Where is your Impact, Acumen Fund?
As someone who wants to be in the developing field, I have a respect for Acumen Fund’s work. Trying to allocate the money to those who work hard to eradicate poverty created a new trend in philanthropy, and I think it is a step in the right direction.
While I feel GlobalGiving is doing an amazing work providing small grassroots organizations a place to fundraise, I also feel the limit of charity. With charity, you cannot move a huge amount of capital (you can if you were a big charity, but most of them with strings attached).
At the same time, I am a little baffled by their presentation of “impact” on their website. Here are some of the things that are on my mind;
-Where IS the impact?
In all the portfolios, the impact is summarized in only a couple of sentences. Is there evaluation for the program? Did people benefit in the long run? Did they restore dignity, as the Fund’s mission statement? There is an in-depth case study paper by UMichigan, but it is not publicly accessible. Why aren’t they making it public? A couple of questions come to mind.
-And, where is the OVERALL impact?
According to their website, Acumen Fund invested $81 million to 72 social enterprises in 10 years. Awesome! Now, how many did they help to pull out of poverty? Did the communities’ income rise as a result of Acumen funded projects??
-Which method was more successful than others?
There are a several portfolios per area. Was there a better method than others? Is there a comparative study across cases/ countries?
The reason why I became such a doubter is because the new “elixir” of poverty reduction, which I wanted to get involved so badly, turned out to be not too effective.
Maybe all the questions are answered not on the website - maybe they are released to the investors. But if traditional aid was criticized for lack of transparency, I hope that Acumen will take another further step to disclosing the results of the enterprises as well.
