Sponsored message
Logged in as
Audience-funded nonprofit news
radio tower icon laist logo
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
Subscribe
  • Listen Now Playing Listen
  • Listen Now Playing Listen

The Brief

The most important stories for you to know today
  • "Round-up" campaigns are raking in millions
    So-called point-of-sale donations have sharply increased in recent years, bringing in hundreds of millions of dollars a year. But the requests to "round up" your bill for charity have really taken off.
    So-called point-of-sale donations have sharply increased in recent years, bringing in hundreds of millions of dollars a year. But the requests to "round up" your bill for charity have really taken off.

    Topline:

    It turns out those ubiquitous "round-up" campaigns — at grocery chains, gas stations, retail stores and online merchants — are raking in millions of dollars annually for everything from scholarships to cancer research.

    Where things stand: In 2022 alone, charities raised $749 million nationwide through so-called point-of-sale donations, a 24% jump from 2020, according to Engage for Good, which tracks this type of charitable giving.

    The backstory: The round-up fundraising strategy was first introduced about 15 years ago. Data suggests that despite being bombarded by such requests, people are giving more each year at cash registers, self-checkouts and online.

    We've all been there: A store cashier asks if you'd like to donate money to the local food bank. Or the PIN pad at the checkout counter prompts you to round up your payment for charity — spare a little change for a worthy cause.

    Those "round-up" campaigns have become ubiquitous in recent years — at grocery chains, gas stations, retail stores and online merchants — and they rake in millions of dollars annually for everything from scholarships to cancer research.

    In 2022 alone, charities raised $749 million nationwide through so-called point-of-sale donations, a 24% jump from 2020, according to Engage for Good, which tracks this type of charitable giving. And that was just from campaigns that brought in $1 million or more. Although that figure was tiny compared to the nearly $500 billion in estimated charitable giving in 2022, total giving actually dropped that year.

    Change graphic NPR

    But it's the round-up fundraising strategy, which was first introduced about 15 years ago, that has really taken off in recent years, according to Michelle McCarthy, executive director of Round It Up America.

    "Especially since the pandemic, we've seen a big increase," says McCarthy, whose nonprofit provides legal and financial guidance for for-profit businesses that collect donations for charities.

    Much of that growth is fueled by customer generosity, but those who study consumer behavior point to other factors, too, including how we think about money and even our unconscious feelings of guilt.

    It makes sense (and dollars) to ask for less

    Michael Rindos says he "almost always" taps the donate button on the credit/debit card reader, or PIN pad. But lately, that's been changing. "I don't do it as much as I used to," Rindos says, as he juggles an armful of groceries outside a Giant Food supermarket in Severna Park, Md., near Washington, D.C.

    Rindos said he's noticed a sharp uptick in the number of requests popping up in places he shops, and it's become a bit tiresome. "Every place that you go to — Taco Bell, 7-Eleven. They're all doing it."

    Data suggests that despite being bombarded by such requests, Rindos and others like him are giving more each year at cash registers, self-checkouts and online. And it has resulted in a huge boost for charities on the receiving end. Consider the Taco Bell Foundation, a nonprofit that operates independently from the fast food chain. It brought in $42 million last year on round-ups collected from the company's more than 7,500 restaurants across the U.S. The average donation: just 44 cents.

    Previously, the foundation's fundraising strategy asked customers to donate $1 to a scholarship program in campaigns that lasted a few weeks or months. "For many years we did that," says Jennifer Bradbury, the foundation's executive director. "We had our scholarship program and we had our community grants program, which funds nonprofits like the Boys & Girls Clubs and Junior Achievement."

    But in 2019, the foundation decided to try a different approach. Bradbury says it realized, somewhat counterintuitively, that less is more. "The data we had at that point was that customers were three times more likely to round up than to donate a dollar," she says.

    Spare change 2 NPR

    The results after the switch were "mind-blowing" she says: The foundation roughly doubled what it had been raising, which averaged between $11 million and $14 million annually, but hit more than $20 million in 2019. The change was so successful, the foundation decided to permanently adopt the new strategy. "The number of regular customers who donate every time and round up every time — it's really inspiring," Bradbury says.

    Children's Miracle Network Hospitals, which raises money for pediatric hospitals, partners with such retail giants as Costco and Walmart, as well as Ace Hardware, Panda Express, 7-Eleven and DQ. In 2022, the network, with the help of its partners, raised $138 million through 78 point-of-sale fundraising campaigns, including round-ups, it says. These campaigns made up a third of the CMNH's total fundraising for that year. An online survey conducted by the network in 2022 polled some 4,000 customers. It showed that of the 88% of respondents who reported being asked to donate at checkout in the previous year, more than half said yes at least once.

    How you perceive "pain" may influence how much you donate

    Why have round up for charity campaigns proven so successful? Katie Kelting, an associate professor of marketing at Saint Louis University, suggests that there's some powerful psychology at work.

    In 2018, Kelting and her colleagues enlisted the St. Louis Zoo in a field study. Instead of asking food court patrons for the usual $1 donation for a wild animal conservation effort, the zoo temporarily tried the round-up approach. Fundraising jumped 21% during the experiment, which ran for a few weeks. Kelting calculated that over a one-year period, the zoo would have brought in about $8,000 more by simply changing the way customers were asked to donate.

    As Kelting explains, a lot of it has to do with the "pain" of parting with our hard-earned cash. "The perceived pain is less in the consumer's mind when that round-up request is presented," compared to a solicitation for a specific dollar amount, she says.

    There are likely other factors in play, says Ike Silver, an assistant professor at Northwestern University's Kellogg School of Management. Humans, for instance, appear to have a fairly strong preference for round numbers, or figures ending with a zero. A 2013 study looked at purchases at self-serve gas pumps and found that 56% of them ended on a round dollar figure — far exceeding mere chance. The same study noted that at restaurants, many people prefer to leave tips that bring the final bill to a round number.

    "It's like an effort-reduction strategy whereby people are better at and intuitively prefer to deal with round numbers," Silver says. "That manifests in how much you want to pay and how much you want to buy."

    Arguably more important is that point-of-sale charitable requests can transform an ordinary purchase into a moral quandary, he says. "It becomes an opportunity to signal to yourself and others that you care," Silver says. In the case of the round-up request, it becomes something of a moral test, he says. "It's such a low-cost ask that to say no starts to induce slight feelings of guilt."

    Kelting, citing a body of research by others, says that customers might also change their behavior and perceptions in public versus private settings. In this case, the self-checkout is analogous to a private setting where it is easier to decline, but the same decision in front of a cashier — especially one who adds a verbal prompt for the donation — is something different. "When you're in the long checkout with the cashier, with everyone around you, that's more like this public setting," she says.

    Round It Up America's McCarthy says the data supports this thinking. "Customers do appreciate being asked, so that prompt at the checkout does make a difference."

    But Cait Lamberton, a professor of marketing at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School, cautions that there's a potential downside to all of this. Customers, she says, may feel manipulated and could end up "feeling resentful toward the source of the manipulation" — the retailer doing the collecting.

    Shoppers want to know where their money is going

    Paula Nichols says she never taps "Yes" on the PIN pad when it prompts her to round up her bill. "Does that make me a bad person?" she laughs, as she loads groceries into the back of her SUV at the Giant Food supermarket in Maryland.

    It's not that Nichols minds giving to charity. She says she supports a local nonprofit food bank and is friends with its president. "We do a lot with them."

    But when it comes to giving in the checkout line, she's wary. "How do I know where that money is going? And the price of food? I just spent almost $200 on this," she says, nodding to the groceries in the trunk.

    In 2022, a CVS customer filed a lawsuit against the pharmaceutical chain claiming that it wrongly used money collected through point-of-sale donations to honor a pledge to the American Diabetes Association. In a statement to NPR, the pharmaceutical giant says the suit was dismissed in September 2023, which "allowed CVS to complete its in-store National Diabetes Month Campaign, which collected more than $10 million in donations for the benefit of the American Diabetes Association."

    Round It Up America says its agreements are designed to ensure that charities receive more than 90% of the money collected, and charities can spend no more than a quarter of donations on administrative costs. McCarthy says her organization receives up to 7% "to cover our legal and financial costs" and stores can take up to 2% to cover credit card transaction fees.

    "Consumers deserve — and state attorneys general require — transparency and assurance that the donations go where they are advertised and intended," McCarthy says.

    Save the Children is one organization that has made extensive use of point-of-sale campaigns, including requests to round up. "We can try to influence [the message] put on that PIN pad or what the store associate says," according to Dan Peirce, who is in charge of the nonprofit's corporate partnerships. "But ... operationally they have to make sure that it works for them. And so they do have the final say."

    The ride-share company Lyft runs a campaign that helps customers take a more considered approach to giving. Riders can select from a list of charities on the company's app. Then each time they ride, their bill is automatically rounded up to the nearest dollar to benefit their charity of choice.

    "If you go to your profile in the app, it'll say something like, 'You know, you've given X number of times' to kind of remind people that this is a good thing, even though ... it was 50 cents here, 20 cents there," says Jeremy Bird, the company's chief policy officer. "It's been a massive success for us."

    How much is too much?

    Despite the burgeoning success of point-of-sale fundraising, including round-up solicitations, there's the risk that customers could become overwhelmed with these pervasive campaigns. "I think you have to be very careful because so many people do find these annoying because they're not relevant to what they're doing at the moment," which is making a purchase, says Lamberton, the Wharton professor.

    Kelting, too, says this could be a problem worth studying. "You might have donated yesterday [but] you forgot to buy milk." So, what happens, she wonders, if you go back the next day for that carton of milk. Are you less likely to round up your bill the second time?

    Another potential downside? Quick point-of-sale donations might not do much to create any meaningful connection with charities, Lamberton says. Donating your virtual pocket change to a cause might elicit a sugar high for the ego — but one that quickly fades.

    It's harder to stand outside a store, ringing a bell to ask for donations, "but what you are getting is a lot of exposure," she says. "So you're building familiarity."

    In a face-to-face solicitation, she says, "people who do engage with you are probably very positively disposed towards the charity already."

    Copyright 2024 NPR. To see more, visit npr.org.

  • Grant helps dozens leave side of 110 Freeway
    Two people shake hands. One is a female presenting person dressed in black. The other is a male presenting person wearing a cap.
    L.A. Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez (right) shakes hands with Thomas Stewart, who used to live in an encampment near the 110 Freeway behind them.

    Topline:

    L.A. City Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez announced today that 59 unhoused people who used to live along the 110 Freeway are now in housing.

    How it happened The effort was funded by a $6.3 million grant from the state that paid social workers and health professionals from various agencies to help those living in the encampments with paperwork, healthcare needs, and other hurdles that would normally slow their access to housing.

    What's next: Hernandez’s office said the goal is to house 11 more people with the grant funds.

    Go deeper: Will recent drops in LA homelessness continue?

    On Thursday morning, L.A. Councilmember Eunisse Hernandez stood at Lacy Street Neighborhood Park in the shadow of the 5 and 110 freeway interchange. Just last year, she said, the Lincoln Heights park and the areas near the freeway were filled with unhoused people. But now, thanks to a $6 million state grant awarded last fall, the park is clear and dozens of people are in temporary and permanent housing.

    “Today we’re here to celebrate that 59 of our neighbors, human beings, finally have a roof over their heads,” she said.

    The funds were secured by Hernandez from California’s Encampment Resolution Funds, which targeted a 4-mile stretch of the 110 Freeway.

    A long to-do list before housing is secured

    The grant helped pay health and social workers from public and private agencies and nonprofits, including employees with USC’s California Street Collaborative.

    These workers helped people straighten things out before they moved into housing, like finding IDs, matching housing with disability needs and space for pets.

    That kind of help requires building trust between the worker and the unhoused person, said Caitlin Schwan, director of the California Street Collaborative.

    “And it takes an investment of resources and a lot of coalitions, a lot of partnerships across street medicine, housing providers, service providers,” she said.

    Los Angeles Global Care has been as the primary interim housing provider. It also provides daily meals to those transitioning to housing, help with pets and case management.

    Male presenting person with a bald head. He is wearing a red, white, and blue sweatshirt that says "Dodgers."
    Rigo Vega was unhoused and lived near the 110 Freeway for four years.
    (
    Adolfo Guzman-Lopez
    /
    LAist
    )

    “I used to live right here under the bridge for like, four years,” said Rigo Vega, who attended the announcement at the park.

    Outreach workers, he said, helped him get food and clothes, and the paperwork needed to get into housing last November. Now that’s settled him enough for him to set a goal for himself, “to work, to get a job,” he said.

    Hernandez’s office said the goal is to house 11 more people with the grant funds.

  • Sponsored message
  • Celebrate Songkran at Wat Thai temple
    A life sized statue in traditional Thai clothes stands outside a Thai temple. In front are festive red and blue umbrellas
    Wat Thai temple in North Hollywood hosts one of the biggest Songkran festivals in the U.S.

    Topline:

    Head to the Songkran festival, the Thai New Year, at Wat Thai in North Hollywood, the largest Buddhist temple in L.A. this weekend, Saturday and Sunday. (It's also one of the biggest Songkran festivals in the U.S.) Expect Thai music, Thai dancing, traditional water blessings, the building of sand pagodas and, of course, delicious food.

    What's on offer: The temple's Thai food court is a must-visit for many during regular weekends, when a large collection of food vendors set up stalls around the temple, similar to what you'd see in Bangkok. Expect this and more at the festival. "Smells and tastes are amazing," say happy visitors on social media. (Try the Thai gelato). The temple itself is also beautiful to experience.

    When and where: The temple is at 8225 Coldwater Canyon Ave., North Hollywood. There's additional parking at the Kaiser Permanente in Panorama City with a free shuttle to the festival. The temple is open from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m. each day. The opening ceremony starts at 1 p.m. Saturday.

    Topline:

    Head to the festival of Songkran, Thai New Year, at Wat Thai in North Hollywood this weekend, Saturday and Sunday. It's the largest Buddhist temple in L.A. and also one of the biggest Songkran festivals in the U.S. Expect Thai music, Thai dancing, traditional water blessings, the building of sand pagodas and, of course, delicious food.

    What's on offer: The temple's Thai food court is a must-visit for many during regular weekends, when a large collection of food vendors set up stalls around the temple, similar to what you'd see in Bangkok. Expect this and more at the festival. We're told you should try the Thai gelato. The temple itself is also beautiful.

    When and where: The temple is at 8225 Coldwater Canyon Ave., North Hollywood. There's additional parking at the Kaiser Permanente in Panorama City with a free shuttle to the festival. The temple is open from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m. each day. The opening ceremony starts at 1 p.m. Saturday.

  • It's a no-brainer for progressive Dems, right? No
    A group of people in a crowd inside a building hold up signs that read "Keep hospitals and ERs open" and "Billionaire tax NOW."
    People supporting California's proposed billionaire tax hold signs at the 2026 California Democratic Party State Convention in San Francisco on Feb. 21, 2026.

    Topline:

    The health care union behind the tax measure argues its plan is the only viable fix for federal funding cuts to Medi-Cal. But even some of the most liberal lawmakers and labor unions aren’t convinced yet.

    Why it matters: Publicly, prominent labor and progressive players have largely kept quiet, unlike Gov. Gavin Newsom who has aired his disdain loud and clear. Yet in private, some union leaders and their allies in the Legislature rail against the measure. Of the critics who spoke with CalMatters for this story — three union leaders and five members of the Legislative Progressive Caucus — only one lawmaker would criticize the measure openly.

    The backstory: The proposed initiative would levy a one-time tax of 5% on any resident of California whose net worth exceeds $1 billion, which applies to around 200 people, according to Forbes. That money would plug an estimated $100 billion hole left by federal cuts to Medi-Cal and other social service programs.

    Read on... for more on the proposed initiative.

    A union-backed proposal to tax California’s billionaires to fund health care has put some progressive lawmakers — and their labor allies — in a quandary.

    Taxing the rich to backfill Trump-induced federal funding cuts might sound like a no-brainer policy for the party’s left flank, which counts wealth inequality among its top issues.

    But despite a strong show of support from prominent national figures, including Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont and liberal economist Robert Reich, the “2026 California Billionaire Tax Act” has become a hot potato for labor leaders.

    The proposed initiative would levy a one-time tax of 5% on any resident of California whose net worth exceeds $1 billion, which applies to around 200 people, according to Forbes. That money would plug an estimated $100 billion hole left by federal cuts to Medi-Cal and other social service programs.

    Publicly, prominent labor and progressive players have largely kept quiet, unlike Gov. Gavin Newsom who has aired his disdain loud and clear. Yet in private, some union leaders and their allies in the Legislature rail against the measure. Of the critics who spoke with CalMatters for this story — three union leaders and five members of the Legislative Progressive Caucus — only one lawmaker would criticize the measure openly.

    Critics question its feasibility and whether the state even knows how to accurately appraise a billionaire’s total wealth, a crucial step to evaluating how much tax they would owe. They fear long-term revenue loss by driving wealthy people out of California. And some resent that the union sponsoring the initiative, SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West, designed the measure to predominantly benefit its members rather than boost the state’s general fund, where it could go to all budget needs.

    “It's not that taxing billionaires in itself is wrong,” said Keely Martin Bosler, formerly the top state budget officer to Newsom and former Gov. Jerry Brown. She is now a Democratic consultant who has advised several of California’s most powerful labor groups, including the Service Employees International Union of California, the parent union of SEIU-UHW. “The way in which this tax specifically is constructed is problematic.”

    Many progressive state lawmakers and Capitol heavyweights, such as Sen. Scott Wiener of San Francisco and the powerful California Labor Federation, have sidestepped the question of whether they’d support it, declining for now to take a position on an initiative that has yet to officially qualify for the ballot.

    “The Labor Federation won’t take it up for an endorsement until July,” said Lorena Gonzalez, the organization’s president, in a text message.

    Yet if the tax lands on the November ballot, as it appears on track to do, progressive critics will be saddled with the tricky optics of opposing — or at least not supporting — a measure that embodies one of their base’s core tenets: taxing the rich.

    Even the mere threat the measure could qualify for the ballot has already spurred a torrent of opposition spending — more than $50 million in total so far — from billionaires such as Google co-founder Sergey Brin and cryptocurrency mogul Chris Larsen. Brin’s group, known as “Building a Better California,” has also spawned three new competing ballot measures designed to undermine the billionaires’ tax.

    Critics fear that if billionaires like Brin become even bigger perennial spenders in California politics, they could neuter the progressive agenda by bankrolling more business-friendly candidates and ousting left-leaning, labor-aligned legislators.

    But the measure’s proponents say they are undeterred by the secretive detractors and challenge their critics to put their names behind their words.

    A man with light skin tone, wearing a tucked in white striped button-down shirt, speaks into a microphone while standing on a stage. Signage in the background, partially out of focus, reads "SEIU-UHW."
    Dave Regan speaks to the SEIU-UHW Leadership Assembly in 2013.
    (
    Steve Yeater
    /
    Courtesy of SEIU-UHW
    )

    “What we have is a group of so-called leaders who are not reflecting the attitudes of their own constituents,” said Dave Regan, president of SEIU-UHW and the de facto leader of the billionaire tax measure. “That’s why they want to be anonymous.”

    Regan said he’s confident the initiative will amass enough signatures to qualify for the ballot before the end of April. Then, he said, “We believe a lot of those people are going to come around and change because this makes sense, because the public is supportive, because their own members are supportive.”

    The case for, and against, the billionaires’ tax

    So far, polling has shown the billionaire tax is relatively popular with voters. Recent surveys show just over half of Californians surveyed said they’re inclined to vote for it.

    Critics point out that California’s existing state tax structure is entirely based on income, rather than net worth. The state would have to appraise each person’s assets, including real estate, art, automobiles and private and public businesses. The billionaires could pay in installments, handing over 1% of their wealth annually for five years.

    Bosler said that with income tax filings, the Franchise Tax Board can use data from federal tax returns to verify its own analysis. Since there’s no federal wealth tax, California would be forging uncharted territory with no tax compliance support from any other source or agency — a risky move that could invite legal challenges.

    “The state is not a miracle worker, like, they're not going to suddenly be able to do all of this like perfectly,” said Bosler. “I mean they will do their best, but I just think this is expertise that they have built up over 50-plus years. Like, none of this is in their wheelhouse at this point.”

    But champions of the tax argue it is the only real solution on the table so far to save hospitals, health care jobs and, ultimately, patient lives they say are at risk due to federal funding cuts to Medi-Cal and food assistance programs.

    Supporters note that the tax is not intended to solve California’s structural budget problems.

    “It’s one-time funding to fill what we hope is a one-time hole,” said Brian Galle, a tax law professor at UC Berkeley who helped craft the measure. Galle said only around 200 people would be subjected to the tax, so the extra burden on the Franchise Tax Board wouldn’t be too great.

    “It's not like FTB is going to get a blizzard of tens of thousands of new returns that they're going to have to figure out a whole new data system for cracking,” said Galle.

    Why some progressives aren’t on board

    Those who have qualms with the initiative have largely kept their criticisms private.

    One liberal state legislator, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said the infighting among the unions puts progressive lawmakers in a difficult position. While he empathizes with the urgency that health care workers feel, he and other Democrats are not convinced the policy could withstand legal challenges and worry about the wealthy employing savvy accounting maneuvers to skirt the tax altogether.

    Some organizations that are synonymous with progressive politics in California, such as the Working Families Party, also haven’t taken a position, even as other unions such as the Teamsters and AFSCME California support it.

    Even the powerhouse labor union SEIU California is choosing not to take a position on the measure, which is spearheaded by one of its local affiliates, SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West.

    Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, a man with medium skin tone, wearing a blue suit and tie, speaks with Assemblymember Chris Ward, a man with light skin tone, wearing glasses and a tan suit, as they sit with other people standing in the background.
    Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, right, speaks with Assemblymember Chris Ward at the state Capitol in Sacramento on Sept. 12, 2025.
    (
    Fred Greaves
    /
    CalMatters
    )

    Assemblymember Chris Ward, a member of the progressive caucus, called the measure a “well-meaning effort by UHW,” but criticized the proposal for being just a one-time tax primarily benefiting the health care sector rather than boosting the state’s overall revenues. Regan said SEIU-UHW made the tax one-time to nullify the argument that it would push billionaires out of the state.

    Ward noted that he and his colleagues are considering “superior” bills, such as one that would close a corporate tax loop to generate $3 billion per year, and another that would create a new tax on corporations that pay workers so little that they qualify for Medi-Cal and nutrition assistance.

    Regan argued these measures would only make California more unaffordable, since businesses would pass their increased costs along to consumers.

    Ward, the sole state lawmaker who would candidly share his concerns about the initiative with CalMatters, said he and his colleagues have heard pushback from “a number of other labor organizations that don't support that initiative,” primarily because its members would not directly benefit from any of the revenue. Uniting labor, he said, is the key to any successful revenue solution.

    “There's a need to look at a wealth tax for a more broad range, including health care workers but other purposes that are state priorities,” Ward said, “and that will be left off of the table if this is the only question we're seeing.”

    CalMatters' Nadia Lathan contributed to this story.

    This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

  • Citrus quarantine expands into LA and OC
    An orange citrus is covered in hard brown scabs across the surface.
    An orange pockmarked and scarred by sweet orange scab, a fungal disease.

    Topline:

    Sweet orange scab, a plant disease that can harm citrus trees, continues to expand in our region. The California Department of Food and Agriculture recently expanded a quarantine in parts of L.A. and Orange counties.

    What is it? SOS is a fungal pathogen that causes young citrus fruit to look scarred. The disease can lead to premature fruit drop and stunt the growth of young trees. Tangerines, sweet oranges and other citrus are at risk.

    Where is it? After it was previously found in L.A. and Ventura counties last year, sweet orange scab has expanded into both the Irvine and La Puente areas. Officials expanded the quarantine zone to include those areas, which means residents should not move plants.

    You can visit the CDFA’s website to see a map of currently quarantined areas.

    What if your tree has it? There isn’t currently a treatment for SOS, but you don’t have to pull your tree out and can still eat the fruit. You can call the CDFA’s pest hotline at (800) 491-1899 to report any trees you suspect have the disease.

    Why it matters: The CDFA said quarantine areas have expanded to try to keep the disease away from commercial growers. SOS can cause blemishes, lesions and other symptoms on citrus fruit, and no one wants to buy scabbed fruit.