The dark side of giving: Exposing charity fraud

From employees who embezzle funds to criminals who exploit disasters for profit, charitable organizations are vulnerable to many types of fraud schemes. The author reveals the methods perpetrators use to deceive donors and charities, and how organizations can protect themselves to carry out their philanthropic missions.

On March 13, 2025, Aimee Bock, founder of the children’s nutrition nonprofit, Feeding Our Future, took the stand in a Minneapolis, Minnesota, federal courtroom. She was there to testify in defense of her role in a sprawling scheme that defrauded the U.S. government’s child nutrition program of $250 million. Since 2022, 70 people have been charged in what the Minnesota U.S. Attorney’s Office has declared the largest COVID-related fraud scheme in the country.

Defendants involved in the case spent funds allocated to feed children on international travel, fancy vacations, luxury vehicles, and residential and commercial real estate in the U.S., Kenya and Turkey.

For her part, Bock was charged with seven counts of wire fraud and bribery. According to prosecutors, she orchestrated the scheme by recruiting restaurants and other organizations to operate meal distribution sites for low-income children during the pandemic. She and her recruits are accused of lying about the number of meals and children they served to get reimbursed by the government. The amount the nonprofit and its partners filed in reimbursement requests caused its revenue in 2021 to increase by 59 times its pre-pandemic level. Some conspirators admitted to submitting thousands of fake names of children they were supposedly feeding.

On the stand, Bock denied the charges against her and said that she’d detected fraud herself and tried to stop it but couldn’t. This defense apparently wasn’t convincing enough for a jury; Bock was convicted on all seven counts just a week later. She faces a decade in prison.

Feeding Our Future is an exceptionally large case, but it highlights the types of frauds that are connected to charitable organizations and the people who perpetrate them. Whether the suspected perpetrator is an internal or external party looking to exploit people’s desire to help others during a crisis like the COVID-19 pandemic, charities and their donors are ideal targets for fraud. Protecting the integrity of charitable giving is essential, as charity fraud can lead to significant losses for small organizations already financially strapped and damage the reputation of organizations that legitimately help underserved populations. According to the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners’ (ACFE) Occupational Fraud 2024: A Report to the Nations, nonprofits incurred a median loss of $76,000 due to fraud and were more frequently fined by authorities for noncompliance related to fraud.

Moreover, according to BDO’s U.K. Charity Fraud Report 2024, 50% of the charities surveyed expect their risk of fraud to increase in 2025. The U.K.’s policy adviser on charities, His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC), called charity fraud in the U.K. its own industry. Similarly, the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has warned taxpayers about groups masquerading as charitable organizations to attract donations from innocent contributors.

Here, we delve into the various forms and methods of fraud within charities, examine motivations behind deceptive practices, and offer strategies for charity organizations and donors to combat charity fraud effectively.

The ins and outs of charity fraud

Charities face the risk of fraud from different directions, with threats from both internal (i.e., insiders) and external parties.

Internal threats

Insiders at all levels perpetrate fraud against charitable organizations. According to the 2024 Charity Fraud Report, 50% of charity fraud cases detected in the U.K. involved staff, volunteers, members or trustees. In addition, the report found that 40% of fraud was due to misappropriation of cash or other assets. Other reported schemes include bribery, payroll fraud and procurement fraud.

In the U.S., academic research shows that misappropriation of funds and fraudulent fundraising are common insider fraud threats. Billing schemes involving false invoices or inflated billing statements for goods or services that were never delivered are prevalent in nonprofit organizations globally, as highlighted in the 2024 Report to the Nations. Employees have embezzled, diverted or misused funds intended for their employers’ charitable activities for their own personal gain.

The case of New York charity leader Keith Taylor illustrates the threat of embezzlement that insiders pose to charitable organizations. In June 2024, Taylor, chief executive officer and founder of charity Modest Needs, was indicted by U.S. law enforcement officials for embezzling around $2.5 million in donations meant for low-income families. Taylor allegedly used the funds to pay rent for his Manhattan luxury apartment, order food delivery, get cosmetic surgery and enjoy fine dining. Upon Taylor’s arrest, then-U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Damian Williams, said that the charity executive “misled donors into believing their contributions would support families in need, instead diverting funds for his lavish lifestyle. His actions defrauded donors and robbed those in desperate need …”

Along with misappropriating funds, other insider charity schemes include submitting false invoices and purchase orders, inflating expense claims or skimming cash from charity tills. Employees might also divert mail or award contracts to suppliers who inflate their charges, often in exchange for kickbacks.

Charitable organizations often deal with large sums of money, whether in the form of donations from citizens or grants from the government. The proceeds from fundraising activities are a particularly easy target for internal perpetrators. An employee might divert funds from donors, misusing restricted donations or creating fictitious expenses to conduct vendor and supplier schemes. Additionally, charity insiders may improperly secure unused funds for charity projects, manipulate journal entries to divert expected payments or open unauthorized bank accounts to misappropriate locally generated funds, or financial resources raised within the organization or its community.

During her employment with the Foyle Youth and Community Association in Londonderry, Northern Ireland, Wendy MacBean allegedly used her position to defraud the U.K. government’s Gift Aid program. MacBean is facing more than 20 charges linked to an alleged 1 million-pound ($1,262,100) fraud for cheating the Inland Revenue, falsely claiming that the charity had received donations exceeding 1 million pounds, for which she sought over 250,000 pounds ($315,525) in Gift Aid.

In a more recent case, a judge at Worcester Crown Court in the U.K., ruled that Jane Brookes stole more than 225,000 pounds ($292,227.91) in donations intended for Cancer Research UK. Brookes, who served as chair of a local fundraising committee for the charity allegedly used its bank account for personal expenses.

External threats

David Levi served as ringleader to a gang that defrauded U.K. charities out of 500,000 pounds ($631,050). In the scheme, a “pool of collectors” sometimes dressed in teddy bear costumes to mimic fundraisers for U.K.-based charity, Children in Need, solicited donations from shoppers at supermarkets. The fraud lasted more than six years. When not dressed as teddy bears, Levi and his pool of collectors used fake identities to appear legitimate. The group registered as official fundraisers for charities and made small donations but pocketed the rest of the money.

External charity fraud, as illustrated by Levi’s supermarket gang, is carried out by individuals or organizations outside the charity and may involve cyberattacks or soliciting funds through fake charities. In 2024, the amount of external fraud in U.K. charities increased from 23% in 2023 to 29%. The most common form was authorized push payment fraud, also known as payment diversion fraud. This occurs when a fraudster impersonates a supplier, creating or altering seemingly legitimate invoices to redirect funds to their bank accounts.

Another external threat for nonprofits and charities is cyberfraud. Fraudsters employ deceptive practices to unlawfully obtain funds or sensitive information via computer attacks. For example, perpetrators might impersonate a charity to solicit donations or manipulate financial records to misappropriate funds. In a 2019 phishing attack, fraudsters impersonated Salvation Army executives and requested sensitive information from employees, compromising their personal data and raising concerns about identity theft.

Cyberattacks, such as hacking into the charity’s network, deploying ransomware, or launching denial-of-service attacks to take its website offline, can disrupt a charity organization’s operations and compromise its data.

Deceiving donors

In March 2024, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission and 10 states sued the fraudulent charity Cancer Recovery Foundation International, also known as the Women’s Cancer Fund, and its operator, Gregory B. Anderson, for misleading donors. From 2017 to 2022, the charity allegedly raised more than $18 million, claiming to assist women with cancer and their families. However, according to the complaint, only about a penny of each dollar went to actual support, with most funds directed to for-profit fundraisers and Anderson.

Charity donors face various fraud risks, including inadvertently contributing to fake charities and solicitations from unscrupulous fundraisers. Fraudsters may pose as legitimate collectors, pocketing donations meant for well-known organizations. They might also create websites that mimic real charities, tricking donors into giving funds to fake platforms, and phishing emails to impersonate reputable charities, urging recipients to click links and share personal information. Additionally, fraudsters pressure individuals to make immediate donations with fake donation buckets, mimicking organizations such as the Salvation Army.

Fraudsters often take advantage of public health issues, like the Women’s Cancer Fund, and misdirect funds intended for research and support for patients. Donors with the desire to help humanitarian causes are targeted by fake organizations that claim to provide aid in crisis areas. Perpetrators create compelling stories to attract donations through crowdfunding platforms. For instance, fraudsters may fabricate narratives about individuals in need, such as a sick child or a family facing hardship, to elicit sympathy and financial support.

In 2024, Charlotte Blackwell of South Wales received a suspended sentence for a scheme in which she faked her son’s terminal cancer to defraud a charity established in memory of a 3-year-old who died from liver cancer. Blackwell deceived the child’s grieving parents out of 4,000 pounds ($5,048.40) by claiming that her child needed palliative care. She set up a GoFundMe page, prompting the mother to offer support just months after losing her son.

Other schemes to defraud donors include disaster relief fraud, where fraudsters create fake organizations to divert donations intended for victims of disasters. Veteran and public servant fraud involves fraudulent groups who solicit support under the guise of helping veterans and first responders, often using emotional appeals. In animal welfare fraud, donors are misled with false claims about supporting animal rescue and a lack of transparency on how funds are spent.

Fraudsters frequently exploit social media to create fake accounts that impersonate legitimate charities. These accounts often use emotional appeals and stolen images to convince users to donate. During holiday seasons, fraudsters often launch campaigns that claim to help those in need, such as providing meals or gifts for underprivileged families. These frauds typically use festive imagery and emotional appeals to encourage donations, preying on people’s spirit of generosity during the holidays.

Opportunities, motives and rationalizations for charity fraud

Opportunity is perhaps the most significant factor enabling schemes against charities, especially within organizations. Charities might operate on limited budgets and limited staff, but they make up for those deficiencies with an abundance of trust in employees, volunteers and the public. This trust leads to weaknesses in internal control systems, which provides perpetrators an opening to commit fraud — and evade detection. In fact, the Charity Fraud Report 2024 reveals that the most significant barrier to preventing fraud in U.K. charities is an overreliance on trust, which 57% of charities identified as a primary concern. Additionally, 48% of respondents pointed to a lack of internal resources as a critical obstacle and 35% expressed concern over insufficient fraud awareness.

The authors of the Journal of Business Ethics article, “Understanding Fraud in the Not-For-Profit Sector: A Stakeholder Perspective for Charities” report that donors and beneficiaries underestimate the severity of fraud — a phenomenon termed “trusting indifference.” Donors may assume that charitable organizations are acting ethically and efficiently without questioning their practices. The limited ability of individuals or groups who benefit from charitable organizations (the beneficiaries) to express their needs, concerns or experiences regarding the services they receive, combined with the “warm glow” associated with giving, can lead to complacency in monitoring and preventing fraud. It can also result in a lack of accountability. Without a strong voice, beneficiaries cannot hold organizations accountable for their actions, allowing fraudulent activities to persist without scrutiny. The authors developed the Fraud Tower Model to elucidate three layers of fraud risk factors in charities, including:

1. Social factors, where social dynamics create opportunities for fraud exacerbated by a lack of oversight.
2. Organizational conditions, where charities often function in relaxed control environments with inadequate oversight, increasing their susceptibility to fraud.
3. Opportunity seekers, who exploit vulnerabilities by viewing charities as easy targets.

Many small organizations have limited oversight and insufficient separation of duties, making them attractive targets. Cash-based fundraising increases exposure to fraud, while a culture of trust can lead to complacency among staff. Operational risks exist at every stage, from fundraising to fund distribution, and international charities often face challenges like local corruption.

Additionally, charities may collect funds under the guise of providing humanitarian aid, which can then be diverted to support terrorist activities. For instance, donations meant for relief efforts can be siphoned off to finance operations or recruit members.

Fraud risks are exacerbated by limited cybersecurity resources and mixed teams of paid staff and volunteers, which complicate information technology (IT) training and make it difficult for employees to recognize possible frauds. Charities may also lack effective auditing methods, increasing their vulnerability. Organizational leaders might overlook misconduct in pursuit of funding, and unexpected donations can mask irregularities. Sending money overseas to areas with weak financial systems further heightens risk.

Research emphasizes charities’ unique challenges compared to that of corporations. Donors receive little to no return on their contributions, thus enabling charity managers to misuse funds with minimal accountability. For example, in Scotland, there’s a disconnect between the types of charities suspected of misconduct and those facing regulatory action, largely due to the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator (OSCR) facing resource constraints that prevent thorough oversight. Many small, community-based charities, which are more vulnerable to fraud, attract less scrutiny than larger organizations. This gap in accountability is compounded by a culture of trust within the sector, leading to complacency among donors and regulators.

Financial need is a prevalent motive for charity fraud, especially in the U.K. with its ongoing cost-of-living crisis. Additionally, personal issues, such as substance abuse, can drive individuals to engage in fraudulent activities, further complicating the challenges the sector faces. Research finds that in the U.S., factors such as greed, low wages, perceived injustices and unemployment contribute to charity fraud.

Aspiring to live beyond one’s means can also drive individuals to commit charity fraud. Andrew Philpin, a finance manager at a YMCA in Wales, was convicted of stealing more than 300,000 pounds ($378,630) to fund luxury holidays, home renovations, designer jewelry and a rare vinyl collection. His fraudulent actions pushed the YMCA to the verge of bankruptcy, threatening its charitable status and potential staff layoffs. Philpin embezzled funds for more than six years using various methods, including direct transfers, cash withdrawals, forged signatures and fake invoices. Colleagues raised concerns when he appeared to live beyond his 29,000 pounds ($36,600.90) salary, which he attributed to his pension from the Royal Air Force (RAF). Suspicion about his activities grew in November 2022 due to financial discrepancies. When questioned, Philpin confessed to taking 100,000 pounds ($126,210), resulting in his dismissal from the YMCA.

Many small organizations have limited oversight and insufficient separation of duties, making them attractive targets. Cash-based fundraising increases exposure to fraud, while a culture of trust can lead to complacency among staff.

The ability to rationalize that it’s acceptable to defraud a charitable organization can ease any guilt that someone might feel as they perpetrate a scheme. For example, perpetrators might convince themselves that their actions are justified due to financial pressures, personal hardships or the belief that the organization can absorb the loss. Such rationalizations often stem from low integrity and a perceived lack of accountability, particularly in environments with weak oversight and inadequate internal controls.

Moreover, a charity’s culture can inadvertently support people’s rationalizations for committing fraud. When employees observe unethical behavior going unpunished or see others bending the rules, they may come to view such actions as acceptable. Like people in for-profit organizations, charity employees may feel underappreciated or inadequately compensated, which can lead to justifying their misconduct as deserved compensation. Minimizing the impact of their actions can allow charity workers to engage in further wrongdoing with little remorse.

Charity leaders must understand these rationalizations to develop effective strategies to prevent fraud and cultivate a culture of integrity within their organizations. To address these integrity issues, it’s vital to foster a strong ethical culture, implement robust oversight mechanisms and ensure that all staff are aware of the serious consequences of fraud. Building a strong ethical culture within charitable organizations and ensuring that staff are aware of the consequences of fraud involves several key strategies, including implementing strong internal controls and providing a safe, anonymous way for employees to report wrongdoing.

Protecting charitable organizations from fraud

Internal controls and whistleblowing mechanisms are the primary methods for detecting fraud in charities, much like the private sector. Many U.K. charitable organizations have implemented anti-fraud policies, including conflict-of-interest and whistleblowing guidelines. 

Implementing these measures is a positive step, but there’s more that charities can do to prevent fraud. Effectively combating insider fraud requires a comprehensive approach with robust anti-fraud controls, investment in technology and cybersecurity, anti-fraud education for staff, continuous fraud risk assessments, and current information about evolving fraud tactics and prevention techniques. By adopting this holistic strategy, charities can safeguard themselves against fraudulent activities.

Designing and implementing robust anti-fraud controls

The most crucial control for organizations is a strong culture that rejects fraud and encourages employees to report suspicious behavior. Charity organizers can teach that stolen funds harm valuable causes, and leadership must set an example by adhering to integrity. Engaging trustees as champions against fraud can also strengthen an organization’s culture.

Building a strong ethical culture within charitable organizations and ensuring that staff are aware of the consequences of fraud involves several key strategies. First, leadership must demonstrate a commitment to integrity by modeling ethical behavior, as their actions set the tone for the organization. Charity leaders should develop and communicate clear policies and a comprehensive code of conduct that outlines expectations and the repercussions of unethical actions. Ongoing training on ethical practices and fraud detection, including real-life scenarios, is essential for all staff.

Creating an environment of open communication encourages employees to discuss ethical concerns without fear of retaliation, supported by robust reporting mechanisms like anonymous hotlines. Regular audits and oversight help identify potential fraud risks and ensure accountability. Additionally, aligning performance metrics with ethical behavior and recognizing employees who contribute to a positive culture reinforces the importance of integrity. Clear consequences for misconduct, consistent disciplinary actions and a culture of accountability where everyone takes responsibility for their actions are crucial. Periodic assessments of the organization’s ethical climate can help identify areas for improvement, ensuring that strategies remain effective in promoting a strong ethical culture and reducing the risk of fraud.

Charities should implement strong internal controls, such as proper record-keeping, segregating payment duties and frequent bank reconciliations. Essential practices include requiring multiple approvals for expenditures, verifying payroll and ensuring new suppliers disclose connections to the charity. Charities should avoid using dormant accounts and pre-signed checks and conduct background checks of staff who handle funds. Trustees must review financial reports for irregularities and have meeting documentation.

Effective controls also involve proper procedures for handling donations, analyzing direct mail responses and understanding income sources. Management and auditors should recognize different income streams to assess fraud risk effectively. Charities need clear whistleblowing policies, and should conduct exit interviews with employees to understand their reasons for departures. Managers should also conduct regular anonymous surveys to assess staff satisfaction and take actions to address staff concerns. Risk assessments should identify weaknesses in hybrid work, and all expense claims must require pre-approval from supervisors. For frequent purchases, charities could consider a centrally controlled credit or prepaid card. Regular expense monitoring and clear procurement policies are essential, along with conducting due diligence checks on new suppliers.

Monitoring volunteers while they raise funds and informing donors about legitimate locations to bring contributions are also important actions to prevent charity fraud. Charitable organizations should conduct systematic assessments to evaluate the performance and accountability of individuals or teams, particularly regarding their financial duties. Complying with regulators, such as the U.K.’s Fundraising Regulator’s Code, is essential, especially when working with third-party fundraisers. Research suggests that improving governance practices, such as conducting audits and increasing board independence can rebuild trust in charities after a fraud incident.

Designing adequate controls is only part of the solution; gaining buy-in from staff is essential for their adherence. Regular reviews are needed to ensure that controls are adequate, and empowering staff requires realistic policies and building their skills. A robust framework to prevent and respond to risks is critical, supported by leadership that promotes an ethical culture and accountability.

Continuous fraud risk assessment and management

Charities must continuously revisit their fraud risk assessments, understanding that different types of fundraisers — from in-house experts to third-party volunteers — require ongoing oversight. Establishing procedures for identifying and responding to fraud and formulating guidelines for whistleblowers are essential elements for fraud risk management.

Additionally, charities should maintain a formal record of documented incidents of suspected or confirmed fraud. After an incident, it’s crucial to reflect on what happened and consider these questions:

• What factors contributed to the incident?
• What is the extent of the risk? Are similar issues occurring elsewhere in the organization?
• How was the incident discovered?
• What measures could be implemented to prevent recurrences?

By systematically addressing these areas, charities can enhance their fraud prevention efforts and better protect their resources. Research suggests that incorporating fraud risk assessments as a standard agenda item in trustee board meetings will promote ongoing vigilance and proactive measures against potential fraud.

Invest in technology and cybersecurity

Charities should prioritize investment in technology and cybersecurity to combat fraud. Effective ways to do this include:

• Integrating a phishing email identifier into the email system to flag unusual or suspicious messages.
• Updating policies to align with the evolving digital landscape and the charity’s technology-driven processes.
• Acting swiftly when there’s a cyber incident with a comprehensive cyber-response plan.
• Regularly backing up data to ensure recovery in case of an attack and reviewing IT security solutions to confirm that they’re adequate.
• Conducting a cyberfraud risk assessment to identify, rate and assign responsibility for managing risks.
• Implementing two-factor authentication for email and ensuring that software is regularly updated automatically with patch management to enhance security.

For charities that lack the funds to make significant investments in cybersecurity, free fraud detection tools, such as the National Cyber Security Centre’s (NCSC) Early Warning service, can alert organizations to malware and network vulnerabilities. Charities may also consider enrolling in NCSC’s Active Cyber Defence Programme for access to a variety of free cybersecurity services and tools.

Implementing data encryption for sensitive information protects against unauthorized access to systems, and strict access controls ensure that only authorized personnel can access critical systems. Conducting regular incident response drills helps test the effectiveness of cyber-response plans and ensures that everyone understands their roles in a crisis.

Using monitoring tools to analyze network traffic for unusual activity, and scheduling routine security audits helps identify potential vulnerabilities. Finally, ensuring that collaboration tools used for communication are secure and compliant with data protection regulations is vital for safeguarding an organization against fraud.

Charities can leverage technology in various ways to detect and prevent fraud effectively. Advanced fraud detection tools, such as artificial intelligence (AI) and machine-learning algorithms, can help analyze transaction patterns and identify anomalies. Data analytics allows charities to scrutinize financial records and donor data for inconsistencies or irregularities. Regularly updating cybersecurity measures, including firewalls and intrusion detection systems, protects against external threats, and secure payment-processing systems and digital transaction monitoring can help prevent fraud in fundraising activities.

As charities face budget constraints that limit their ability to invest in advanced technologies, there are free and low-cost tools available, such as open-source security software for firewalls and antivirus protection, as well as free versions of reputable security programs. Governmental organizations such as the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) offer free online resources. Charities may also consider building partnerships with local businesses for pro bono cybersecurity services and engage tech-savvy volunteers for assistance.

Anti-fraud training and awareness

According to the 2024 Report to the Nations, nonprofit organizations have the lowest implementation rate of fraud awareness training compared to other organizations in the survey. In addition to lack of resources, some charities may hesitate to train volunteers in fraud prevention, out of gratitude for their contributions. Plus, many charity organizers, in their zeal for their missions, can develop blind spots for fraud, not considering the possibility they could be defrauded and thus develop relaxed attitudes toward safeguards and training. However, fostering a robust anti-fraud culture among volunteers is essential to protect the charity’s reputation and ensure that funds reach beneficiaries.

Effective volunteer training requires strategic planning and efficiency. First, it’s essential to identify the most critical skills and knowledge that volunteers need. Second, microlearning techniques, which break training into small, manageable segments, can accommodate busy schedules and improve retention. Remote training via video conferencing tools enables broader participation in a cost-effective way, and free online training platforms, webinars and tutorials allow for self-paced learning without the need for in-person sessions. Creating concise training materials, such as handbooks and checklists, can further facilitate independent study. Implementing a mentorship program that pairs new volunteers with experienced ones provides hands-on guidance while fostering community. Local higher education institutions can also serve as sources of free training if they have social responsibility initiatives.

Training should cover various fraud types, risk factors and reporting channels. Staff and volunteers must know how to handle phishing attempts, practice good password management and understand the risks of public Wi-Fi versus secure connections. Regular updates to antivirus software and operating systems on personal devices are also crucial.

Charities should also encourage due diligence with their donors. If an offer seems too good to be true, it likely is. Organizations can maintain IT security by avoiding unfamiliar email links and verifying requests with known contacts. All team members should know the procedures for reporting suspected fraud to senior management, local law enforcement and relevant regulatory bodies. Ensuring that everyone understands the response steps for addressing fraud or security breaches is essential for minimizing potential damage and maintaining organizational integrity. By fostering a culture of vigilance and clear communication, charities can better protect themselves against fraud and cybersecurity threats.

Defending donors against fraud

Donors must be vigilant to protect themselves from charity fraud. Fundraisers who pressure people to make immediate donations and discourage them from researching an organization’s cause should raise suspicion. Consider it a red flag if a charity representative cannot provide precise details about their mission, leadership or how funds are allocated. Be cautious of unexpected calls, emails or visits from unknown charity representatives.

Remaining cautious is especially important during times of tragedy and crisis, as fraudsters exploit chaos and vulnerability to conduct their schemes, particularly following natural disasters. Prospective donors can avoid becoming victims to disaster fraud schemes by verifying sources, and report fraud to organizations such as the National Center for Disaster Fraud.

Additionally, unprofessional websites with poor grammar, typos and suspicious URLs can signal a fake charity. Watch out for unusual payment requests, such as cash or gift cards, which may suggest fraudulent activity. Perpetrators often use names that closely resemble reputable charities, so it’s important to verify legitimacy using resources such as CharityNavigator.org or the IRS’s Tax Exempt Organization Search Tool before donating. For further verification in the U.K., check the Charity Register and consult the Fundraising Regulator to confirm a charity’s credibility.

Prospective donors should always take their time when considering whether to contribute to a cause. Legitimate charities will allow prospective donors time to research before they make a commitment. If a donor does choose to contribute, they should use secure payment methods such as credit cards, and ensure that the charity has a physical address and working phone number.

Donors must protect personal information and never share sensitive data unless they’re confident of the charity’s legitimacy, and consider using tools such as Bitdefender and Fraudio to analyze suspicious communications.

The smart side to giving

Fraudsters will take advantage of tragedy, lax controls, scarce resources and generosity. Contributing to worthy causes or working for organizations established to help others and fraud awareness aren’t mutually exclusive — people shouldn’t put on blinders to fraudsters and their malicious intents. Charitable organizations structured with adequate tools, protections, and well-trained staff and volunteers are better able to guard against fraudulent attacks from both outside and within so that those they intend to help can receive the funds they need.

Rasha Kassem, Ph.D., CFE, is an associate professor and leads the fraud research group at Aston University in the U.K. Contact her at r.kassem@aston.ac.uk.