Listen to any radio station at this time of year and you will hear a plethora of ads extolling the reasons why donations should be made to a particular group that often strives towards the the same goals as another. Charity organisation branding and marketing seem to have become so important that the reason for existence can become secondary. For me, when I hear the word "homeless", I automatically think of the organisation I have done some work for. It is their name that I think of, not necessarily the issue. Please don't get me wrong, it's not that I give pre-eminence to the organisation over the relevant cause, but the whole point is branding is that one group must gain ground.
While there may be some obvious reasons as to why two or more groups exist to address the same cause (religious vs. secular, rural vs. urban, RC vs. non-Catholic, established vs. newer, etc.), is it not the cause far more important? For the purpose of this thread, I offer the example of homelessness here but there are so many: cancer supports, animal welfare, addiction counselling and aid for the developing world are but many others.
For example, IndexIreland: society_and_politics/charities lists many of the current charity organisations operating In Ireland presently, albeit in alphabetical order.
As individual donors, we can only support do many charities. Therefore, is there not a case for the amalgamation of certain charities? They have a limited pot to draw from, so surely the relevant cause deserves the donation and not the organisation.