冰桶挑战超两亿善款该怎么花

    从上个月开始，Facebook的新闻推送放目望去几乎全是各类为美国肌萎缩性脊髓侧索硬化症(ALS——国内又称“渐冻人”)协会募捐的“冰桶挑战”（Ice bucket challenge）视频。要参与这项疯狂传播的病毒视频活动非常简单：你只需往头上浇一桶冰水，录下视频，然后挑战一位朋友或“敌友”在24小时内做同样的事情。起初，参与者可选择向ALS协会寄一张支票，来代替往头上浇冰水，但现在许多参与者会选择合二为一。本周接受了“湿身”挑战的名人包括美国前总统小布什、演员本•阿弗莱克、《Vogue》杂志主编安娜•温图尔，以及通用电气（General Electric）首席执行官杰夫•伊梅尔特。

    “冰桶挑战”终会有结束的一天，晒孩子和猫咪的照片将在新闻推送中卷土重来。但对ALS协会来说，种种挑战才刚刚开始。

    自7月29日以来，“冰桶挑战”已经为ALS协会募集了4,180万美元（约合2.57亿元人民币），这笔捐款将被用于治疗肌肉萎缩性侧索硬化症，该疾病会影响脑部和脊柱的神经细胞，又被称为卢•格里克病。高达八位数的捐款远远超过了ALS协会去年同期募集的210万美元，甚至比该组织在上一财年（至2014年1月结束）的总收入还多。据ALS协会最近提交的税务报表显示，其上一财年的收入为2,400万美元。这家协会告诉《财富》杂志（Fortune），仅上周三一天ALS便收到了1,010万美元的捐款，创下了其单日最高记录。

    一个问题随之而来：ALS协会要怎么处理这些钱？

    纽约大学（New York University）公共机构与非盈利机构管理教授萨德•卡拉布里亚表示，虽然“非盈利”这个词包含有其他意思，但ALS协会在冰桶挑战善款支出上无需承担任何法律义务。尽管如此，行业准则和捐款的公众都期待ALS协会能善用这笔钱：分次少量发放。

    出于对透明度和捐赠教育的考虑，慈善导航（Charity Navigator）、商业促进局（Better Business Bureau）下署的明智捐赠联盟（Wise Giving Alliance）和慈善观察（Charity Watch）等监督组织早已出台了关于非盈利组织如何使用捐款的指导方针，并且会根据慈善机构遵守规定的情况对其进行评级或认证。

    将慈善机构花在行政管理、资金募集和“项目”（如研究和教育等）的捐款按百分比进行分解，是对非盈利机构进行评级的主要形式。[《慈善纪事报》（Chronicle of Philanthropy）高级编辑苏珊娜•佩里表示，对于开支计量与评级的重视程度，在非盈利机构间一直存在争议。“慈善机构对此褒贬不一。如果得到较高评级，他们会四处宣扬。但如果得到的评级较低，他们就会宣称评级方法‘存在缺陷’。”] 监督组织均认为，非盈利机构应该将大多数收入用于“项目”，在评分方法的不同计算上，：慈善导航认为这一百分比为75%；商业促进局认为是65%；慈善观察认为在60%。

    Ice bucket challenge videos raising money for the ALS Association charity have saturated Facebook news feeds in the last month. It’s easy to participate in the very viral video campaign: film yourself pouring a bucket of ice water over your head, then challenge a friend or frenemy to do the same within 24 hours. At first, the dousing would substitute for sending a check to the ALSA, but many participants now do both. This week former President George W. Bush, actor Ben Affleck, Vogue editor Anna Wintour, and General Electric chief executive Jeff Immelt became the most recent famous faces to get soaked.

    At some point the ice bucket campaign will dry up, and photos of your friends’ kids and cats will again dominate your news feed. But the challenges for the ALS Association will just be beginning.

    Since July 29, the ice bucket challenge has raised $41.8 million for ALSA, which helps fight amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, a disease that affects nerve cells in the brain and spinal cord commonly referred to as Lou Gehrig’s Disease. That eight-figure sum far surpasses the $2.1 million ALSA raised in the same period last year, and more than doubles the total revenue the organization generated all of last fiscal year ending January 2014—$24 million, according to its most recent 990 tax form. ALSA told Fortune it recorded donations worth $10.1 million on Wednesday alone.

    So the question now is this: what is ALSA going to do with all that money?

    Though the term implies otherwise, as a non-profit, ALSA is under no legal obligation to spend its ice bucket windfall, says Thad Calabrese, a professor of public and non-profit management at New York University. While that may be true, industry standards and the donating public expect otherwise; they want the organization to dole out the funds.

    With an eye toward transparency and donor education, watchdog groups like Charity Navigator, the Better Business Bureau’s Wise Giving Alliance, and Charity Watch have long laid out guidelines for how non-profits should spend their donations and rate or accredit charities based on how well they keep to those rules.

    The breakdown of what percentage of donations a charity spends on administration, fundraising and “programming,” such as research and education, is a main component in how non-profits stack up. (Just how much weight should be placed on this spending measurement and the ratings in general is a flashpoint in the non-profit world, says Suzanne Perry, a senior editor at the Chronicle of Philanthropy. “It’s a love-hate relationship. If [charities] get rated highly, they broadcast it everywhere. If they get a lower grade, the methodology is ‘flawed,’” she says.) In calculating their different scoring systems, the watchdog organizations agree that the majority of a non-profits’ revenue should be spent on programming: Charity Navigator pegs that percentage at 75; Better Business Bureau at 65%; and Charity Watch at 60%.