Comments on: Signaling, Smart Money & Philanthropy

By: Gayle Gifford

Gayle Gifford — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 18:15:05 +0000

I just took a look at GiveWell and was decidedly underwhelmed. More than underwhelmed, really agitated. What hubris.
Two twentysomething staff members, just out of college, one of whom has an undergraduate degree in social studies and the other in religion? And a few hedge fund managers on the board.
This is what scares me completely about the private sector setting itself up as the arbitors of social change.
UNICEF was on GiveWell’s not-recommended list?!!! Isn’t UNICEF one of the organizations, if not THE organization, that governments and the NGO community look to for data (State of the World’s Children), for analysis and for recommendations on the very strategies that will make a difference and do make a difference in communities? Are we supposed to believe that UNICEF’s many evaluators, field workers, NGO partners, Government partners, etc etc don’t stack up to the GiveWell staff?
I’m afraid Hewlett has tossed its money away if this is the what the start up looks like.

By: Sean Stannard-Stockton

Sean Stannard-Stockton — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 20:39:23 +0000

It is easy to shoot down “smart money” when things go bad. But plenty of smart investors have great long term records. Buffett has one of the best.

I’m not sure why you would have such a negative view of GiveWell after a quick check of their website. But my point is that they can’t be written off anymore now that Hewlett has funded them. That doesn’t mean you have to agree that they are good. But they are now credible and legitimized.

Do you reject GiveWell or do you reject the concept that it makes sense for people to give credence to things which better informed people think is good?

By: ani hurwitz

ani hurwitz — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 20:30:15 +0000

Not infallible? How delicately put. Ending (or should i say “currently”?) with madoff, you can add greenspan, rubin, wamu, citicorp, and on.

I’m pleased to say that the new york community trust refused to allow a donor to use madoff as an advisor (nyt, 12/20).

I also visited givewell’s site for the first time. what nonsense. we fund a number of the grantees that are “not recommened.” How do we know they’re effective? For starters, we don’t write them off on the basis of some documents. We also visit them, talk with other funders, and with people in their neighborhoods. We’ve learned that some, no many, programs take years to assess. In fact, our biggest success came more than a decade after we started funding(with the previous 10 years devoted to research. Had we looked for “metrics,” the project would never have happened.