Comments on: If you build it, will they come? http://www.tacticalphilanthropy.com/2008/07/if-you-build-it-will-they-come Fri, 09 Dec 2011 20:42:38 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Jason Dick http://www.tacticalphilanthropy.com/2008/07/if-you-build-it-will-they-come/comment-page-1#comment-4040 Jason Dick Wed, 13 Aug 2008 03:46:58 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2008/07/if-you-build-it-will-they-come#comment-4040 I think that many people are going to give a gift because of who else is giving that gift. For some it woun't matter how well they are "represented" on charity navigator and other sites but what the testimonial messages are like and if their friend asks them to give. I think that many people are going to give a gift because of who else is giving that gift. For some it woun’t matter how well they are “represented” on charity navigator and other sites but what the testimonial messages are like and if their friend asks them to give.

]]> By: Lucy Bernholz http://www.tacticalphilanthropy.com/2008/07/if-you-build-it-will-they-come/comment-page-1#comment-3985 Lucy Bernholz Tue, 05 Aug 2008 19:58:49 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2008/07/if-you-build-it-will-they-come#comment-3985 All of the above comments on user centered and different values make me think of socialmarkets.org. They're getting ready to launch beta site - where one intent is to see if crowds can set SROI. Check it out. Lucy All of the above comments on user centered and different values make me think of socialmarkets.org. They’re getting ready to launch beta site – where one intent is to see if crowds can set SROI. Check it out.

Lucy

]]> By: Jacob Harold http://www.tacticalphilanthropy.com/2008/07/if-you-build-it-will-they-come/comment-page-1#comment-3981 Jacob Harold Tue, 05 Aug 2008 00:25:42 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2008/07/if-you-build-it-will-they-come#comment-3981 If only these databases were already in existence! There are databases of nonprofits--but they don't tell us anything about whether or not the nonprofit was effective. CharityNavigator is based on financial ratios. They don't try to evaluate programmatic effectiveness (which they admit). Here's an example: imagine two health organizations serving the same low income community. Each has a $1 million budget. Org A saves 1000 lives and spends $200,000 a year on administrative and fundraising expenses. Org B saves 100 lives a year and spends $50,000 a year on administrative and fundraising expenses. Org A is more effective -- but using financial ratios will lead you to give to Org B (and Org B would get a higher score from Charity Navigator.) What we need is a database that actually tells us something about what the nonprofits accomplish. It's a difficult, worthwhile challenge. If only these databases were already in existence! There are databases of nonprofits–but they don’t tell us anything about whether or not the nonprofit was effective. CharityNavigator is based on financial ratios. They don’t try to evaluate programmatic effectiveness (which they admit). Here’s an example: imagine two health organizations serving the same low income community. Each has a $1 million budget. Org A saves 1000 lives and spends $200,000 a year on administrative and fundraising expenses. Org B saves 100 lives a year and spends $50,000 a year on administrative and fundraising expenses. Org A is more effective — but using financial ratios will lead you to give to Org B (and Org B would get a higher score from Charity Navigator.) What we need is a database that actually tells us something about what the nonprofits accomplish. It’s a difficult, worthwhile challenge.

]]> By: Gena Rotstein http://www.tacticalphilanthropy.com/2008/07/if-you-build-it-will-they-come/comment-page-1#comment-3964 Gena Rotstein Sun, 03 Aug 2008 18:09:28 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2008/07/if-you-build-it-will-they-come#comment-3964 Hi Dave & Sean, I think those "databases" are already in existance aren't they? Isn't that what Charity Navigator and ChristmasFuture proof of impact sites are about? I am not sure. I know for my clients we start at a values focal point because everyone puts a different value on personal values. What one person says is important (i.e. true cost accounting) another person says take out the overhead because I don't fund that to the other who says I only want to fund internal capacity. A study was released about 6 months ago that Canadian donors feel that 13% overhead was the right amount and anything more was too much. When asked to clarify what goes into that overhead costs, people had different answers ranging from rent and utilities to salaries and consultants. I think before we can start putting together "good information" we have to define what that "good information" looks like. As a sector I don't believe we have come to a conscense (sp?) on that... yet. Andrea Swaney is doing some research on measurements and impacts and creating a matrix for values. If you are serious about creating the technology behind it I am sure that you will have several people (myself included) that would be interested in working on this. Andrea is with: Straight Path Managment. All the best, Gena Hi Dave & Sean,
I think those “databases” are already in existance aren’t they? Isn’t that what Charity Navigator and ChristmasFuture proof of impact sites are about?

I am not sure. I know for my clients we start at a values focal point because everyone puts a different value on personal values. What one person says is important (i.e. true cost accounting) another person says take out the overhead because I don’t fund that to the other who says I only want to fund internal capacity. A study was released about 6 months ago that Canadian donors feel that 13% overhead was the right amount and anything more was too much. When asked to clarify what goes into that overhead costs, people had different answers ranging from rent and utilities to salaries and consultants.

I think before we can start putting together “good information” we have to define what that “good information” looks like. As a sector I don’t believe we have come to a conscense (sp?) on that… yet.

Andrea Swaney is doing some research on measurements and impacts and creating a matrix for values. If you are serious about creating the technology behind it I am sure that you will have several people (myself included) that would be interested in working on this. Andrea is with: Straight Path Managment.

All the best,
Gena

]]> By: Dave Chakrabarti http://www.tacticalphilanthropy.com/2008/07/if-you-build-it-will-they-come/comment-page-1#comment-3947 Dave Chakrabarti Fri, 01 Aug 2008 17:04:19 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2008/07/if-you-build-it-will-they-come#comment-3947 "User-centered" is thought provoking. It occurs to me that the main obstacle to developing such a perfect database is the elusive quest for the perfect "nonprofit metric" of evaluation, quantitative or qualitative or both. What if we crowdsourced the solution? Perhaps the perfect database is a dumb database, that casts no value judgements, but allows users to adjust the relative importance of a very wide variety of factors to their giving decisions. Intelligence would reside at the edges of the network, like the internet itself. This would characterize users by their yardsticks; and enable global yardsticks, composed of all users or users of a specific type / sector / etc. And also allow, perhaps, for a highlighting of unique or innovative evaluation models? It would certainly allow trending on an unprecedented level of granularity. What if we could *show* that a funder who values (and funds) reasonable administrative "overhead" versus program costs for a specific sector is getting results? Perfect information might enable perfect arguments, in many cases :) But enough with the navel-gazing: The tech platform for something like this isn't impossible to build. Anyone want to run with the idea, if I find the folks to do the building? “User-centered” is thought provoking. It occurs to me that the main obstacle to developing such a perfect database is the elusive quest for the perfect “nonprofit metric” of evaluation, quantitative or qualitative or both.

What if we crowdsourced the solution? Perhaps the perfect database is a dumb database, that casts no value judgements, but allows users to adjust the relative importance of a very wide variety of factors to their giving decisions. Intelligence would reside at the edges of the network, like the internet itself.

This would characterize users by their yardsticks; and enable global yardsticks, composed of all users or users of a specific type / sector / etc. And also allow, perhaps, for a highlighting of unique or innovative evaluation models? It would certainly allow trending on an unprecedented level of granularity.

What if we could *show* that a funder who values (and funds) reasonable administrative “overhead” versus program costs for a specific sector is getting results?

Perfect information might enable perfect arguments, in many cases :)

But enough with the navel-gazing: The tech platform for something like this isn’t impossible to build. Anyone want to run with the idea, if I find the folks to do the building?

]]>