Manifund Let 340 Strangers Hand Out $200,000 to Charity

Back in late 2024, an organization called Manifund tried something unusual. Instead of having a small panel of experts pick which community projects deserved money, it handed $200,000 to 340 everyday members of the Effective Altruism community (a movement focused on doing the most good with each dollar) and let them decide. Half the money — $100,000 — was given out directly to those 340 people to donate as they saw fit. The other half was used to match their choices. An anonymous donor supplied the cash, and organizers made a point of noting it was not connected to FTX, the collapsed crypto exchange that had funded many EA projects.

The direct payments worked like a loyalty card. Anyone who filled out a two-minute form could claim between $100 and $800 to donate, based on how they had contributed: giving 10% of their income to charity, organizing a local group, volunteering at a conference, or being active on the community's online forum. Most claims were $100 each. The goal was to reward many different kinds of contribution, not just the famous names. It worked well enough that 300 more people ended up on a waiting list.

The second half used a system called quadratic funding, which is designed so that a project with 100 small supporters beats a project with one rich backer. In theory, that spreads money more fairly. In practice, organizers admitted it was only "okay." The match money still flowed heavily to the most popular projects — one project, Lightcone, received about two dollars of matching money for every dollar donated, far above the rest.

The big lesson: lowering the amounts would let more people take part. Organizers say they would happily do it again, and hinted they might even hold a public vote on what the organization should do next. The experiment offers a small but real test case for a bigger question — what happens when you trust a crowd instead of a committee with a checkbook.