Buy one, get 24 free!

I just have to share this because it’s so stunning.

You want to improve education in rural India. A good start is to improve attendance. So you look at the causes of non-attendance: poor transport to/from school; children having no uniforms; parents having poor incentive / not seeing the incentive to send their children to school; children being ill because of intestinal worms. You design programmes to solve each problem.

Any of these sounds like a good idea. You could persuade a donor to fund any of them.

Well, crickey, it turns out that the differences in performance are just vast. The charming-sounding de-worming programme is fully 25 times cheaper than making payments to families if their children show up to school: a 96% discount. That is, for every child you reach through a ‘conditional cash transfer’ programme, fully 24 needlessly miss out.

Magic?

Here’s the really amazing thing. If you de-worm children School A in the village, you get better attendance not only there, but also in School B down the road – where you did precisely nothing. Magic? Well, it’s because worms are infectious and children play in close proximity – so de-worming School A reduces the chance of a child in School B getting worms, so their attendance improves too.

Salutory tale

Obviously the data here are striking in themselves. But what’s also remarkable is how rarely we see comparative data like these. Without them, for all we know, we’re routinely funding the uber-expensive, uber-wasteful programmes.

If we’re to make most difference with our charitable giving, we need to get these data. We need to fund charities to get them, or – better – fund somebody independent to get them.  

(This example comes from J-PAL – the Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab in Massachusetts Institute of Technology, which specialises in randomised control trials of techniques for poverty alleviation.)

Source: http://southasia.oneworld.net/todaysheadlines/deworming-improves-school-attendance-says-report

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Great charities, Impact & evaluation and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

23 Responses to Buy one, get 24 free!

  1. Pingback: How do you know if your charity is making any difference? Take control | Giving Evidence

  2. Pingback: Giving Evidence

  3. Pingback: Book: It Ain’t What You Give, It’s The Way That You Give It | Caroline Fiennes @carolinefiennes

  4. Pingback: Application and reporting processes keep 3m children out of school | Giving Evidence

  5. Pingback: Application and reporting processes keep 3m children out of school | Caroline Fiennes @carolinefiennes

  6. Pingback: Should You Donate to Sport Relief? | Giving Evidence

  7. Pingback: Giving Evidence: advice on giving, based on evidence | Giving Evidence

  8. Pingback: Giving Evidence: advice on giving, based on evidence | Caroline Fiennes @carolinefiennes

  9. Pingback: Why I don’t back the Give It Back George campaign | Giving Evidence

  10. Pingback: Why I don’t back the Give It Back George campaign | Caroline Fiennes @carolinefiennes

  11. Pingback: How can we best support charities? | Caroline Fiennes @carolinefiennes

  12. Pingback: Why I’m delighted to be working with Innovations for Poverty Action | Giving Evidence

  13. Pingback: Why I’m delighted to be working with Innovations for Poverty Action | Caroline Fiennes @carolinefiennes

  14. Pingback: MoneyBox Live: good questions to ask | Giving Evidence

  15. Pingback: MoneyBox Live: good questions to ask | Caroline Fiennes @carolinefiennes

  16. Pingback: How foundations discourage charity mergers | Giving Evidence

  17. Pingback: Has the worm turned on deworming? | Giving Evidence

  18. What a fascinating statistic… as you say, this is the sort of information that we need to help us select where to make charitable donations, but we also need to know that the money we give is actually used for the programme we want to support.

  19. Pingback: What is decent evidence? | Giving Evidence

  20. Pingback: Good charities spend more on administration than less good charities spend | Giving Evidence

  21. Pingback: Good charities spend more on administration than bad charities | whydev.org

  22. Pingback: MPs should donate their payrise if they really don’t want it | Giving Evidence

  23. Pingback: MPs should donate their payrise if they really don’t want it | Caroline Fiennes @carolinefiennes

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s