Animal Charity Evaluators started as an 80,000 Hours project
More precisely, it was started by a student who came to volunteer in Oxford one summer, had the idea and then created it over that summer and afterwards as his brainchild, fundraising to start it as a staffed-up charity, etc. CEA hosted a number of students who came to do volunteer work over summers and other free periods. So while it was labelled an 80,000 Hours project, it’s appropriate to use it as an example of someone with little relevant experience starting a charity.
To explain why I downvoted, I don’t like this general kind of response (i.e. “shouldn’t this be part of large organisation X?”):
It discourages people from actually doing things, for several reasons.
Dealing with a large organisation before starting the work takes time and is offputting, and many ideas will peter out or run into the ground if people are pressured to always do this.
It’s quite a negative response to give to someone trying to start something.
It can involve unhealthy deference to or hero worship of large organisations.
There are rarely strong reasons for a large organization to take over the projects that people suggest they do, and cross-linking often allows all the same benefits.
It encourages a ‘turf’ mentality.
Having many people experiment with many approaches is valuable, and lets us see which work.