On fraud:

Unfortunately, [fraud] problems are not addressed simply by locking drawers and bird-dogging collection plates. As we have seen, charities tend to be ineffective overall because they are discouraged from investing in infrastructure. The normal speed governors of effective organizations — strong boards, empowered auditors, internal checks and balances, and active regulators — are broadly absent in the charitable system. And until that is addressed, charities will remain an easy mark for con men, criminals, and thieves.

On donor motivations:

research on donor self-image shows a strong correlation between the willingness of donors to give to a specific organization and their belief in the organization’s effectiveness. In a 2010 major-donor survey conducted by Hope Consulting, a San Francisco– based philanthropy advisory firm, “organizational effectiveness” was the most cited factor in choosing a charity, identified by 90 percent of surveyed givers. 24 Yet when the Hope Consulting team began to look at the actual behavior of these very same donors, an entirely different picture emerged. While the vast majority of donors say they care about charitable effectiveness, few make serious efforts to confirm it. Fully 65 percent of donors confess that they never do any research. Of the remaining 35 percent, the effort level is trivial. About half of this research is completed in under an hour, two-thirds in less than two hours. Only 3 percent of donors claim to have done more than six hours of research over the course of a year.