There is so much room to be better at funding nonprofits than donors currently are. Especially big donors, which are governments or might as well be. Imagine if your startup had to raise money from a government agency. That's what your friends running nonprofits are up against.
-
I'm talking about improving the interface between donors and nonprofits, which would do both. At the moment, big donors are brutally bureaucratic and micromanaging, and nonprofits have no way to push back against them. There isn't the balance of forces you see in business.
This imbalance means the way the nonprofits operate is dictated by the big donors. But that is not good for either of them. And it burns out the founders of nonprofits, who grit their teeth and bear it for as long as they can, then leave.
-
-
Maybe more small donors is the answer.
@Charityvest (YC S20) is doing good work there. cc@StephenKumpThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@AngelaRastegar and I tried and failed at this five years ago with@AgoraForGood It’s not a UI problem it’s an incentive problem. No one in the non profit industry really wants transparency or accountability ¯\_(ツ)_/¯Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Working on this. My thesis is that no “donor-centric” experience exists — every digital platform is centered around the recipient. People are willing to give. They just need the proper direct, frictionless marketplace to do so!
-
By bucketing grassroots organizations under the cause they’re associated with, it’s much easier for an individual to give to an impact in one click (or connect with the org specifically)pic.twitter.com/VURbpxgaQy
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.