That was my initial impression of how that worked, but after looking at the information on their website I'm not really so sure anymore. Some of the passages that I, as a tax layman, thought could be problematic are:
"Make A Connection with Your Sponsored Child
As a sponsor, you can build a personal, one-to-one relationship with your sponsored child through letters, and learn about his or her family, community, daily life and hopes for the future. Regular health and progress reports will show you how your sponsorship is improving the child's life. Your correspondence and special gifts give your sponsored child hope, nurturing and confidence. You may even visit your sponsored child and see first-hand the difference your sponsorship contributions are making."
That certainly makes it sound an awful lot like there is some specific, designated individual that the sponsor it connected with. Now, it's possible that this is all part of the marketing, and the funds in fact, get amalgamated. At another point this is spelled out thusly:
"...when you sponsor a child, CCF uses your monthly sponsorship donations, combined with donations from sponsors of other children in your child?s community, to support community wide programs and facilities that change lives and plant the seeds of self-sufficiency."
So, to that extent it seems to involve a more broad-based effort that wouldn't be problematic. But it still seemed like things were skating awfully close to having a designated individual beneficiary.
They are certainly a well-established and highly regarded charity. I somehow doubt that the IRS would really want to question this in any case.