Disasters are nasty business. This past week has tested the disaster relief machines in new ways. There is never an easy disaster relief scenario-all bring with them unanticipated complications. Nevertheless, Myanmar and China are arguably two of the more difficult environments in which to operate. There are few nonprofit organizations with authority to operate in these countries, and getting the needed resources–aid and expertise–to where they will make the most difference is challenging to the best of the logistics professionals. I will focus in this posting on Myanmar, and follow up on China when we have more information.

GlobalGiving’s strong network of project partners has been mobilizing to meet the needs of the Cyclone Nargis survivors. I am pleased to report that more than $68,000 has already been disbursed to projects working on the ground in Myanmar. It is an honor to play even a small part in helping bring resources to their efforts. The projects on the GlobalGiving Myanmar Relief page have been posted by existing partners that are using their in-country staffs and/or their tried and true skills in disaster relief. They are leveraging their in-country offices and coordinating partnerships with other organizations to address the varied and extensive needs.

GlobalGiving has great respect for those courageous people in the field best situated to assess the situation and formulate strategies to save lives. There is even more pressure on them now, considering international experts are having difficulties in getting visas to enter Myanmar. At the time of writing this post, International Development Enterprises and Save The Children are currently working on the ground in Myanmar, while CHF and International Medical Corps are working through partners and negotiating the challenges of getting visas for their staff and aid into the country. To ensure we can provide full transparency and be the best stewards of our donors’ funds, we have defined our key operating tenets in supporting disaster relief efforts:

-In order to post a disaster relief project, a project partner must have pre-existing program operations in Myanmar or significant experience in disaster relief with a credible strategy to achieve a significant impact in the current situation
-For organizations without staff on the ground in the affected area, we will only disburse funding once they have demonstrated their ability to execute their relief efforts. If these organizations are not able to execute their posted projects, we will reallocate funds in consultation with the donors to these projects.
-We commit to complete transparency. Our project partner organizations are dealing with an evolving, fluid and, possibly, volatile situation. Projects might not run with their planned strategies, so reporting on progress is a necessary courtesy we owe our donors.

I want to thank all the generous individuals and corporate partners that have dug deep to help in this crisis situation. We welcome your feedback and your continued support.

Save to:  

I have been fascinated with survey data my entire life. In 6^th grade, I polled my classmates on whether or not they liked my classmate Kenneth Klein, to this day one of the 3 funniest people I have ever known.

 I regularly watched Family Feud (I watched when Richard Dawson was the host.) As a political science undergraduate student I actually railed against “horserace” polls and their misuse in the media. Later after working for a few years, I decided to go back to school and had the great fortune to study survey research and work at the Center for Survey Research at The Ohio State University. While there, I read an article in the New York Times that rocked the foundation on which I had been working and studying. Here’s the segment of interest from the magazine article (free registration required) by Max Frankel, former executive editor at the New York Times, talking about how he was interrupted at dinner time by a telephone survey:

“…That telephone pollster called, naturally, in the middle of dinner. He asked what kind of car I dreamed of owning next. Fortunately, I was annoyed.

“Do you get paid for asking that?”

“Yes, sir.”

“Well, then, how much will I get for my answer?”

“Why nothing, sir. We have selected you so that we can learn how to serve you better.”

With no thought at all, I heard myself inventing a doctrine that I have smugly invoked ever since: “No pay, no say.” …”

The cliched lightbulb went on for me. The entire discipline of survey research rested on the assumption that people would answer researcher’s questions for free. Max wrote that in 1995, at the dawn of the internet. Today, online survey practitioners consider incentives as a matter of course.

As did we when we surveyed GlobalGiving’s donors and newsletter subscribers recently. (If you replied, thank you!) We offered respondents the opportunity to enter into a drawing for ten $50 gift certificates, for a total cost of $500. We received over 1,200 responses, so each survey “cost us” a little more than $.40 in incentives.

So imagine my surprise, when performing one of my other duties here at GlobalGiving, analyzing site traffic that leads to donations, I saw this:

We actually received donations from people who had filled out the survey at surveymonkey.com. Sixteen separate donations, averaging just over $100, for a total of $1,647! No, we won’t be sending out surveys to collect donations. But yes, here is yet another data point showing how lucky we at GlobalGiving are to be bringing together our donors and projects, breaking rules left and right.

Save to:  

Saw this in a blog called Don’t Tell the Donor, but actually it’s the kind of inspiring story that donors like to hear.

It’s about Sonja Christopher, one of the contestants in season one of Survivor (way back in 2000). She had originally promised to donate her potential prize winnings of $1 million to her church to build a community hall - but since she was the first one voted off the island, ended up with “only” $2,500, which she went ahead and gave to her church anyway.

But something interesting happened - moved by her generosity, fellow congregants stepped up - and raised the million dollars needed. Ground was broken recently. The moral of the story, according to the church’s minister, is that “giving is good.”

And never underestimate the power of a “small” donation.

Save to: