Charities Deserve Zero Credit for Unsubstantiated Claims

If we told you that we met with Twitter and caused them to change their name to X, would you believe us?

Of course not. There are no names of people we met with, no corroboration, and no reason to believe we have that kind of influence over a multi-billion dollar company.

But in the nonprofit sector, these are the exact types of claims charities expect donors to accept.

They'll say things like:

"We met with 7 companies and caused them to switch to cage-free eggs. These policy changes helped 50 million animals."

And that's all they'll give you. No evidence, just an impact claim backed by an unverifiable story.

For charities, it's the perfect strategy:

• They receive credit for massive impact.
• No one can prove they didn't cause the impact.

It's a serious problem, but we have the solution to it:

By default, assume a charity is having zero impact. From there, the charity can earn credit for impact by providing evidence.

Related Articles

Vague Work is Worse Than Horrible Work
Hidden dangers are worse than obvious ones. For this reason, it is worse for a charity to have vague work that donors don't understand than it is for a charity to have horrible work that can be easily understood.

Why Donors Get Fooled: 5 Principles Every Donor Should Understand
Many donors want to help others, but struggle to have an impact. If you want your donations to actually make a difference, here are 5 key principles every donor should understand.