Comments on: Three Cups of Tea scandal: why we had the right bottom line on the Central Asia Institute

By: Alexander

Alexander — Wed, 18 May 2011 04:49:28 +0000

I also saw the NPR story and thought it was interesting. I think that Berger was referring to their plans for Charity Navigator 2.0, which you can see here or here.

By: J. S. Greenfield

J. S. Greenfield — Wed, 18 May 2011 02:22:50 +0000

Anybody catch this story on NPR a couple of weeks ago:

http://www.npr.org/2011/05/06/136029810/can-you-know-where-charity-dollars-go-not-easily

What was interesting here was the CEO of Charity Navigator stating that (in the wake of the Three Cups of Tea scandal), they are revamping Charity Navigator’s ratings to focus more on “actual impact” as opposed to purely financial measures.

This was stated rather matter-of-factly, as if it were a straightforward thing to do.

Anybody have any clue what they think they’re going to do to measure such?

By: Marcia

Marcia — Wed, 04 May 2011 17:55:11 +0000

Recycling facts echo’s my sentiments. However, Greg Mortenson, as a one man show, a braver, more determined man, one could not find. I more than appreciate the fact Give Well would not recommend Central Asia Institute. Doesn’t mean I wouldn’t support a man who goes to the ceiling of the world to build schools that may help even one person. For the many he has touched, saved and given the opportunity of education, I more than applaud his amazing efforts. Greg’s accomplishments have not gone away because he is a lousy book keeper and doesn’t meet the strictest criteria for recommendation. I applaud Give Well for doing their job! Well Done !! I also love Greg for his amazing magical feats, although not perfect, are fabulous none the less. So, I am not disappointed in Greg. I am relieved he is human after all. Just for the record…my donation to the Central Asia Institute is buying Greg’s books and tapes. I do listen to Give Well. They are a terrific group!

By: Recycling Facts

Recycling Facts — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 14:44:06 +0000

To say this is SO disappointing to me is a vast understatement. Three Cups of Tea is one of the most inspiring books I’ve ever read, I have bought the book for so many people, and the thought and principles behind it gave me hope. I rarely have such regard for a man; who values the education of women, and builds bridges and schools. Can’t there be one person who is incorruptible?

By: Holden

Holden — Wed, 27 Apr 2011 18:48:32 +0000

Jonah, I agree that we don’t have evidence that Central Asia Institute is representative of a given nontransparent charity. I don’t think our post suggests otherwise. What our post says is that our process is unlikely to recommend a charity with this sort of problem, and that other methodologies do not offer the same kind of protection.

By: Jonah S

Jonah S — Mon, 25 Apr 2011 21:50:28 +0000

I agree that the situation discussed provides a good example showing that the overhead ratio is a very poor metric and of how much money can be wasted in absence of internal monitoring and evaluation. On the other hand, I find the introduction and the conclusion of this post misleading; there's an implicit suggestion that there's a substantial chance that Central Asia Institute is representative of a given nontransparent charity, which is something that we can't infer from the fact that there was a scandal with a single charity among the 404 charities that GiveWell didn't recommend. I think that one is on more solid ground saying charities vary widely in cost-effectiveness and that that GiveWell's top rated charities are probably among the best in their respective causes so that if you're trying to do as much good as possible you're much better off donating to one of GiveWell's recommended charities than you are with donating to a generic charity in a given cause, independently of whether or not a given generic charity is a source of scandal. This is in line with your blog post from October 6th 2010.