Giving during COVID-19

Clearly, communities and charities are under great strain at the moment. A vast number of people in the UK have less than one week’s savings. Charities are doing all manner of work, and the crisis is expected to cost them at least £4 billion(!)

Please give.

The National Emergencies Trust was set up after Grenfell Tower to co-ordinate donations after disasters. It has now launched a Coronavirus Appeal. Funds will be distributed to local charities through UK’s network of Community Foundations.

The Big Give will double your donation to it: please give here.

If you can donate more than £50K, or know anyone who could do so, The Big Give can use this as ‘champion money’ – for the pool of matching funds – and thereby encourage more people to give. (There is evidence that the offer of a match encourages more donations.)

Anyone who’d like to be a champion, please get in touch and I will connect you with them.

Some funders are giving way more than their normal budget in order to cope with this crisis: for instance, on Friday, Indigo Trust, a private UK family trust, gave 250% of its annual budget as an emergency measure: see here.

Please forward this message.

If you already have grants in-play

Please consider removing any restrictions from them: organisations need flexibility to respond to fast-changing circumstances on the ground without needing to negotiate with funders. (This is always true, and hence Giving Evidence recommends that gifts are almost never restricted – see here – but it’s particularly important right now).

At least 40 foundations have signed the US Council on Foundations’ Pledge to that end: it’s detailed below.

Other useful things at this time:

1. The evidence about Covid-19
Our friends at the EPPI Centre at UCL have mapped the available evidence so that people can find it easily. It’s here. They’re continuing to update it.


2. How to tell if you’ve got it
Quite a few conditions can be signs that you’ve got it: 

3. This bug and crisis will be here for a while yet
It will only start to decline in May / June, according to the FT.

The countries which have reduced the growth have had way stricter measures than the UK and US have now. The FT produces this graph most days.

4. Tip for staying sane: Online dinner parties!

Caroline Fiennes held one of these (as have loads of other people, presumably) – and it got covered in the Washington Post!

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

We tried to update our analysis of charities’ performance and their admin costs, and you won’t BELIEVE what happened next!

Many people believe that charities waste money on ‘administration’, and hence that the best charities spend little on administration. A strong form of this view is that the best charities are by definition those which spend little on administration, i.e., you can tell how good a charity is just by looking at their admin costs: one sometimes hears this view.

It’s nonsense. The amount that charities spend on administration is (probably) totally unrelated to whether they’re intervention is any good. If I have an intervention which, to take a real example, is supposed to decrease the number of vulnerable teenagers who get pregnant, but in fact does the opposite and increases it, then it doesn’t matter how low the administrative costs are: the fact is that the intervention doesn’t work. As Michael Green, co-author of Philanthrocapitalism: How Giving Can Save The World says: ‘A bad charity with low administration costs is still a bad charity’. Continue reading

Posted in Admin costs, Effective giving, Impact & evaluation, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Why I’ve joined a board of the Flemish Red Cross

I know. You’ve never heard of the Flemish Red Cross. You realise that such a thing probably must exist but you’d never hitherto realised it, right?

Well, you should know about it because it’s amazing. Of all the operational charities I’ve encountered, it is easily the most sophisticated in terms of use and production  of decent evidence – and seeing as I’ve been in this sector now for >18 years, I’ve seen a lot. A clue is that it has 12 post-doctoral researchers on payroll, most of whose output goes into the peer-reviewed academic literature. Continue reading

Posted in Great charities, Impact & evaluation | Leave a comment

Do Royals help charities? We’re finding out

Apparently ~3000 organisations have Royal patrons. About 200 have this week lost their relationship with Prince Andrew. Securing and maintaining a relationship with a Royal is work, and is it worth it? It seems that nobody knows. Giving Evidence is going to investigate.

This is a question about donor effectiveness: the patrons probably think that they are helping the charities, but donors are often rather less helpful than they think they are. It’s reasonable – and possible – to assess the effectiveness of donors, as we have said elsewhere. It is also a question about charity effectiveness: how should charities best allocate their scarce resources? We will specifically be looking at whether & how much & when Royals patrons – and with luck other celeb patrons – help charities. Continue reading

Posted in Donor behaviour & giving stats, Effective giving, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Can people tell posh champagne from cava in a blind trial?? – an experiment

{Warning: this post has nothing to do with philanthropy. It’s to do with science. Sort of.}

As widely discussed in the press (i.e., written about by me on Twitter), I recently ran a little trial to see whether people (specifically myself and some friends and family) could distinguish between posh champagne and much cheaper cava.

In short, we couldn’t. Well, *I* could, and my family could, but on aggregate the answers were barely better than random.

Because this is *science*, and not just a random drinking game, I’ve written it up. Not in the Journal of Champagne-ology, which surprisingly doesn’t exist, but below. Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

A life ended well

This article first published in the British Medical Journal.

My mum died in 2016, a more decorous and peaceful end of life would be hard to imagine. That she died well is a huge blessing: not everybody gets that privilege. I gather that there is discussion in medical circles about how to improve and de-medicalise ends of lives. In case it is useful to anybody, here is my mum’s story. Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

How to give well to charity?

This article first published in MoneyWise magazine.

MacKenzie Bezos, who recently divorced the world’s richest person, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, has pledged to give away at least half of her $37billion fortune. To whom should she give it?

I’ve advised charitable donors for many years and they’re often surprised to learn that the principles of giving well are the same, whether you’re giving a massive sum or your hard-saved £20.

Continue reading

Posted in Effective giving | Leave a comment

The second best thing to give to charity is feedback

This article first published in the Financial Times in May 2018

Donors can encourage charities to seek feedback

Oxfam’s UK chief executive announced his resignation last week, after a spate of damaging allegations of abuse by the charity’s frontline staff in Haiti. But would the whole issue have been avoided if Oxfam had had a decent and open process for hearing from the people it seeks to serve? Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Charitable foundations: There’s an argument for spending it fast

This article first published in the Financial Times in January 2018

A growing number of funds take a shorter-term approach

Having spent its entire war chest of $100m, the Skoll Global Threats Fund closed last month. Jeff Skoll, eBay’s first employee and first president, created the fund to “make progress against five of the gravest threats to humanity” — climate change, pandemics, water security, nuclear proliferation and conflict in the Middle East — and gave it eight years.

It is one of a growing number of foundations which are “spending down” and disbanding. Atlantic Philanthropies, set up by Chuck Feeney, co-founder of Duty Free shops, finished spending its $8bn in 2016 and will close in 2020. A foundation created with public donations after the death of Diana, Princess of Wales, closed in 2012. Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Priority areas for research into charities & philanthropy

With Charity Futures, Giving Evidence has run two projects which combine to identify priority areas for new academic research into charities and philanthropy. These studies are prompted by the growing amount of academic research activity around charities and philanthropy, including Charity Futures’ announced intention to establish an Institute of Charity at Oxford University.

Our two studies were about:

  1. Demand: This asked UK charities and donors (of all types) what they want more research about. It was an open consultation process run over 15 months, through focus groups, surveys and a workshop, which invited any charity or donor to suggest questions for research, and then invited any charity or donor to vote to prioritise the list. It resulted in a prioritised list of 24 questions (listed here). It adapted a method developed in medical / health for consulting with patients and their carers about their priorities for medical research. Download the ‘demand’ findings here, and more details are here.
  2. Supply: This investigated what research already exists about UK charities and philanthropy; what topics it does and does not cover, and what methods it uses. It used systematic review methods, and was led by The Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinating Centre (EPPI Centre) at University College London, precisely because they are experts in systematic reviews but are outside the charity / philanthropy sectors. Download the ‘review version’ of the ‘supply’ findings here, and more details are here.

Combined, the two sets of results form a ‘gap analysis’ and show major areas where more research would be valued by charities and donors, who are among its intended users.

There were some surprises in terms of issues/questions that did arise, and some that didn’t arise. Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment