To expand on your understanding, VillageReach is a hybrid social enterprise aiming to increase access to essential and basic healthcare services in rural and under-served communities. We call ourselves a hybrid organization because we try to effect this goal of increasing healthcare access by approaching it in three ways: supply chain logistics, information technology, and social business. Let me provide some context.

In Mozambique, VillageReach’s Health Systems Group has developed a locally appropriate logistics platform/model that re-structures the supply chain of critical vaccines and associated medical supplies to rural health centers. This logistics model was introduced to more reliably distribute these medical supplies to where they need to be, when they need to be.

To function intelligently and efficiently, supply chains rely on information management in order to optimize performance. Therefore, VillageReach’s Information Systems Group developed a Management Information System (vrMIS) to provide critical performance data and health statistics to managers and distribution staff.

Lastly and demonstrating the third approach, VillageReach’s Social Business Group launched (in partnership with a local NGO) a socially missioned for-profit LPG distributor business (VidaGas) to provide LPG to the refrigerators at these rural health centers needed to keep temperature-sensitive vaccines.

VillageReach’s approach focuses on strengthening the health system (through these three methods) which is often the most challenging but the most crucial and effective road to sustainable impact.

Nick Amland
Administrative and Program Assistant
VillageReach

I have an alternative suggestion. In the short term at least, I think there aren’t many development organisations who can be clear that they are making systematic change and measurable impact – whereas the competition among the big organizations with nice stories and “personal connections” is much more intense. Perhaps as a small organisation looking to grow, you’d be better off to target the less competitive market? It seems like you’re doing pretty well there already. I for one recently made a donation to VillageReach (my first significant donation to charity for some years) after reading about how you impressed the people at GiveWell – which is not easily done!

I agree with the above comments about using both techniques to appeal to people who are potential and continuing donors. Personally, I would like to hear stories of specific projects that were undertaken at particular villages.

Because VillageReach is a more complex organization and does not focus on only one area (food aid, mosquito nets, education, etc.) it would be nice to have a simple explanation for what you do. From my understanding, your organization works to improve the infastructure in rural communities of less developed countries so that people can have easier access to health care. But how in concrete terms is that done? Are medical supplies distributed? Are vehicles outfitted so they can transport more essential equipment?

For the person relatively uninformed about the ins and outs of extreme poverty who just wants to help (including me) it’s easy to understand when your donation goes to, say, a bag of rice, or a malaria vaccine for a child, but harder to grasp supply chain logistics and social business platforms (I’m trying!). Your rating on GiveWell and your cost-effectiveness is what sold me.

Hope this helps.

Moving on, to address this dilemma, I believe each approach is necessary, as Dr. Singer mentions above. However, in contrast to Dr. Singer, I believe that utilizing each approach simultaneously could be effective. For example, if you are targeting the general public with a flyer or email of some sort, then attracting their attention with an identifiable person would, undoubtedly, be the most effective method of the two. Additionally, if you were to supplement that same piece of awareness with the message of social enterprise, you could potentially create a more thoroughly-aware audience who you’ve now triggered an emotional response in, as well as something logical to rationalization or consider.

I believe this could work particularly well if the logical half was related back to the emotions felt from the identifiable person by connecting the two in a way that demonstrates how drastically social enterprise affects the life of the identifiable person. It’s like saying, “Save this child now, and…” through community infrastructure, “… prevent further suffering in the future.”

It seems the issue is one of “generations.” You appeal to the impact on children, but they are our future generations. And it’s not just systems building and social change, it’s the evolution of a nation.

You need to continually approach your mission from different angles so you don’t lose the chance to describe the complicated and sophisticated nature of what you do. And as you suggest, you should tailor the message to the donor.

Nothing is as black or white we would like it to be….but the nuances can be brought to life by the stories your organization can tell so well. You can “write about the power of an identifiable victim.”

So it seems to me that you need a development organization that is nimble on its feet, that can adjust the message, combine the message into one that properly states a call for action in terms of images that evoke an emotional response and that draws one into a position of logical thinking.

So you shouldn’t change your message, but adapt it to give a more balanced picture of stories and systems.