Why is the Hewlett Foundation still considering support for GiveWell, asks Kelly Kleiman on her blog, The Nonprofiteer.

In a New York Times’ article on the GiveWell board’s decision to reprimand the second of the group’s founders for misrepresenting himself on the Internet, a Hewlett official is quoted as saying the foundation is “going to wait and see” but “we think the concept has a lot of value.”

Ms. Kleiman takes issue with that notion. “Would that be the concept that it might be relevant to funding decisions if a group devoted to judging charities based on transparency and management excellence proves itself deceptive and ill-managed?,” she asks. “Or the concept that someone might be concerned about entrusting charitable reputations to an organization whose self-promotion included anonymous attacks on the reputations of its charitable competitors?”

What do you think? Does GiveWell still deserve to garner interest from donors? Or is its credibility gone?

(To read more about GiveWell, see this article from The Chronicle of Philanthropy.)