Opinion: Red Cross slowly earning trust

As the leading charity responding to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the American Red Cross has found itself coming to the rescue of an unexpected victim -- its own reputation. The Red Cross used its sophisticated fund-raising machinery to collect $542-million for terrorism victims and their families. But after a series of wrong-headed decisions, including diverting some of the money from its intended purpose, the Red Cross found itself the target of criticism from donors, New York officials, Congress and even the families it was supposed to be serving.

With an apology Tuesday, the Red Cross has reversed its questionable decisions and taken a necessary step toward redeeming itself. "We regret that our program over the past eight weeks has not been as sharply focused as the people affected by this tragedy deserve and as our generous donors intended," top Red Cross officials said in a full-page ad in the New York Times.

In fact, the venerable organization seemed surprisingly unprepared for the outflowing of charity for survivors and families of those killed in the attacks. Its call for blood donations produced the first controversy. Little of the blood was needed because relatively few initial victims survived, but the Red Cross kept collecting beyond its storage capacity. Some of the excess blood had to be destroyed.

Millions of dollars flowed into its Liberty Fund, so much that the Red Cross announced that $200-million would be diverted to prepare for future terrorist threats and for other purposes. Failing to heed popular sentiment, Red Cross President Bernadine Healy tried to justify the decision by saying fund-raising literature mentioned "emerging needs," which she defined as future expenses unrelated to the Sept. 11 attacks. It was an unfortunate decision. Clearly, donors meant to help those currently suffering losses, and the Red Cross demeaned itself by resorting to specious word play.

The organization also initially refused to share its database of families served, making it impossible for New York officials to coordinate relief efforts among various charities. Such actions brought widespread criticism of the Red Cross. The turmoil intensified when Healy tearfully announced her forced resignation.

Under Chief Executive Officer Harold Decker, however, the organization has begun to regain its balance. He suspended solicitations for the Liberty Fund, acknowledging that enough money had been collected to provide assistance to all of those in need. That will help smaller charities get out their message. In early November, the Red Cross offered to return donations if givers were dissatisfied.

On Tuesday, Decker and board Chairman David McLaughlin pledged that the entire Liberty Fund "will be meeting the immediate and long-term needs of the people affected by the Sept. 11 tragedies." The help will be increased from 3 months living expenses to a full year. The organization will share the names of 25,000 families it is helping with other relief agencies. And the Red Cross officials invited two auditing agencies to publish a public report about the organization's use of its funds.

Such steps are a painful admission of past mistakes, and the damage to its reputation is not yet fully repaired. But Americans need to trust the Red Cross, one of our most important charities, if it is to be effective. Finally, the Red Cross is beginning to earn back the trust in has lost.

Back to Opinion

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright

From the Times
Opinion page