That is an organization judging it's own success while a program is accelerating.

And if you measure poverty by how much money someone has and then give them money saying you've fixed poverty is tautology.

If your plan is to build a client state on perpetual welfare, well sure it's easy to be successful. But you can never leave and it's very possible that if you do leave things will be worse than if you had done nothing at all.

Whereas if you distribute a bunch of goats and chickens among a community and spread some education about raising goats and chickens, there's a good chance you've made a one shot permanent improvement to the quality of life of a community.

The criticism for giving direct aid in food and cash isn't that things are worse for the people you're giving them to while you're giving it to them... it's that you wreck the local economy for food and everything else because nobody can sell food when food is free and you can't price things correctly when money is pouring in. The money always stops and the aftermath is a disaster.