The first 32 winners of the Pepsi Refresh Project were announced at the end of March, and the initial distribution of $1.3m (£746,000) to a range of projects nominated and voted for by consumers has been widely judged a success.

The ‘Refresh’ project invites all legal residents of the 50 US states, aged 13 or over, to participate in helping to distribute a global total of $20m (£13m). Individuals, non-profits and pro-social businesses are invited to go online and submit details of ideas that can make a positive impact in the community. One thousand ideas per month are voted on, and each month up to $1.3m is distributed as a result of this crowdsourcing exercise, including two grants of $250,000 (£163,000), 10 grants of $50,000 (£32,000), 10 grants of $25,000 (£16,000), and 10 grants of $5,000 (£3,250). According to the Chronicle of Philanthropy, the first tranche of winners include $250,000 to established charity brands such as Teach First America and $25,000 to an initiative by a 14-year-old student in Illinois, seeking funding to improve the energy efficiency of school buses.

This high-profile scheme was funded in part by the company foregoing its traditional big budget advertising during the US Super Bowl, and is unusual in being explicitly led by the marketing department, rather than the community or philanthropic arm of the corporation.

In the light of other company’s uneven attempts to enlist the wisdom of crowds to distribute philanthropic dollars, such as J P Morgan which attracted complaints of attempting to rig the competition. Pepsi is judged to have successfully negotiated potential minefields in this approach, according to The Chronicle. The relative success of this initiative may be due to the winners’ package including support to help turn ideas into reality, such as connecting grantees with organisations that can provide specialised assistance and input from a media company to communicate their progress to the public.

The Refresh Project is not only restricted to input from US consumers, the beneficiaries of funded projects cannot be overseas: all applications must be submitted by US residents and must benefit projects taking place and serving the US.

Whilst Pepsi has not expressed any intention of expanding the project to the UK, the positive publicity generated by this scheme, and the potential marketing returns, may mean it eventually comes to our shores. ‘Digital philanthropy’ is at an earlier stage on this side of the Atlantic, as discussed in Philanthropy UK’s March 2010 newsletter . It would be interesting to see what impact one major online corporate charity campaign could have in unleashing the potential of e-philanthropy on our real and virtual shores.