Discount on acclaimed new book about giving!
- Why are there so many charities?
- Don’t spread the love with your Christmas charity giving
- How we could can impact measurement more useful
- What makes philanthropy succeed? – potentially revealing analysis
- When charitable donations cost more than they give
- Creating a sector-wide research agenda: Industrial Farm Animal Production
- What is evidence-based giving and why does it matter?
- Avoiding waste in medical research
- What would have happened otherwise?
- The evidence system in the mental health charity sector
- Why do so few charities have their meetings in public?
- Be a flexible friend
- Admin costs (9)
- Analysing giving (8)
- Books (7)
- Corporate philanthropy (6)
- Donor behaviour & giving stats (23)
- Effective giving (52)
- Fundraising (18)
- Great charities (18)
- Impact & evaluation (59)
- Mergers (2)
- meta-research (6)
- Promoting giving (5)
- Tax and governance (7)
- transparency (2)
- Uncategorized (68)
Category Archives: meta-research
Funders’ reporting and evaluation systems are rarely loved: they are more often regarded as compliance or ‘policing’. But not so for the Inter-American Foundation apparently: IAF received better feedback from its grantees on its reporting and evaluation system than have … Continue reading →
Many charities’ theory of change is: ‘here’s that document you didn’t ask for’ I want to introduce you to someone: the Magic Impact Fairy. Her job is to take all the research that people do and the reports they write, … Continue reading →
Most charities hate the reporting which funders make them do. Notionally a learning process, it’s often just compliance, box-ticking and a dead-weight cost. But not so apparently for the Inter-American Foundation, an independent US government agency which grant-funds citizen-led community … Continue reading →
A flawed study on deworming children—and new studies that expose its errors—reveal why activists and philanthropists alike need safeguards. The book Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, of all things, offers a critically important message for people who work … Continue reading →
The short answer is no. At first sight, it seems that randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and Constituent Voice (CV: a good way of gathering feedback from programme beneficiaries or grantees) could substitute for each other because they both seek to … Continue reading →
This was first published by our friends at Evidence Matters. It’s hard to make evidence-based decisions if much of the evidence is missing, ropey, unclear or you can’t find it. Charities produce masses of evidence about their effectiveness but Giving Evidence … Continue reading →