Peter Singer explains the “effective altruism” movement at TED2013. Photo: James Duncan Davidson

Every day, most of us do something morally indefensible — we go about our lives without sending help to the 6.9 million children under the age of 5 who will die this year from poverty-related disease. In today’s talk, philosopher Peter Singer makes the case that ignoring these kids is as inhumane as ignoring a child who’s been hit by a car on the street in front of you.

Peter Singer: The why and how of effective altruism “Does it really matter that they’re far away?” asks Singer. “I don’t think it does make a morally relevant difference — the fact that they’re not right in front of us, or the fact that they’re of a different nationality or race.”

But he’s not saying this to make us feel bad and helpless. Today’s talk actually delivers good news: that through what Singer calls “effective altruism,” we all have the ability to make a difference. Effective altruism begins with reason – the realization that all lives are of equal value — and looking for charities that affect the most lives, the most effectively.

To hear how a single person — and one who is nowhere close to a billionaire – can make a big impact for good in the world, watch this talk. And below, some resources to get you thinking about giving more effectively.

Peter Singer’s top 10 recommended charities:

1. Against Malaria Foundation. Of those 6.9 million children who die every year of poverty-related illness, 1 million succumb to malaria. AMF provides insecticide-treated bed nets, which only cost $5 apiece.
2. Schistosomiasis Control Initiative. Protecting a child from worm-based disease for a full year costs around 50 cents. This organization works with governments to make sure it happens.
3. The Humane League. Invests time, money and energy to reduce animal cruelty and save the lives of animals, focusing on farmed animals.
4. GiveDirectly. This nonprofit transfers money to poor individuals in Kenya, letting them spend it for food and other basic needs, or on high-return investments.
5. Oxfam International. This mega aid organization works in a wide range of areas, including disaster relief, education, sanitation and women’s rights.
6. Proven Impact Fund. Dedicated to data and results, this fund from Innovations for Poverty Action supports interventions with strong evidence of success.
7. The Fistula Foundation. Fistula is a ghastly injury during childbirth, and it afflicts women living in the poorest areas of the world. This organization provides needed surgery.
8. The Hunger Project. Encouraging men and women to end their own hunger, this organization assists poor villages for five years, relying on the local workforce to build skills and take over before they leave.
9. Vegan Outreach. A nonprofit that seeks to expose and end cruelty to animals.
10. Population Services International. A global health organization that focuses on family planning, a simple service that can improve the health of women and their children.
    

Resources for finding other charities to support:

• GiveWell. This nonprofit does in-depth research on charities and highlights a small number that do a remarkable amount of good per dollar they receive. (Singer recommends this site.)
• Effective Animal Activism. One of the causes nearest to Singer’s heart is animal liberation, and he is impressed with this charity evaluator that focuses on animal suffering.
• Charity Navigator. The largest charity evaluator in the U.S., Charity Navigator has data and ratings for nearly 6,000 charities.
• Great Nonprofits. A site dedicated to informing would-be donors through reviews from board members, volunteers, experts and regular folks who’ve interfaced with a charity.

Resources Singer recommends for connecting with other people interested in doing good:

• Giving What We Can. The members of this international society make a bold pledge: to donate 10% of their income to eliminating poverty in the developing world. A good place to connect with others, and to find high-quality organizations to support.
• The Life You Can Save. At this site, you can pledge to donate any percentage of your income to those in need. In addition to directing you to great charities to support, it’s also a log for local volunteer opportunities.
• Effective Altruism. A blog from Peter Singer and William MacAskill dedicated to the tenets of effective altruism.
• The High Impact Network. This group has a great acronym – THINK. Members meet up to ponder effective giving — both strategically and creatively.

A resource for finding the career that does the greatest good:

• 80,000 Hours. Named after the number of hours most people will work over their lifetime, this career advice site has a twist – it gives advice on how different careers can have an impact on poverty. As Singer mentions in his talk, the site doesn’t shy away from unusual answers; it suggests that working in finance and donating a percentage of your income could fund multiple aid workers.

And further reading in effective altruism:

• The Life You Can Save: How to Do Your Part to End World Poverty. Peter Singer’s book about how each person can be a part of the solution to poverty, it calls for a cultural change to consider poverty eradication a natural part of a moral life.
• The Expanding Circle: Ethics, Evolution and Moral Progress. Peter Singer’s classic study of ethics, which examines the question: Where does our desire for altruism come from? He shows how it might come down to the biological drive to protect or kin — but that it is also a matter of reason.
• The Ethics of What We Eat: Why Our Food Choices Matter. A bold look from Peter Singer and Jim Mason on how our individual food choices affect animals, the environment and our fellow human beings.

Want more advice on how to parse the world of nonprofits and giving? Check out Dan Pallotta’s tips for picking a charity that’s right for you »

Volunteer firefighter Mark Bezos kicks off the hour with a story of a small, seemingly insignificant act of heroism. Through a tiny act of kindness, he realizes the dozens of possibilities we have in a day to be heroes in our own humble ways. Next, self-named “renegade ecolutionary” Ron Finley describes the garden that he began on the sidewalk in front of his house in South Central Los Angeles, meant for anyone to eat from. Finley expresses the importance of the yin and yang of giving and receiving — one cannot simply take, but must create a cycle of giving.

The second half of the show continues with Dan Pallotta, who wonders why we are so much more willing to invest in a private company’s enterprises than we are to donate to a non-profit. Pallotta stresses the paradigm shift that we need to enact — away from viewing non-profits as things that must produce results in the here-and-now to seeing them as organizations that can grow and thrive on long-term investments. Amanda Palmer closes the show, sharing her experience as a musician in a budding economy built on trust. As she talks, she emphasizes the importance of the simple act of asking when you need something — and the joy that comes from the connection found through mutual support.

To hear TED Radio Hour’s “Giving It Away,” check your local NPR schedule to find out when the show airs today. Or listen to it via NPR’s website »

Head to iTunes, where the podcast is available now »

Dan Pallotta: The way we think about charity is dead wrong“350 employees lost their jobs because they were labeled overhead,” says Palotta in today’s talk, given at TED2013. “This is what happens when we confuse morality with frugality.”

This wasn’t just a problem for the newly unemployed or Pallotta’s wounded sense of pride. As he explains in this talk, the real issue is that everything we have been taught to think about charity is wrong. In particular, the single yardstick generally used to measure the worthiness of a charity – how much money goes directly toward the people it seeks to help and how much is used to cover overhead — is dangerously unhelpful. According to this thinking, the “best” charities are the ones with the lowest overhead. In fact, that focus may actually be preventing charities from making a real impact.

“The things we’ve been taught to think about giving and charity and the non-profit sector are actually undermining the causes we love … Our social problems are massive in scale, our organizations are tiny up against them — and we have a belief system that keeps them tiny,” says Pallotta, the author of the book Uncharitable. “We have two rulebooks—one for the non-profit sector and one for the rest of the economic world. It’s an apartheid.”

It’s time to change the way we think about giving to charity, says Pallotta. “Don’t ask about the size of their overhead,” he urges. “Ask about the size of their dreams.”

Curious to hear more on this new way of evaluating nonprofits, we asked Pallotta to share his thoughts on how to find a charity to support and what questions to ask along the way. Here’s what he had to say:

I want people to consider themselves a philanthropist no matter how much or how little they are giving. Even if you are giving $25, you are still a philanthropist. I advise people to figure out what cause they want to have an impact on, and take time doing research to find out the organization they feel is doing the best work on that problem. Then, make them your charitable partner for life. Continue to follow their progress, continue to learn about them, and continue to invest in them. You make a lot of inquiries before you buy a car or before you cast your vote for president – do the same thing before you cast your vote for a charity with your contribution.

1) How do I find the right charity for me?

Start with a broad search and narrow it from there. You can use websites like GreatNonprofits.org, Philanthropedia and GiveWell.org. They each have flaws. I say—use them, but don’t rely on them.

Then, do in-person interviews with your top two or three. Call the charity and ask for a tour or overview meeting. That’s why charities have development departments — to nurture and build relationships with donors. If you are going to make a long-term commitment to an organization, even if the money isn’t huge, you owe it to yourself to do this kind of research in the same way you would go to a dealership to test-drive a car.

I also recommend looking at a charity’s annual report. Does it inspire you? Does it seem to have a sense of mission, bravery, boldness — or is it cautious and formulaic? Check out Invisible Children, Share our Strength, and Charity Water to see examples of organizations that are inspiring, right down to their materials. Though in general, don’t just rely on a website.

2) Ask: what progress is the charity making toward its goals—and what metrics does it use to measure that?

Ask the charity to provide you with program data that tracks their activities — and ask how they measure their own progress. This question may be the most important of all — it really gets at what data they collect, how serious they are about that data collection, and how they shift behavior or strategy based on what the data is telling them.

But note, it doesn’t necessarily matter if the organization is effective. Some problems can be extremely difficult to solve, and you don’t want to punish the charities working on those problems — otherwise we’ll only get charities working on easy problems. Think about if you had asked Jonas Salk how effective he was one year before he found the cure for polio. He would not have been very effective at that point, but that doesn’t mean you would not have wanted to invest in him.

Bringing cold, hard business sense to running charities can help transform the philanthropic landscape for all and for the better, says Pallotta. “Overall, for each charity I give to, I ask myself if I believe in their business model and if I feel they have a bold future ahead of them,” he says.

Photos: James Duncan Davidson

Dan Pallotta created two huge charity initiatives — AIDS Rides bicycle journeys and Breast Cancer 3-Day events. These initiatives raised $108 million for HIV/AIDS and $194 million for breast cancer. Both had their best years in 2002 … and then Pallotta’s nonprofit went out of business.

In the final session of TED2013, Pallotta shares why that happened: Major sponsors pulled out following a slew of bad press over the idea that his organization was investing 40% of their gross into recruitment and customer service. The backlash came from our basic — and wrong — cultural understanding of charity.

“What we know about charity and the nonprofit sector is undermining the causes we believe in and our desire to change the world,” says Pallotta. We expect businesses and nonprofits to use “two separate rulebooks,” he suggests.

“Business will move the mass of humanity forward, but will always leave behind that 10% of the most disadvantaged and unlucky,” he says — which is why we need philanthropy and nonprofits. But couldn’t the nonprofit sector use the same strategies as the business world to grow their profits and give more money to the needy? After all, says Pallotta, “How do you monetize the prevention of violence against women?”

The nonprofit sector as we know it isn’t working. In the United States, poverty has been stuck at 12% for the last 40 years. Homelessness has not been solved in any major city, and we have no cure for cancer.

“Our social problems are gigantic in scale, our organizations are tiny up against them — and we have beliefs that keep them tiny,” says Pallotta, the president of Advertising for Humanity and author of Charity Case.

Pallotta outlines five ways in which nonprofits are handicapped in their mission to help people.

1. Compensation

“We have a visceral reaction to the idea of people making a lot of money helping others. Interestingly, we don’t have a visceral reaction to the idea that people should make a lot of money not helping other people,” says Pallotta. “It gives a stark, mutually exclusive choice between doing well for yourself and your family and doing well for world.”

For example, the average salary for a CEO of a hunger charity is $80K. Meanwhile the average salary for someone with an MBA, after ten years of school, is $400K.

“We send people marching from the nonprofit sector into the for-profit sector, because they’re not willing to make that kind of compromise,” says Pallotta. “Not a lot of people with $400K talent will make a $316K sacrifice every year.” And actually, it turns out it’s more financially advantageous for these talented business minds to take the big paycheck, give $100K to a hunger charity each year, reap the tax benefits and get the label of “philanthropist.”

2. Adveritsing and marketing

“We tell for-profits to spend, spend, spend on advertising,” says Pallotta, but nonprofits are expected not to advertise — unless the advertising space and airtime is donated. People want to see their money spent directly on the needy.

But Pallotta points out that money invested in advertising can be returned dramatically amplified. He uses his own initiatives as an example. Over nine years, more than 182,000 people participated in Pallotta’s AIDS Rides and Breast Cancer 3-Day events, raising a cummulative $581 million.

“We got that many people to participate because we bought full-page ads,” says Pallotta. “Do you know how many people we would have gotten if we advertised with fliers in the laundromat?”

Pallotta stresses that nonprofits need to be able to communicate with the public the incredible work that they are doing — and to ask for bold commitments in return. “People are yearning to be asked to use the full measure of their potential for somthing they care about,” he says.

3. Taking risks on new revenue ideas

Nonprofits are not allowed to try new things, says Pallotta, because public outcry sounds so quickly at a failure. As Pallotta found by using a different model of spending — experimentation is a big no-no for nonprofits.

“Nonprofits are reluctant to attempt any brave, daring new fundraising endeavors, because they’re scared their reputations will be dragged through the mud,” he says.

This fear kills innovation. And if nonprofits can’t try new things and grow — how can they possibly tackle problems of the size that our world has?

4. Time

On the same note, Pallotta points out that it took Amazon four years to turn a profit. While businesses are given time to build the infrastructure they need, non-profits are not afforded this luxury.

“If a non-profit had a dream of building at a magnificent scale, but it would require six years for the money to go to the needy, we would expect a crucifixion,” says Pallotta.

5. Profit to attract risk capital

This point is a simple one: nonprofits can’t go after capital, because they can’t be on the stock market. And how do you build scale without capital?

Pallotta stresses that the nonprofit sector is at an extreme disadvantage when compared with the for-profit sector. The difference is dramatic. Since 1970, 144 nonprofits have crossed the $50 million annual revenue barrier. In the same amount of the time, an astounding 46,136 for-profit businesses have surpassed that mark.

So how did this happen? Pallotta looks to American history for the answer. He shares how the Puritanical spirit saw self-interest as a ticket to hell. But charity was seen as the antidote, a way to do penance. “Financial interest was exiled from the realm of charity,” he says.

Today, Pallotta is horrified that only one question is used to evaluate a charity: What percentage of my donation goes to the cause versus overhead?

“It makes us think that overhead is a negative, that it is somehow not a part of ‘the cause,’” he says. “This forces organizations to forego what they need for growth.”

Pallotta shares how his organization used a more-business like model — taking $50K in initial funding for AIDS Rides and multiplying it to $108 million, and taking an $350K initial investment in Breast Cancer 3-Day walks and multiplying it to $194 million. Pallotta says that his organization could have gone the route of just giving the initial funding to research, but by investing in growth, they were able to give so much more.

“[And yet] 350 employees lost their jobs because they were labeled overhead,” says Palotta. “This is what happens when we confuse morality with frugality.”

Pallotta notes that charitable giving in the United States has remained stuck at 2% of the gross domestic product for the past four decades. What if, instead of requiring charities to tighten their belts, we let them grow and try to increase their marketshare?

Pallotta shows an interesting pie graph. Two percent of the US GDP equals $300 billion, with about $60 billion going to health and human services charities. But what if charitable giving could be boosted just 1%? That would be an extra $150 billion a year — just for health and human services charities.

“Our generation does not want its epithet to read, ‘We kept charity overhead low,’” concludes Pallotta. “We want it to read that we changed the world.”

And so next time you’re investigating at charity, he pleads: “Don’t ask about the size of their overhead — ask about the size of their dreams.”

Dan Pallotta’s TED Talk has been posted. Watch it here »

Most charities begin with a cause. That is not, however, the case for Movember, the global non-profit that asks men to grow moustaches for the month of November and, in the process, raise awareness for men’s health.

As Movember co-founder Adam Garone explained at TEDxToronto, his charity began with a random idea in a bar in 2003: could the moustache be made cool again? Because a  moustache is referred to as a “mo” in his native Australia, Garone and his brother decided to turn November into “Movember,” asking a group of 30 male friends to grow moustaches for the month.

Making it an annual tradition, the next year Garone decided to take inspiration from women’s groups that fundraise for breast cancer research. He approached the Prostate Cancer Foundation about forging a partnership. And while he was initially laughed out of a meeting, that year Movember donated $54,000 to the organization — its biggest gift ever. Garone recognized that Movember had big potential to bring attention to the under-discussed cause of men’s health.

“Every morning, I wake up and go, ‘My life is about a moustache,’” jokes Garone in this talk. “Essentially, I’m a moustache farmer and my season is November.”

To hear more about how Movember transformed from a fringe event to a worldwide movement that donated $126 million to men’s health organizations last year, watch Garone’s talk. And after the jump, read about how the TED staff is taking up the Movember cause.

This year, many TED staffers will be growing out moustaches, with the rest of the office supporting them, both financially and in spirit. Below, TED’s Jordan Reeves explains:

“It’s Movember! That’s right! You read it correctly. Movember. As their website explains, ‘During November each year, Movember is responsible for the sprouting of moustaches on thousands of men’s faces, in the US and around the world. With their Mo’s, these men raise vital awareness and funds for men’s health issues, specifically prostate and testicular cancer initiatives.’

This year, TED is participating in this incredibly ambitious and invaluable fundraiser. We’ll be doing fun things — a month long bake sale, a raffle, an election night party, a bingo night, and a series of giveaways for people who participate — and we hope to raise $5,000. While I don’t think that men’s health necessarily gets overlooked, I do think it’s not as prevalent in the world of fundraising. This is such an incredibly creative initiative  – a good cause done in a fun way. Stay tuned to our TEDnews Instagram and our Movember team page for progress on our Mo’s. Here are a few of our before images.”