Or I can donate to a church that is doing all of it for free. If the issue is efficiency then isn't it better to donate to individuals doing it for free.
Imagine a charity could hire someone that would 100x the amount of donations, whether that’s through more effective marketing, connections, etc. how much should a charity be willing to pay for that?
The charity is about need. If it is also about that kind of growth, there is serious need.
We may be better served by a policy change so that charity remains at a lean scale.
But, there can be much better basics in place for people, and with those, a reduced need for charity to somehow perform at very large scale.
It can target, operate locally more, all good.
Disease, hunger, homelessness are all massive artifacts of long overdue policy reforms in the US.
I volunteer with and donate to a group - https://adrn.org/ - and that's what we do. When Hurricane Harvey hit, they (I was traveling) mobilized 150+ churches around central Texas to support the coast with food, supplies, and transportation immediately after it hit. Further, we've supported cleanup operations and helped get people back on their feet.
One of the things I've helped with directly is developer our playbook so other groups worldwide can learn from what we've done and build the infrastructure and relationships to prepare in advance.
By working with smaller organizations, the closest to the problem, you get great perspective but backed by larger teams who can coordinate across a city, region, or country.
It's business management + crisis response.
I'm a Christian who proudly supports our local church's food bank (no strings attached, walk in and take food) -- but I recognize that the Church can't do it alone.
People donate a ton of money to churches.