Comments on: Philanthropedia http://www.tacticalphilanthropy.com/2009/10/philanthropedia Fri, 09 Dec 2011 20:42:38 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Aaron Stiner http://www.tacticalphilanthropy.com/2009/10/philanthropedia/comment-page-1#comment-8030 Aaron Stiner Tue, 20 Oct 2009 20:41:28 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2009/10/philanthropedia#comment-8030 I would actually like to expand this effort beyond experts. I think an "Amazon for nonprofits" sort of approach would be incredibly successful. Let's leverage the knowledge and experiences of the 82% of donors by letting them rate, comment on and discuss their experiences with individual nonprofit organizations. We know conversations about donating to organizations happen anyway, offline and informally. Let's bring them online into a public, open forum. It also then gives nonprofit organizations an opportunity to respond to favorable or unfavorable comments. I would actually like to expand this effort beyond experts. I think an “Amazon for nonprofits” sort of approach would be incredibly successful. Let’s leverage the knowledge and experiences of the 82% of donors by letting them rate, comment on and discuss their experiences with individual nonprofit organizations. We know conversations about donating to organizations happen anyway, offline and informally. Let’s bring them online into a public, open forum. It also then gives nonprofit organizations an opportunity to respond to favorable or unfavorable comments.

]]> By: Sean Stannard-Stockton http://www.tacticalphilanthropy.com/2009/10/philanthropedia/comment-page-1#comment-7986 Sean Stannard-Stockton Wed, 14 Oct 2009 16:33:14 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2009/10/philanthropedia#comment-7986 Yes, I agree that the methodology for choosing experts is critical. And different focuses will lead to different selection criteria. However, a quick look at the Annenberg report shows that the orgs they profiled were sites they were studying for evidence of impact. Where as Philanthropedia's methodology is intended to surface high performing organizations. Both important, but quite different projects. Yes, I agree that the methodology for choosing experts is critical. And different focuses will lead to different selection criteria. However, a quick look at the Annenberg report shows that the orgs they profiled were sites they were studying for evidence of impact. Where as Philanthropedia’s methodology is intended to surface high performing organizations.

Both important, but quite different projects.

]]> By: Lisa Ranghelli http://www.tacticalphilanthropy.com/2009/10/philanthropedia/comment-page-1#comment-7976 Lisa Ranghelli Tue, 13 Oct 2009 21:52:55 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2009/10/philanthropedia#comment-7976 I agree that sharing knowledge and expertise across foundations AND nonprofits is important, and I applaud efforts such as Philanthropedia. Yet how "experts" are chosen and who is consulted to produce such collective wisdom is important to consider. For example, were any funders that support education organizing and advocacy consulted? It is interesting to juxtapose the top 8 organizations Philanthropedia featured with the 7 organizations profiled in the recent Annenberg Institute report on education organizing. Two completely distinct sets of organizations that different experts say are doing important work to reform education. I agree that sharing knowledge and expertise across foundations AND nonprofits is important, and I applaud efforts such as Philanthropedia. Yet how “experts” are chosen and who is consulted to produce such collective wisdom is important to consider. For example, were any funders that support education organizing and advocacy consulted? It is interesting to juxtapose the top 8 organizations Philanthropedia featured with the 7 organizations profiled in the recent Annenberg Institute report on education organizing. Two completely distinct sets of organizations that different experts say are doing important work to reform education.

]]>