????從上個月開始，Facebook的新聞推送放目望去幾乎全是各類為美國肌萎縮性脊髓側索硬化癥(ALS——國內又稱“漸凍人”)協會募捐的“冰桶挑戰”（Ice bucket challenge）視頻。要參與這項瘋狂傳播的病毒視頻活動非常簡單：你只需往頭上澆一桶冰水，錄下視頻，然后挑戰一位朋友或“敵友”在24小時內做同樣的事情。起初，參與者可選擇向ALS協會寄一張支票，來代替往頭上澆冰水，但現在許多參與者會選擇合二為一。本周接受了“濕身”挑戰的名人包括美國前總統小布什、演員本?阿弗萊克、《Vogue》雜志主編安娜?溫圖爾，以及通用電氣（General Electric）首席執行官杰夫?伊梅爾特。

????“冰桶挑戰”終會有結束的一天，曬孩子和貓咪的照片將在新聞推送中卷土重來。但對ALS協會來說，種種挑戰才剛剛開始。

????自7月29日以來，“冰桶挑戰”已經為ALS協會募集了4,180萬美元（約合2.57億元人民幣），這筆捐款將被用于治療肌肉萎縮性側索硬化癥，該疾病會影響腦部和脊柱的神經細胞，又被稱為盧?格里克病。高達八位數的捐款遠遠超過了ALS協會去年同期募集的210萬美元，甚至比該組織在上一財年（至2014年1月結束）的總收入還多。據ALS協會最近提交的稅務報表顯示，其上一財年的收入為2,400萬美元。這家協會告訴《財富》雜志（Fortune），僅上周三一天ALS便收到了1,010萬美元的捐款，創下了其單日最高記錄。

????一個問題隨之而來：ALS協會要怎么處理這些錢？

????紐約大學（New York University）公共機構與非盈利機構管理教授薩德?卡拉布里亞表示，雖然“非盈利”這個詞包含有其他意思，但ALS協會在冰桶挑戰善款支出上無需承擔任何法律義務。盡管如此，行業準則和捐款的公眾都期待ALS協會能善用這筆錢：分次少量發放。

????出于對透明度和捐贈教育的考慮，慈善導航（Charity Navigator）、商業促進局（Better Business Bureau）下署的明智捐贈聯盟（Wise Giving Alliance）和慈善觀察（Charity Watch）等監督組織早已出臺了關于非盈利組織如何使用捐款的指導方針，并且會根據慈善機構遵守規定的情況對其進行評級或認證。

????將慈善機構花在行政管理、資金募集和“項目”（如研究和教育等）的捐款按百分比進行分解，是對非盈利機構進行評級的主要形式。[《慈善紀事報》（Chronicle of Philanthropy）高級編輯蘇珊娜?佩里表示，對于開支計量與評級的重視程度，在非盈利機構間一直存在爭議。“慈善機構對此褒貶不一。如果得到較高評級，他們會四處宣揚。但如果得到的評級較低，他們就會宣稱評級方法‘存在缺陷’。”] 監督組織均認為，非盈利機構應該將大多數收入用于“項目”，在評分方法的不同計算上，：慈善導航認為這一百分比為75%；商業促進局認為是65%；慈善觀察認為在60%。

????Ice bucket challenge videos raising money for the ALS Association charity have saturated Facebook news feeds in the last month. It’s easy to participate in the very viral video campaign: film yourself pouring a bucket of ice water over your head, then challenge a friend or frenemy to do the same within 24 hours. At first, the dousing would substitute for sending a check to the ALSA, but many participants now do both. This week former President George W. Bush, actor Ben Affleck, Vogue editor Anna Wintour, and General Electric chief executive Jeff Immelt became the most recent famous faces to get soaked.

????At some point the ice bucket campaign will dry up, and photos of your friends’ kids and cats will again dominate your news feed. But the challenges for the ALS Association will just be beginning.

????Since July 29, the ice bucket challenge has raised $41.8 million for ALSA, which helps fight amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, a disease that affects nerve cells in the brain and spinal cord commonly referred to as Lou Gehrig’s Disease. That eight-figure sum far surpasses the $2.1 million ALSA raised in the same period last year, and more than doubles the total revenue the organization generated all of last fiscal year ending January 2014—$24 million, according to its most recent 990 tax form. ALSA told Fortune it recorded donations worth $10.1 million on Wednesday alone.

????So the question now is this: what is ALSA going to do with all that money?

????Though the term implies otherwise, as a non-profit, ALSA is under no legal obligation to spend its ice bucket windfall, says Thad Calabrese, a professor of public and non-profit management at New York University. While that may be true, industry standards and the donating public expect otherwise; they want the organization to dole out the funds.

????With an eye toward transparency and donor education, watchdog groups like Charity Navigator, the Better Business Bureau’s Wise Giving Alliance, and Charity Watch have long laid out guidelines for how non-profits should spend their donations and rate or accredit charities based on how well they keep to those rules.

????The breakdown of what percentage of donations a charity spends on administration, fundraising and “programming,” such as research and education, is a main component in how non-profits stack up. (Just how much weight should be placed on this spending measurement and the ratings in general is a flashpoint in the non-profit world, says Suzanne Perry, a senior editor at the Chronicle of Philanthropy. “It’s a love-hate relationship. If [charities] get rated highly, they broadcast it everywhere. If they get a lower grade, the methodology is ‘flawed,’” she says.) In calculating their different scoring systems, the watchdog organizations agree that the majority of a non-profits’ revenue should be spent on programming: Charity Navigator pegs that percentage at 75; Better Business Bureau at 65%; and Charity Watch at 60%.