4 ms·
Looks like they've had a drastic drop in rating from Charity Navigator, from 4/4 stars to 2. Apparently due to them spending 22% of their income on fund raising
by xhrpost 13y ago
Looks like they've had a drastic drop in rating from Charity Navigator, from 4/4 stars to 2. Apparently due to them spending 22% of their income on fund raising [1]. This is the first I've heard of them and I may still give just because I like the idea.
[1] http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=3809#.UrKZG_RDv8p http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary...
- albedo 13y agoThe overhead ratio is a pretty poor indicator of a charity's effectiveness. http://overheadmyth.com/ http://overheadmyth.com/
- xhrpost 13y agoI would think overhead would be the 7.3% cited on Charity Navigator and the 22% fund raising would be separate. Maybe that 22% will really pay off in the future. If Bill likes them though they can't be doing too bad.
- albedo 13y agoThe proportion spent on fundraising isn't a good indicator of effectiveness either. Generally, the metrics tracked by Charity Navigator are easy to measure, and aren't very useful. GiveWell is a much better evaluator of charity quality. Since they spend much more time on analyzing each charity, they cover way fewer charities. They are quite strategic about prioritizing which ones to interview. http://www.givewell.org/international/process http://www.givewell.org/international/process
- xhrpost 13y agoInteresting, GiveWell goes as far as to not recommend Heifer, though for different reasons.