Effective Altruism Forum
EA Forum

Hide table of contents
by Richenda
2 min read 1

12

LEANRethink Charity
Frontpage

LEAN Logo

Hello! I’m Richenda, Manager of LEAN (the Local Effective Altruism Network). In March I assumed responsibility for the project, having previously worked on it in 2015 and 2016 under Tom Ash. The aim of this post is to keep the EA community informed about our operations, and to share some of the goals we have for the future.

Who Are We?

LEAN is a Rethink Charity (formerly .impact) project dedicated to expanding the growth and accessibility of the EA movement. LEAN is a continuation of a grassroots initiative which first emerged in 2013, and it’s purpose is to provide material and strategic support for existing local EA groups, and to start new local groups. We presently support over 350 local groups around the world.

What Do We Do?

We offer a variety of services and tools to groups in the EA network.

Guidance & Expertise

  • In-depth advice and one-to-one support for local organisers across different communication channels

  • Guidance on how to start new groups

  • Resources for group growth and management

  • The annual survey of group organizers, which gathers information alongside .impact’s annual EA Survey (Click here for the last impact assessment)

  • Recommendations for possible group activities, such as donation decision events and career workshops

  • Conference calls, bringing local organisers together

  • The local EA group newsletter*

  • The Local Organisers Mentoring Programme

  • The use of our network to initiate connections between EAs who have common needs.

*Now in collaboration with CEA

Administrative

  • Maintaining a global, up-to-date group database

  • EA peer-to-peer fundraisers, which provide one of the most effective actions local groups can take (e.g. Living On Less, Christmas and birthdays)

  • Providing spaces for groups to communicate and share resources amongst each other, including our Facebook and Google groups

  • Overseeing the transition of email addresses and online profiles when groups change leaders

  • Local group seeding and activation.

Technical

Where We Are Headed

  1. LEAN will significantly expand the selection of resources available to groups by creating content backed by empirical and professional expertise.

  2. LEAN will diversify and fine tune the level of support offered in order to assist different kinds of groups and organisers at different stages of development.

  3. LEAN will coordinate concentrated efforts between local groups to take effective action, known as “Impact Missions.”

  4. LEAN will draw upon other Rethink Charity projects, like SHIC, to increase the opportunities for action available to local groups.

  5. LEAN will develop the EA Hub, with the view to improving user experience.

  6. LEAN will build on existing assessment procedures in order to optimise our impact.

  7. LEAN will be proactive in coordinating with other organisations in the EA outreach space, promoting efficient and coherent provision for local groups. We are presently collaborating on:

    1. Creating an EA-wide cooperation agreement for local groups

    2. Integrating distinct organisation databases of group records

    3. Centralising and standardising the materials available to local groups.

 

To receive support or to make an enquiry, contact the team through lean@eahub.org

You can also schedule a video call with Richenda here.

12

0
0

Reactions

0
0

More posts like this

Comments1


Sorted by
New & upvoted
Click to highlight new comments since:
DC3
0
0

Local group seeding and activation.

Thanks for this link. I may have raised this in a private channel, but I want to take the time to point out that based on anecdotal experience, I think LEAN & CEA shouldn't be seeding groups without taking the time to make sure the groups are mentored, managed by motivated individual(s), and grown to sustainability. I found my local group last year and it was essentially dilapidated. I felt a responsibility to run it but was mostly unsuccessful in establishing contact to obtain help managing it until some time in 2017. I'm predicting these kinds of problems will diminish at least somewhat now that LEAN & Rethink have full-time staff, the Mentoring program, more group calls, etc. :)

Reply
More from Richenda
31
Why Groups Should Consider Direct Work
Richenda
· · 12m read
23
23
93
Announcing EA Hub 2.0
2 authors
· · 3m read
18
18
View more
Curated and popular this week
Paul Present
 ·  · 28m read
 · 
Note: I am not a malaria expert. This is my best-faith attempt at answering a question that was bothering me, but this field is a large and complex field, and I’ve almost certainly misunderstood something somewhere along the way. Summary While the world made incredible progress in reducing malaria cases from 2000 to 2015, the past 10 years have seen malaria cases stop declining and start rising. I investigated potential reasons behind this increase through reading the existing literature and looking at publicly available data, and I identified three key factors explaining the rise: 1. Population Growth: Africa's population has increased by approximately 75% since 2000. This alone explains most of the increase in absolute case numbers, while cases per capita have remained relatively flat since 2015. 2. Stagnant Funding: After rapid growth starting in 2000, funding for malaria prevention plateaued around 2010. 3. Insecticide Resistance: Mosquitoes have become increasingly resistant to the insecticides used in bednets over the past 20 years. This has made older models of bednets less effective, although they still have some effect. Newer models of bednets developed in response to insecticide resistance are more effective but still not widely deployed.  I very crudely estimate that without any of these factors, there would be 55% fewer malaria cases in the world than what we see today. I think all three of these factors are roughly equally important in explaining the difference.  Alternative explanations like removal of PFAS, climate change, or invasive mosquito species don't appear to be major contributors.  Overall this investigation made me more convinced that bednets are an effective global health intervention.  Introduction In 2015, malaria rates were down, and EAs were celebrating. Giving What We Can posted this incredible gif showing the decrease in malaria cases across Africa since 2000: Giving What We Can said that > The reduction in malaria has be
LintzA
 ·  · 15m read
 · 
Cross-posted to Lesswrong Introduction Several developments over the past few months should cause you to re-evaluate what you are doing. These include: 1. Updates toward short timelines 2. The Trump presidency 3. The o1 (inference-time compute scaling) paradigm 4. Deepseek 5. Stargate/AI datacenter spending 6. Increased internal deployment 7. Absence of AI x-risk/safety considerations in mainstream AI discourse Taken together, these are enough to render many existing AI governance strategies obsolete (and probably some technical safety strategies too). There's a good chance we're entering crunch time and that should absolutely affect your theory of change and what you plan to work on. In this piece I try to give a quick summary of these developments and think through the broader implications these have for AI safety. At the end of the piece I give some quick initial thoughts on how these developments affect what safety-concerned folks should be prioritizing. These are early days and I expect many of my takes will shift, look forward to discussing in the comments!  Implications of recent developments Updates toward short timelines There’s general agreement that timelines are likely to be far shorter than most expected. Both Sam Altman and Dario Amodei have recently said they expect AGI within the next 3 years. Anecdotally, nearly everyone I know or have heard of who was expecting longer timelines has updated significantly toward short timelines (<5 years). E.g. Ajeya’s median estimate is that 99% of fully-remote jobs will be automatable in roughly 6-8 years, 5+ years earlier than her 2023 estimate. On a quick look, prediction markets seem to have shifted to short timelines (e.g. Metaculus[1] & Manifold appear to have roughly 2030 median timelines to AGI, though haven’t moved dramatically in recent months). We’ve consistently seen performance on benchmarks far exceed what most predicted. Most recently, Epoch was surprised to see OpenAI’s o3 model achi
Rory Fenton
 ·  · 6m read
 · 
Cross-posted from my blog. Contrary to my carefully crafted brand as a weak nerd, I go to a local CrossFit gym a few times a week. Every year, the gym raises funds for a scholarship for teens from lower-income families to attend their summer camp program. I don’t know how many Crossfit-interested low-income teens there are in my small town, but I’ll guess there are perhaps 2 of them who would benefit from the scholarship. After all, CrossFit is pretty niche, and the town is small. Helping youngsters get swole in the Pacific Northwest is not exactly as cost-effective as preventing malaria in Malawi. But I notice I feel drawn to supporting the scholarship anyway. Every time it pops in my head I think, “My money could fully solve this problem”. The camp only costs a few hundred dollars per kid and if there are just 2 kids who need support, I could give $500 and there would no longer be teenagers in my town who want to go to a CrossFit summer camp but can’t. Thanks to me, the hero, this problem would be entirely solved. 100%. That is not how most nonprofit work feels to me. You are only ever making small dents in important problems I want to work on big problems. Global poverty. Malaria. Everyone not suddenly dying. But if I’m honest, what I really want is to solve those problems. Me, personally, solve them. This is a continued source of frustration and sadness because I absolutely cannot solve those problems. Consider what else my $500 CrossFit scholarship might do: * I want to save lives, and USAID suddenly stops giving $7 billion a year to PEPFAR. So I give $500 to the Rapid Response Fund. My donation solves 0.000001% of the problem and I feel like I have failed. * I want to solve climate change, and getting to net zero will require stopping or removing emissions of 1,500 billion tons of carbon dioxide. I give $500 to a policy nonprofit that reduces emissions, in expectation, by 50 tons. My donation solves 0.000000003% of the problem and I feel like I have f
Relevant opportunities
23
Last week to apply for the Futurekind AI Fellowship! (deadline: April 1)
Jay Luong
· · 1m read
0
0
25
Out of This Box: The Last Musical (Written by Humans) - Crowdfunding!
GuyP
· · 7m read
0
0
38
Australians for AI Safety Launches New Election Campaign — Here's How You Can Help
Luke Freeman 🔸
· · 3m read
5
5
View more