Most folks I talk with believe that a donation of their used clothes to Goodwill or the Salvation Army is going to be recycled into the many retail outlets dotting the US. These clothes will provide revenues from sales and will also provide employment opportunities.
This belief is partially valid. But did you know that up to 80% of the 2.5 billion pounds of clothes that are donated eventually end up in open-air bazaars or similar outlets outside of the US? These "affordable" items have market and while they do indeed provide employment opportunities in the US (e.g. sorting and bundling) they are not likely to resurface within US borders. Contrary to the perception of the revenue model (sales in retail outlets), the real revenue model relies on shipping these items abroad.
Would US citizens not continue contributing if they fully understand their clothes don't get distributed as expected. I'm guessing not -- recycling as it is thought of, and getting a charitable contribution still provide emotive and financial rewards even if one element of the end result differs.
Just the same, US consumers might benefit from understanding that the distribution of their goods abroad may be affecting the earning potential of domestic textile and apparel manufacturers in the countries where US goods arrive. It may also affect the culture where local clothing styles are supplanted for US styles.
So, a good revenue model for US charities but one which creates, perhaps, an excellent ethics and mission conversation for the committed board.
But wouldn't the boards already have had these conversations?