IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fal/wpaper/08001.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Do Charity Ratings Matter?

Author

Listed:
  • Vidhi Chhaochharia

    () (Department of Finance, School of Business, University of Miami)

  • Suman Ghosh

    () (Department of Economics, College of Business, Florida Atlantic University)

Abstract

This paper investigates whether donor contributions to charities responds to the information incorporated in charity ratings. Using charity ratings data from 1999-2004, we find that ratings do have a significant effect on contributions received. We find that charities that have the lowest rating have 16 % less contributions as compared to charities with the highest rating. In addition we find that charities in turn react to lower ratings by increasing their fundraising expenditures. Our results suggest that ratings do have an effect in reducing the asymmetry of information that exists amongst donors and the charities.

Suggested Citation

  • Vidhi Chhaochharia & Suman Ghosh, 2008. "Do Charity Ratings Matter?," Working Papers 08001, Department of Economics, College of Business, Florida Atlantic University.
  • Handle: RePEc:fal:wpaper:08001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://home.fau.edu/sghosh/web/CharityFeb19.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2008
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Donald Alexander & Robert Feinberg, 2004. "Entry in Local Telecommunication Markets," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 25(2), pages 107-127, June.
    2. H. Cremer & F. Gasmi & A. Grimaud & J. J. Laffont, 2001. "Universal Service: An economic perspective," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(1), pages 5-43, March.
    3. Zolnierek, James & Eisner, James & Burton, Ellen, 2001. "An Empirical Examination of Entry Patterns in Local Telephone Markets," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 143-159, March.
    4. Eriksson, Ross C & Kaserman, David L & Mayo, John W, 1998. "Targeted and Untargeted Subsidy Schemes: Evidence from Postdivestiture Efforts to Promote Universal Telephone Service," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 41(2), pages 477-502, October.
    5. Mueller, Milton, 1993. "Universal service in telephone history : A reconstruction," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(5), pages 352-369, July.
    6. Barros, Pedro P. & Seabra, M. Carmo, 1999. "Universal service: does competition help or hurt?," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 45-60, March.
    7. Hauge, Janice A. & Jamison, Mark A. & Gentry, Richard J., 2008. "Bureaucrats as entrepreneurs: Do municipal telecommunications providers hinder private entrepreneurs," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 89-102, March.
    8. Trevor R. Roycroft, 2005. "Empirical Analysis of Entry in the Local Exchange Market: The Case of Pacific Bell," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 23(1), pages 107-115, January.
    9. Lukasz Grzybowski, 2005. "Regulation of Mobile Telephony across the European Union: An Empirical Analysis," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 47-67, July.
    10. Mario Denni & Harald Gruber, 2006. "The diffusion of broadband telecommunications: the role of competition," Departmental Working Papers of Economics - University 'Roma Tre' 0060, Department of Economics - University Roma Tre.
    11. Wolak, Frank A., 1996. "Can universal service survive in a competitive telecommunications environment? Evidence from the United States consumer expenditure survey," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 163-203, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Brown, Alexander L. & Meer, Jonathan & Williams, J. Forrest, 2017. "Social distance and quality ratings in charity choice," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 9-15.
    2. Figlio, David N. & Kenny, Lawrence W., 2009. "Public sector performance measurement and stakeholder support," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(9-10), pages 1069-1077, October.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fal:wpaper:08001. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Vadym Volosovych). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/defauus.html .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.