Is there even standard practices to audit the effectiveness of charity? No accountability means they will always operate like a black box, and I’ve always thought black boxes create misalignments.

Money goes in, and good feelings come out. It certainly serves a purpose, but not the intended one.

▲

input_sh 15 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Yes, it's called Form 990 and it is a requirement to publish it on a yearly basis to retain non-profit status. You can search for any US-registered NGO here for example: https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/

To put it in HN terms, this is what people here like to use to shit on Mozilla for how much they pay their executives while having zero insight into how much Firefox's for-profit competitors pay their executives.

▲

jlarocco 11 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> To put it in HN terms, this is what people here like to use to shit on Mozilla for how much they pay their executives while having zero insight into how much Firefox's for-profit competitors pay their executives.

It's dubious to say Google "competes" with Mozilla, because they pay Mozilla to develop Firefox to avoid antitrust issues, but it's easy enough to find CEO compensation for public companies.

https://www.sec.gov/answers/execcomp.htm

Of course people have published the numbers for well known companies:

https://www.jagranjosh.com/general-knowledge/highest-paid-ce...

Also, "Other companies pay their CEOs ridiculous amounts, so we're going to," is a poor justification, and just shows Mozilla execs are there to enrich themselves, and don't really care about the browser or community. But I guess they can't spend all of the money on Pocket and AI.

▲

ivape 14 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Hmmm. But who can audit the reporting? Evidently, this looks like something they can manipulate.

Is the bottom line roughly:

Money received: 1000

Money used for good: 800

Labor: 200

Is that it?

Because I can assure you, that will not turn out well.

▲

sgerenser 14 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The IRS can audit the reporting, and if you lie on egregiously you can even go to jail. Granted that is very rare, and we currently have an anti-IRS administration, but that’s the basic enforcement mechanism.

	▲	Avicebron 14 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Ok, so what your describing is a pinky promise. I'm guessing enforcement requires people which is magically _too expensive_ and therefore worthless.

▲

input_sh 13 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> But who can audit the reporting?

The same people that audit your taxes, roughly with the same consequences for lying. Except the IRS is far more likely to send unannounced auditors to NGOs than they are to send them to for-profit companies or individuals. It's more of a hassle to get/retain tax-free status than it is to simply pay your taxes like everyone else (as it should be).

> Is that it?

Let me guess: you haven't clicked on "view filing", which leads to a roughly 20-pages-long document.

	▲	ivape 12 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Caught me :)

▲

14 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]