Systemic Altruism
← Back to the cohort
Justice & public goodsPreliminary editorial review

Democracy Club

Builds UK candidate and polling-place data services that civil-society organizations can incorporate into their own voter information.

Visit the organization ↗

Systemic Altruism practice potential: 68–78/100
90% of weighted axes reviewed. A mechanism hypothesis, not proven effectiveness or a donation recommendation.

Who this work enables

Tools & support for charities: Shared candidate-data software and election-information services usable by civic organizations and public-interest developers.

Open-source evidence · license checked

  • YourNextRepresentative — AGPL-3.0 license file. Organization’s role: maintainer.
    Named candidate-database software license inspected. Candidate records, geographic data, other Democracy Club projects and hosted/API terms must be checked separately; source availability is not a guarantee of timely or accurate election information. License-file snapshot: dba13ed2ddf783ee8118c6a581dbf75305f816a3.

License checked 2026-10-27. This is not a security audit, proof of current support or effectiveness, or a promise of free hosting. A sponsor or steward is not necessarily the sole developer. Unchecked profiles are not evidence of closed code. No extra score points are added.

Humanity’s Checklist source match

Gatekeepers · Coordination — editorial, partial alignment.

Common election data can reduce duplicated collection and make civic information easier to build on. Reliable information is not proof of increased turnout or more accountable representation.

Explicit checklist adoption: not verified. A mechanism match is not an affiliation, endorsement, evidence of effectiveness or a scoring bonus. Read the practice.

Focus classification: 2026-10-27. Based on the organization’s dated official sources below; earlier axis-review dates are unchanged.

Compare alternatives for a funder →

The proposed pathway

Shared election information and data infrastructure for civic implementers

Six dimensions, with rationale

Structural depth

3 / 4

Reduces information and implementation barriers to democratic participation without itself changing electoral representation rules.

Institutional reach

3 / 4

Common data can support many civic organizations and voters, but the documented infrastructure is principally UK election-specific.

Durability

2 / 4

Election data becomes stale quickly and requires repeated collection and correction; retained code does not eliminate ongoing operational needs.

Scalability

4 / 4

APIs, downloadable data and common code enable reuse, while other jurisdictions require new source relationships, coverage and quality checks.

Funding additionality

Unreviewed

Unknown: current contract income, maintenance capacity, unfunded data gaps and the donation counterfactual relative to other civic information services were not audited.

Community agency

Unreviewed

Unknown: volunteer contributions and publicly accessible information do not establish affected voters’ control over organizational priorities or data decisions.

Evidence and selection

Organization reported; current primary mechanism sources inspected and named license file checked

Illustrative inclusion to examine this mechanism. Inclusion is not an external recommendation or a verified comparative ranking.

A testable next question

Do additional data-quality investments measurably reduce incorrect or missing voter information for underserved users beyond existing official and civic alternatives?

Review confidence: Moderate for documented design; low for systemic attribution. The UK Community Interest Company, number 09461226, and its election-data infrastructure; CIC status is not presented as registered-charity status or US tax deductibility.

What remains uncertain

Registration as a CIC is not a charity recommendation. Incorrect or incomplete election data can cause harm; live coverage, accessibility and official information must be checked for each use. Software, candidate data and API/service terms are distinct.

Sources to inspect

Propose a sourced correction →

Axis review: 2026-10-27 · weighting method v0.2 (2026-10-26) · Method, conflicts and coverage