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

OpenStreetMap Foundation

Supports, but does not control, OpenStreetMap’s community-run mapping infrastructure and freely reusable geographic data.

Visit the organization ↗

Systemic Altruism practice potential: 86–96/100
90% of weighted axes reviewed. A mechanism hypothesis, not proven effectiveness or a donation recommendation.

Who this work enables

Tools & support for charities: Common geographic-data and website infrastructure usable by humanitarian groups and other public-interest implementers.

Open-source evidence · license checked

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

Coordination · Gatekeepers — editorial, partial alignment.

Common geographic references can connect work across organizations and reduce dependence on closed mapping infrastructure. This does not establish local inclusion, accurate maps or control by affected people.

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 geographic-data and community infrastructure

Six dimensions, with rationale

Structural depth

4 / 4

Institutional support for a shared mapping commons reduces dependence on individually commissioned or closed geographic infrastructure.

Institutional reach

4 / 4

A global map and common infrastructure have cross-sector public-interest application; actual local coverage and usefulness vary.

Durability

3 / 4

Community infrastructure and reusable data can outlast individual grants, but upkeep, moderation and contributor health remain necessary.

Scalability

4 / 4

The checked website code permits reuse, while map-data licensing, tile policies, data quality and operating costs remain separate.

Funding additionality

Unreviewed

Unknown: current marginal funding, restricted allocations, delivery capacity and a credible counterfactual have not been audited.

Community agency

Unreviewed

Unknown: open source, consultations, memberships or participation do not by themselves establish audited consequential decision rights for affected communities.

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

Does foundation support improve sustained reliability, equitable coverage and useful nonprofit reuse beyond alternative support arrangements after maintenance and community costs are included?

Review confidence: Moderate for documented design; low for systemic attribution. OSMF’s community/infrastructure support, with the community website as a checked code example. OSMF supports rather than controls the project and is distinct from Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team.

What remains uncertain

The foundation is an international nonprofit, not assumed here to be a registered UK charity or US-deductible recipient. Community website code, geographic database licenses, tile services and trademarks differ. Neither OSMF nor HOT receives sole attribution for volunteer mapping or downstream humanitarian outcomes.

Sources to inspect

Propose a sourced correction →

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