How do you measure the "results" of a non-profit, when most of them work in non-quantifiable fields?
You end up with the quantity versus quality argument, favoring large, superficial efforts over narrowly tailored, substantive efforts.
You end up with the quantity versus quality argument, favoring large, superficial efforts over narrowly tailored, substantive efforts.
If McDonalds can work out how to quantify feeding hungry people then any charity working in Africa should be able to quantify feeding hungry people. If an insurance company can tell me the average lifespan of their clients to six decimal places and what exactly the risk factors are among that pool, then health-focused charities should be able to do it as well. etc, etc
(I have some familiarity with the literature and know the excuses for why charities operating in Africa with mobile phones and computers can't be expected to have as good a handle on their numbers as a British bank circa 1780. Yeah yeah, it must be difficult when you rely on globally distributed workers, many of whom are not literate. Oh wait, so does McDonalds.)
I would say that both of them do extremely well in the non-quantifiable quality department as well.
http://www.gatesfoundation.org/learning/Pages/december-2008-...