Our criteria:
- Are a charity's programs proven? (Why do we look for proven programs?)
- Are a charity's programs cost-effective? (How do we use "cost-effectiveness" figures?)
- Can the charity productively use additional funds? (Why is scalability important?)
- Is the above information shared transparently?
Each charity's name links to a brief summary of its activities, below. The column headers link to more information about each factor and its significance.
| Organization | Transparency | Monitoring and evaluation | Proven impact | Cost-effectiveness | Funding gap? | Conclusion | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VillageReach | Excellent | Excellent | Strong | Excellent | Significant | Top-rated | 1 |
| Stop TB Partnership | Strong | Excellent | Strong | Excellent | Significant | Top-rated | 2 |
| Against Malaria Foundation | Excellent | Strong | Moderate | Excellent | Significant | Recommended | 3 |
| PSI | Excellent | Strong | Moderate | Excellent | Probable | Recommended | 4 |
| Partners in Health | Above average | Above average | Moderate | Moderate | Probable | Recommended | 5 |
| Small Enterprise Foundation | Excellent | Strong | Limited | Moderate | Moderate | Recommended | 6 |
| Village Enterprise Fund | Excellent | Strong | Limited | Moderate | Moderate | Recommended | 7 |
| Chamroeun | Excellent | Strong | Limited | Moderate | Moderate | Recommended | 8 |
| Global Fund | Excellent | Strong | Limited | Moderate | Probable | Recommended | 9 |
Village Reach (Top-rated): VillageReach aims to improve the logistics - particularly tracking and distribution of supplies - for health systems in rural areas in Africa. Its programs include both technical support staff and changes in logistical setups (such as moving from a system in which health clinics collect their own supplies to a centralized delivery system).
VillageReach is a relatively small and young organization. Based on results from its pilot project, we believe its model has significant impact, well under $1000 per infant death averted. It anticipates a significant funding gap for the coming year.
Stop Tuberculosis Partnership (Top-rated): The Stop Tuberculosis Partnership aims to increase access to life-saving tuberculosis treatment using the World Health Organization's recommended approach ("DOTS") all across the developing world, primarily by providing government health programs with TB drugs through its Global Drug Facility.
The Partnership is a very large entity that we believe has a significant funding gap. We believe it is averting (adult) deaths from tuberculosis for under $1000 each.
Against Malaria Foundation (Recommended): The Against Malaria Foundation provides insecticide-treated nets (for protection against malaria) in bulk to nonprofits who then distribute them in Africa.
Unlike other net distribution organizations, AMF is extremely transparent, publishing the status of each distribution on its website along with post-distribution photos. We have questions about whether nets continue to be used appropriately over the long run, but net distributions have had repeated success in the past, at a cost of under $1000 per infant death averted. We believe that AMF has a significant funding gap.
Population Services International (Recommended): Population Services International promotes and distributes materials, particularly condoms and bednets, to save lives and improve health throughout the developing world. Its largest program areas focus on preventing HIV/AIDS and reducing unwanted pregnancies (primarily through condom promotion/distribution) and reducing the burden of malaria (primarily by promotion/distribution of insecticide-treated nets (ITNs).
When used appropriately, these materials can be very effective, at less than $1000 per infant death averted (nets) / HIV infection averted (condoms). We are not highly confident that this is happening consistently, but PSI is more transparent and results-driven than comparable charities and is likely having significant impact.
Partners in Health (Recommended): Partners in Health provides comprehensive health care to individuals in the developing world (mostly rural Haiti and Africa) by creating and managing hospitals, health centers, and a network of community health workers.
We have little formal evidence regarding the quality and outcomes of PIH's medical care, but feel it faces a lower burden of proof than most charities because of the nature of its activities, and are largely convinced that it is improving health outcomes. Its cost-effectiveness is somewhat unclear; its programs are not as cost-effective as those of the charities listed above, but still likely within a reasonable range for this cause.
Small Enterprise Foundation (Recommended): SEF is a microfinance institution operating primarily in the Limpopo province of South Africa.
SEF shows a strong focus on collecting the information necessary to assess its social impact, including (a) data on how many clients are dropping out of the program (and why); (b) data on whether SEF is succeeding in its attempt to target people with very low incomes. Nevertheless, we have concerns about SEF's social impact, particularly regarding its substantial dropout rates.
Village Enterprise Fund (Recommended): VEF aims to provide grants (as opposed to loans) directly to extremely poor individuals living in the developing world. It also provides business training and mentoring services.
Village Enterprise Fund stands out for its clear targeting of extremely poor clients (and data collection to ensure that the targeting is working), addressing a key concern about cash grants. At the same time, we are concerned that some of VEF's funds may not reach the intended recipients
Chamroeun (Recommended): Like the Small Enterprise Foundation, Chamroeun shows a strong focus on collecting the information necessary to assess its social impact, including (a) data on how many clients are dropping out of the program (and why); (b) data on clients' satisfaction with the program; (c) data on whether Chamroeun is succeeding in its attempt to target people with low incomes. Nevertheless, we have concerns about Chamroeun's social impact, particularly regarding its substantial dropout rates and whether clients become over-indebted.
Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (Recommended): GFATM is an extremely large funding mechanism, supporting a broad variety of programs to combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria throughout the developing world.
GFATM's commitment to transparency is outstanding, and its activities are mostly proven and cost-effective. We do not have a clear enough sense of its project-by-project (or aggregate) outcomes to be fully confident in its impact or give a cost-effectiveness estimate.
