The guidebook also must be revised to better explain additional solicitations for an anti-parasite medicine, albendazole, and make clear that all sponsored children receive the medication “whether or not the child’s sponsor sends an additional contribution.”
– Must explain to sponsors in writing the “various forms of assistance a child may receive” to more specifically inform the sponsor of what a child actually receives in exchange for the sponsor’s money.
To monitor enforcement of the charity more closely, the attorney general requires that Children International provide the office with audited financial statements, annual reports and copies of current Internal Revenue Service Form 990s, required of all charities. Also, the charity must submit copies of “all current advertising, solicitations and marketing materials” used to promote the charity through any medium, and informational literature sent to sponsors.
Children International uses extensive television and periodical advertising in highly emotional appeals stating that just $12 a month can make an extraordinary difference in a child’s life.
In the highly competitive child sponsorship industry, Children International carved a niche as a low-cost provider, offering sponsorship at half the price of its competitors.
Unlike other well-known child sponsorship organizations, Children International emphasizes the direct benefits, including toiletries and some clothing, that it hands out to sponsored children over longer-term community development projects.
Few dispute Children International’s marketing success, which took it from a relatively small charity whose principal work was a mission in the West Bank to an organization that does business on four continents and takes in more than $65 million annually.
The Tribune special report revealed that the marketing appeals often didn’t match the reality of the children’s lives, a disclosure that the Missouri attorney general seized on in its investigation.
For instance, the report detailed the story of Londy Rodriguez, who was represented as recently as late 1997 in Children International ads as a sweet 6-year-old girl in a lacy dress who lived in a one-room shack in Guatemala with a tin roof. In truth, Londy is a teenager who enjoys rock ‘n’ roll music and though still quite poor, lives in a neatly kept masonry home with several rooms.
Her father held a full-time job and her mother ran a food stand out of their home to earn extra money. Her mother said she had no idea her daughter was being used in promotional literature.
She also complained that Londy often was given handouts by the charity that were inappropriate for her age or did not fit. She also said the charity-sponsored clinic once refused to see Londy when she was quite ill.
More Top Picks Beats Powerbeats Pro 2
Londy’s mother, Rosa Gomez, said that after Children International workers in Guatemala learned that she had talked to Tribune reporters, the workers came back and threatened her.
“Children International’s use of Londy as one of its representative (poster) children was one of the things that this (agreement) deals with,” Youngs said. “Our investigation showed it wasn’t just Londy, but also several other children whose circumstances and photographs we believe had been misrepresented to obtain donations.”
The special report also highlighted Children International’s practice of soliciting donations at regular intervals for holidays such as Easter, and one the charity created, International Special Hug Day.
The attorney general’s agreement with Children International requires that the charity be more explicit in detailing the extra solicitations.
If a sponsor were to answer each additional appeal, the overall annual cost of sponsorship would be greater than those charities with much higher monthly fees.
The Tribune recounted the story of one sponsor, Whitney Ferguson, then an 11-year-old, who told her parents she wanted to use her baby-sitting money to sponsor a child. Her parents, pleased by their child’s generosity, approved. They soon became disenchanted when their daughter began receiving additional appeals that were well beyond her resources.
Whitney’s mother, Linda Ferguson, said her daughter felt obligated to provide the additional money for her sponsored child, also then 11, Angelina Celdonio Reyes of the Dominican Republic. They sent $25 for Angelina’s birthday and were taken aback when Children International wrote to them saying that Angelina had been given a towel.
“If I want to send $25, which buys far more there than it buys here, I want Angelina to get a personal present–a dress, new shoes, a doll, something besides a towel,” Linda Ferguson said last year.
Overall, Ferguson said she spent $269 in a year.
“That’s clearly not what the original letter said. . . . If you need $250 a year, say so. Don’t come back with all these emotional heartstring-pulling (appeals) for money,” she said.
Children International also makes an annual appeal for what the solicitation literature describes as a “miracle drug,” albendazole, an anti-parasite medication. The literature says that if sponsors will donate $25, their sponsored child can live free from the distressing and sometimes debilitating effects of parasites.
However, the Tribune stories disclosed, all sponsored children received the medication whether or not the money was sent in a specific child’s name.
The attorney general’s investigation looked into the issues raised by the story on Ferguson. Youngs specifically noted that the guidebooks and other solicitations required revision because the guidebooks arrived only after a contributor was committed to sponsor a child. He said the guidebook must now “clarify how money is used. Our thought and belief was that it just didn’t accurately state what sponsors’ money was going to be used for.”
———-
ON THE INTERNET: Find the Tribune’s investigative series, The Miracle Merchants, at
chicago.tribune.com/go/children