[orvado]

What if they have a 90% administration fee... all that matching could go right back into the charity. This would effectively make it 0% matching.

Also, the matching could be prorated over the next 100 years. This company has only been around for 3 years and doesn't have a profile on Charity Navigator yet. I will give it some more time.

[chaseadam17]

100% of donations directly fund patient care. We even pay the credit card processing fees out of our own pocket in order to keep the administrative costs at 0% for donors. If you donate $10, it'll be matched to $100, and every cent will go to the healthcare provider to cover the cost of the patient's care.

We can afford to do this by 1) raising money separately from a group of donors to cover our administrative costs and 2) enabling people who donate to patients to add a tip to help cover administrative costs (despite it being optional, ~2/3 of donors tip).

We're too new to have been rated by Charity Navigator. Regardless, even when we are rated I won't point donors there. I think Charity Navigator is a valuable tool (more transparency around nonprofits is a good thing imo) but I don't think it's an effective way of evaluating an organization's impact. It's focused on what % of donations nonprofits spend on programs (vs administration) but not on whether the programs work.

[maxerickson]

You need to find a better way to discuss the separate pools of money. Each of the three sources of funds you mention is donated.

[henryaj]

Agreed on the Charity Navigator front. I'm guessing Watsi hasn't been assessed by e.g. GiveWell? Their top four are where most of my donations go.

[ramidarigaz]

Watsi? It's a pretty well-known charity around here at least. I believe it's a YC-backed nonprofit.

[atwebb]

You're right to be cautious and with any charity it's reasonable to expect transparency. I've donated to Watsi for a while, they send a lot of updates and freely share what procedures cost, the steps they are on and when they were performed. It's my understanding, they cover their operational costs from other sources (and asking you when making a donation). It's never free to run a charity and I can respect some higher expense ratios having worked for one. Assuming what Watsi is putting out isn't flat out lies, they seem competent and trustworthy.

[randall]

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1tZq47h6jg7NX4ddhTS_H...