Faves for this Web page

• white3085 - Mar 23 2008 | global health

  İmportant and useful information
• tigerexotique - Mar 11 2008 | health, research, money

  Fantastic article. While I believe that WHO does a phenomenal job in maintaining a high level of public health standards for all nations, let's face it...it's still a bureaucracy. We know bureaucracies are mostly slow, and for the large part inefficient since there are no "market solutions". But with a NGO structured like the Gates Foundation (more a for-profit business model than the typical NGO), it is driven by the market...there is a supply and demand for better health systems, addressing public health concerns, and cutting edge research.

  While the Gates Foundation may appear monopolistic, in the sector of non-profits, I think it encourages more, generous philanthropy and competition -- isn't that better for non-profits in the end? After all, one of the biggest downfalls of non-profits, and reasons why many of them wither away is that they are bad managers of monetary and human resources, thereby making them less efficient.

  Quoted: The audacity of the Gates Foundation may have unintended consequences, but things would be worse if UN bureaucracies still dominated the field

  • hbhanoo - Mar 12 2008
    

    cool article.

  • tigerexotique - Mar 12 2008
    

    thanks! for me, it's very helpful to have both sides of how philanthropy works...since clearly it's becoming more of a business of "doing good" than just doing good.

Votes for this web page

• white3085
• SenorCoconut
• inform36
• rnstern