4 ms·

Evaluating charities can be very tough and many people tend to be blinded by nice pictures or compelling but simplifying stories (eg Kivas effect on the poor is

by BvS 17y ago

Evaluating charities can be very tough and many people tend to be blinded by nice pictures or compelling but simplifying stories (eg Kivas effect on the poor is far less straight forward than it sounds after spending 5 minutes on their website). After working in development aid for a couple of years I'm very reluctant when it comes to having a vote on what is the best charity. Sounds to me a little like voting on the most efficient code by the general public...

paul 17y ago
That's why I'm looking for commentary from knowledgeable people, not just simple vote counts (which reflect enthusiasm, but not effectiveness).
- BvS 17y ago
  Might have focused a little too much on the Google-Moderator part. I’m curious about the outcome of the experiment though. Since I’m German I’m not that familiar with us-charities but I highly recommend to have a look at http://givewell.net/ http://givewell.net/. I really like their evaluation approach and they have a good blog as well (eg check out this category regarding program expenses / total expenses: http://blog.givewell.net/?cat=6 http://blog.givewell.net/?cat=6). P.S. I made a similar comment in the friendfeed-goup (http://friendfeed.com/collaborative-charity http://friendfeed.com/collaborative-charity) using a different username.
- colins_pride 17y ago
  I just did a totally typical thing (for me): wrote half of this, deleted it because I thought it sucked, went away for a while. But this time it really stayed inside me, so here it is. The problem is not a financial one. Money is not the constraint. There are people with access to (for our purposes) unlimited sums, with good intentions, and a good track record at getting difficult things done, who have not made a meaningful dent in the problem. The answer must lie in an approach nobody tries, which immediately eliminates throwing money at problems. It also means that it doesn't make sense to give money to an existing organization. The problem is inherently informational. How many thousands of small villages have wells, but no access to clean water because some small, inexpensive part is broken? I've travelled extensively in the third world, and this is the situation in all too many places. The key is in knowing what is needed where, and what equipment and knowledge is required to redress the problem. The right answer is some sort of mega-clearinghouse of such information; matching people who know what is needed where with people who are headed in that direction and can bring equipment and acquire the knowledge required to successfully deploy the equipment before they go.
  - paul 17y ago
    Yes, that's roughly my thinking. Everyone has some part of the puzzle, but nobody has been able to put it together. My goal is to find a way to combine all the parts of the puzzle.
newy 17y ago
Curious to hear more of your thoughts (especially critiques) on the Kiva model. I'm helping out with Wokai.org, which runs a similar online microfinance platform for China. http://moderator.appspot.com/#9/e=90c6a&t=wokai http://moderator.appspot.com/#9/e=90c6a&t=wokai

by BvS 17y ago

paul 17y ago

That's why I'm looking for commentary from knowledgeable people, not just simple vote counts (which reflect enthusiasm, but not effectiveness).

BvS 17y ago
Might have focused a little too much on the Google-Moderator part. I’m curious about the outcome of the experiment though. Since I’m German I’m not that familiar with us-charities but I highly recommend to have a look at http://givewell.net/ http://givewell.net/. I really like their evaluation approach and they have a good blog as well (eg check out this category regarding program expenses / total expenses: http://blog.givewell.net/?cat=6 http://blog.givewell.net/?cat=6). P.S. I made a similar comment in the friendfeed-goup (http://friendfeed.com/collaborative-charity http://friendfeed.com/collaborative-charity) using a different username.
colins_pride 17y ago
I just did a totally typical thing (for me): wrote half of this, deleted it because I thought it sucked, went away for a while. But this time it really stayed inside me, so here it is. The problem is not a financial one. Money is not the constraint. There are people with access to (for our purposes) unlimited sums, with good intentions, and a good track record at getting difficult things done, who have not made a meaningful dent in the problem. The answer must lie in an approach nobody tries, which immediately eliminates throwing money at problems. It also means that it doesn't make sense to give money to an existing organization. The problem is inherently informational. How many thousands of small villages have wells, but no access to clean water because some small, inexpensive part is broken? I've travelled extensively in the third world, and this is the situation in all too many places. The key is in knowing what is needed where, and what equipment and knowledge is required to redress the problem. The right answer is some sort of mega-clearinghouse of such information; matching people who know what is needed where with people who are headed in that direction and can bring equipment and acquire the knowledge required to successfully deploy the equipment before they go.
- paul 17y ago
  Yes, that's roughly my thinking. Everyone has some part of the puzzle, but nobody has been able to put it together. My goal is to find a way to combine all the parts of the puzzle.

newy 17y ago

Curious to hear more of your thoughts (especially critiques) on the Kiva model. I'm helping out with Wokai.org, which runs a similar online microfinance platform for China. http://moderator.appspot.com/#9/e=90c6a&t=wokai http://moderator.appspot.com/#9/e=90c6a&t=wokai