However, because we expect the approach of grantmakers/​evaluators to change more slowly than the work/​programs of an individual charity, we are not comfortable relying on the information we used last year without undertaking a reinvestigation,[1] which we don’t expect to do (see below)
I think the rate of change is overwhelmingly a function of size, not of whether it respects grantmakers/​evaluators or work/​programs. I would expect THL’s work/​program to change more slowly than the Animal Welfare Fund. In any case, I agree with your decision of not recommending THL. As you say, it is more consistent with the scope of your project:
We generally base our charity and fund recommendations on our evaluating evaluators project, for reasons explained here. This year, the evaluators and grantmakers we’ll rely on – based on our evaluations – will be EA Funds’ Animal Welfare Fund and ACE’s Movement Grants, and neither of these currently recommends THL as a charity (as neither makes charity recommendations).
I think the rate of change is overwhelmingly a function of size, not of whether it respects grantmakers/​evaluators or work/​programs. I would expect THL’s work/​program to change more slowly than the Animal Welfare Fund. In any case, I agree with your decision of not recommending THL. As you say, it is more consistent with the scope of your project: