A graphic picture of the Jewish contributor to fund-raising campaigns and his motivations for philanthropic giving is presented in a research report based on a stratified sample of the 30, 000 contributors to the United Jewish Appeal of Essex County. A summary of the report was issued here today by Herman M. Pekar-sky, executive director of the Jewish Community Council of Essex County.
The study, conducted by the National Opinion Research Center of the University of Chicago, establishes that half of all the contributions in Essex County are made by first-generation American-born Jews, About a fourth of all contributions come from foreign-born Jews. One out of three top donors- -compared with only one out of five smallest givers- -are foreign-born.
Other facts established by the study are:
1. Half of all UJA funds are contributed by persons with a median income of $27, 000 a year, Almost 70 percent of the top UJA donors, giving $2,500 or more, have an annual income of $50, 000 or over. The smallest donors, giving less than $100, report a median income of $13, 000.
2. United Jewish Appeal contributors come predominantly from the self-employed in business and the professions. More than half report they are proprietors or managers, over 10 percent lawyers, nine percent doctors and five percent accountants. The smallest donors are often in these professions and more often in other professional and semiprofessional, clerical, sales, crafts and operative occupations.
3. Most donors reveal a strong attachment to their individual residential communities. All, but 25 percent, have lived at their present address for the past five years. About 44 percent have lived at their present address 10 or more years. The top donors, more often, have lived at their present address 10 or more years.
4. Almost three-fourths of all respondents had Hebrew school training as children, but the smaller donor groups report less such training and less temple membership and activity at the present time. The smaller donors are generally less oriented toward Jewish groups and practices.
5. Overall, only eight percent said they are non-religious, but 19 percent do not belong to any temple, Only six percent of the top givers are non-members, while 26 percent of the $100-$500 donors and 36 percent of the smallest donors report no temple membership. About seven percent belong to Orthodox, 43 percent to Conservative and 31 percent to Reform congregations. The patterns of membership are similar for all donor groups.
6. Denominational differences tend to blur, however, when actual religious practices are evaluated. Most people only attend religious services during the High Holy Days, The top giver group, more often, supplies the leadership in the temples, but only 29 percent of them are officers or chairmen of any committees. Men’s Clubs and Sisterhoods are the most common forms of temple activity among the smaller donor groups, with 42 percent of them reporting such membership.
7; The contributor groups under $100, who in total represent 87 percent of all contributors, appear to be less oriented to traditional. Jewish values and reflect a desire to be more like their Gentile neighbors. When asked to rate various values as to their importance in defining a “good Jew” 91 percent agreed on “accepting being a good Jew” as most important. But their definition of “accepting being a good Jew” is a rather secular one and serves as a convenient symbol of identification for their non-Jewish neighbors, as evidenced by their responses to traditional values.
8. Only 44 percent of the above groups considered contributing to “charity” important; 41 percent “supporting Israel”; 49 percent “belonging to a temple”; 58 percent “knowing the fundamentals of Judaism”; 47 percent “to marry within the faith” and a low of eight percent “observance of dietary laws, ” At the same time 61 percent felt that to be a “good Jew, ” “a person must gain respect of Christians, ” They also gave the same high ranking to the universal concept of “helping the underprivileged.”
U.J.A. GETS 43% FROM TOP CONTRIBUTORS; 25% FROM SMALLEST DONORS
9% While top contributors give 76 percent of total contributed to Jewish groups, including 43 percent to the UJA, the smallest donors give 61 percent to all Jewish causes and only 25 percent to the UJA. Only 15 percent of the total list contributions to synagogues. National non-sectarian health groups and Red Cross receive 15-17 percent of all giving by smaller donors. This, the report says, may be a reflection of the acculturation process, especially prevalent among the younger suburban residents, which underscores the desire to show loyalty to both communities – – general and Jewish- -in which they live.
10. In response to a free answer question, about favorite causes, over 40 percent mentioned the UJA as their first favorite, an additional 18 percent as their second favorite. Almost 70 percent of top contributors choose the UJA as first and second favorites,
while less than fifty percent of the smallest donors make this selection, In general, Jewish philanthropic groups are named as first favorites by over 60 percent more persons than non-Jewish groups. Second choice favorites are more predominantly non-sectarian.
11. In probing why a person selects a favorite philanthropic project, the “tradition-culture” factor rated near the bottom–10 percent, the “religious” factor was even lower-five percent for the highest givers and under three percent for the lowest, For the largest givers “ethnic loyalty” was the primary factor and third for the smallest givers,
12. Persons contributing under $500 to the UJA defined “generous giving” in lower standards, The larger givers contributed close to 10 percent of their income; smaller donors two to four percent, “It is significant that all contributor groups regard themselves as more generous than their friends, business associates and neighbors, but in practice they are not, ” the report states,
13. Only eight percent say they plan and select in advance all the campaigns they will support. Almost 60 percent say they make all selections spontaneously, as they are solicited, This lack of planning is reported by only 45 percent of the top donors, but by 70 percent of the smallest contributors, When asked, “How do you usually decide what groups to give to?” a majority say they consider the importance of needs as most controlling. Other factors are costs of administration and general reputation, traditional patterns of gifts, social pressures, effectiveness of operations and familiarity with persons connected with the fund-raising campaign.
14 Determining the total amount for all philanthropic causes is also more haphazard than planned, Only 24 percent stated that they had a total philanthropic budget in mind in advance of deciding about individual gifts. Over 47 percent of the top donors have such a systematic plan, compared with only 10 percent of the smallest donors, Income is mentioned by 42 percent as the major consideration in setting the overall amount of giving, varying from 39 percent for the largest givers to 73 percent for the smallest.
15. Deciding on the amounts of individual contributions is largely a matter of chance, Of all respondents 64 percent state all decisions are spontaneous. Of the top contributors, the group which normally gives the impression of having made decisions in advance, 56 percent state that they do not make such advance decisions, Of the smallest donors 75 percent say all contributions are unplanned.
16. In answer to a direct probe on the influence gifts of others have on their own contributions, about 25 percent of all persons, but 41 percent of the top givers admitted such comparisons. About 20 percent of top contributors further stated that they tend to conform to their estimate of the average gift in their group; 10 percent said these comparisons tend to increase their gifts; and an almost equal number say it usually reduces the amount of their gift.
‘JEWISH NEWS’ CONSIDERED BY GIVERS AS BEST SOURCE OF INFORMATION
In general, the report finds, “donors are poorly informed about the UJA, Jewish Community Council and beneficiary agencies. The smallest donors are the least knowledgeable.”
“The Jewish News (of Newark) was reported by 77 percent to be the best single source of information on UJA affairs–71 percent of the largest givers and 85 percent of the smallest contributors spontaneously naming this source.
Almost 80 percent indicated that they read most or a little of the Jewish New–45 percent most; 23 percent a little. They also reported that of other members in the household, 40 percent read most of the Jewish News and 16 percent a little. Almost 90 percent indicated that they read every issue, Around 65 percent feel the Jewish News is a very informative newspaper and an additional 28 percent consider it moderately informative. Over 80 percent state they enjoy reading it very much or moderately. About 67 percent say they consider it very trustworthy and an additional 23 percent consider it moderately so.
In probing the degree of interest in the content of the Jewish News, the responses indicated that 70 percent consider Israel news very interesting and an additional 24 percent moderately so. Editorials are considered very interesting by 55 percent and moderately interesting by 31 percent. Features scored 52 percent very interesting, 31 moderately so. The UJA news was considered very interesting by 43 percent and moderately interesting by another 43 percent. The UJA display ads were regarded ay 25 percent as very interesting and moderately interesting by an additional 39 percent, for a total of 64 percent.
The Archive of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency includes articles published from 1923 to 2008. Archive stories reflect the journalistic standards and practices of the time they were published.
