>>>>>Obviously, I didn't refer to Free Loan program. However, if you mention it again; as long as this program has eligibility criteria assuming certain application process, it cannot be posed as an example of anonymous charity where both sides are unknown.
>>>>
>>>>Actually, it can, since the people who donate the money are not (necessarily) the ones who process the applications. Donors give money to a fund; the fund gives loans to recipients whose anonymity is protected.
>>>>
>>>>Tamar
>>>
>>>Do you mean that you verify neither applicant data nor the way he/she spends money?
>>
>>We verify identify of both the borrower and his/her co-signers. We do not verify the need or whether the borrower spends the money on the purported need. (Some HFLs do this differently.) Our repayment rate over nearly 25 years is in excess of 99%, so whatever we're doing, it's working.
>>
>>But what I meant is that donors don't know the names of borrowers, and borrowers don't know who contributed the money that comprises their loan. (In fact, right now, we don't publish our donors names at all.)
>>
>>Tamar
>
>This way any Salvation Army store qualifies for the same anonymous charity plank.

Sure. There are lots of charities that keep the donor and recipient separate, and meet that standard. In fact, almost any organized charity does.

>PS: I agree that some HFLs do this differently, i.e. they have eligibility cirteria. Does your charity waive it by religious considerations or because of labor expense?

We have criteria, but we take applicants at their word on the basis that for people to ask us and to ask others to cosign for them, the need must be real. I'm sure that occasionally, someone borrows for something we'd think is frivolous, but as I said, our repayment rate is extremely high, so we can live with that.

Tamar