MSC archived stories - December 13, 2021
Living in the US is so much more expensive than the other countries where Children International operate, so that sponsoring a child in the US will require multiple sponsors, whereas one sponsor per child from outside. In other words, our sponsor dollar would have much greater impact on a child living in poverty outside of the USA.
Gross domestic product per capita is the purchasing power parity value of all final goods and services produced within a country in a given year, divided by the average (or mid-year) population for the same year. Here are the GDP per capita (IMF estimates equivalent to USD for 2021)* in CI countries:
1. USA = 69,380
2. Dominican Republic = 20,940
3. Mexico = 20,820
4. Colombia = 15,920
5. Ecuador = 11,530
6. Philippines = 8,900
7. Guatemala = 8,890
8. India = 7,310
9. Honduras = 5,770
10. Zambia = 3,410
So, you can buy more things with one dollar (or the purchasing power of the dollar is higher) in Zambia than you can in any other country listed above.
The average GDP per capita for CI countries (outside USA) is 103490/9 = 11,499, meaning even distribution of dollar amount by the excess from 5 countries going towards 4 higher economy countries. Thus, the number of sponsors required per US child should be 69380/11499 = 6. However, it seems that having up to 4 sponsors (mentioned on CI website) could be due to Arkansas economy rather than the US national average.
This also could be why US children on the waiting list usually stay far longer to find up to 4 sponsors. And, other than required to write once a year plus sharing it with all sponsors, I wonder whether the same (CP rule or for that matter EG/DP) apply to them when comes to individual sponsor letters/gifts follow-up but only sharing with that sponsor in the group.
* www.imf.org/external/datamapper/PPPPC@WEO/OEMDC/ADVEC/WEOWORLD
Thanks Liza! Wow.. you enlightened me with something else now. First, having a smaller 'sponsor group' is better for the child in terms of our precious interaction, so may be CI managed to keep the group size to 4 by outsourcing services, which is certainly cheaper than running all in-house. Secondly, CI international program is unique, yet effective in the sense that infrastructure and resources supported by 'one sponsor per child' model… yes, fascinating indeed.
ReplyDeleteDecember 13, 2021
How interesting learning all this information about US sponsorship! Even if I have not considered sponsoring in the US because of the idea that other countries need it more. I am actually happy that Children international also helps children located in their own country. There is something that feels quite good about that.
ReplyDeleteDecember 14, 2021
Wow. That's a lot for the United States, but not too surprised. Sorry, but I am not able to sponsor any more children at this time. I will keep the U.S. children in my thoughts and prayers. Hopefully, the child credit(s) will help kids and their family to stay above the poverty line. If you would like more information about this, you can watch MSNBC, go on Twitter, and/or go on the MSNBC website. I saw the news on MSNBC tonight and the host was talking about the same situation. I watch the TV show The Beat With Ari Melber at 6 p.m. Monday to Friday nights.
ReplyDeleteDecember 15, 2021