Effective Altruism Forum
EA Forum

Hide table of contents
by Baxter Bullock
3 min read 0

5

Rethink CharityStudents for High-Impact Charity
Frontpage

Better late than never!

As is the goal with everything SHIC publishes, this post is meant to be accessible to those unfamiliar with Effective Altruism. Read the full post here: http://www.shicschools.org/single-post/2017/05/15/SHIC-Recommended-Charities-2017

--------

Why SHIC is updating its list

When Students for High-Impact Charity (SHIC) was founded in early 2016, we knew that the organization would need to go beyond teaching about which factors make a charity high-impact. We would offer a list of recommended charities so that those who are new to the concepts we espouse would be provided tangible examples of causes and charities that are among the best in the world (by metrics related to reducing suffering). The list was not meant to be comprehensive of all high-impact charities, but we felt it was adequately representative (without feeling overwhelming) of causes to be covered by SHIC’s material.

At the end of 2016, both Animal Charity Evaluators (ACE) and GiveWell, two reputable charity evaluators, updated their top recommendations for the giving season. You can find GiveWell’s latest recommendations here and ACE’s here.

Since then, we’ve decided reevaluate SHIC’s list of recommended charities. Though SHIC will continue to maintain a relatively broad stance with regards to cause selection, we would still like to recommend charities front and center that adequately represent the values we see as critical to being high-impact, as we feel it’s important to give students concrete examples as models for highly effective charities.  

In addition, SHIC has always maintained the policy of recommending charities making direct impact rather than “meta-charities” (charities whose primary purpose includes supporting other specific charities). This is because SHIC aims to introduce effective giving to an audience who may be new to the concept of charity evaluators. Recommending meta-charities takes students a step away from direct impact.

The SHIC program will nonetheless continue promoting selected charity evaluators and meta-charities through our curriculum. We will maintain focus on the importance of forming one’s own opinion based on critical thinking, while providing the tools and roadmaps that can aid in forming those conclusions.

Moreover, supporting carefully chosen charities signals the implicit value of specific ethical approaches we endorse and would like to instill within students as a logical foundation for doing the most good in the world. Some of these concepts include:

  • Interventions with strong evidence for high cost-effectiveness are preferable when such data are is available.

  • When cost-effectiveness information is unavailable, assess a cause based on its counterfactual impact, solvability, and neglectedness.

  • If we value all human lives equally, we’re generally better off supporting interventions in developing countries than developed ones.

  • Non-human animal lives and lives in the future are important to consider when prioritizing causes.

  • When possible, we should respect the preferences of those we’re aiming to help. Oftentimes the global poor can best identify their own self-interests.

  • Factory farming is by far the greatest source of non-human animal suffering currently caused by humans.

  • It’s important to recognize we don’t have all the answers and to continually update our viewpoints based on new evidence.

Charities remaining on the list

From our original list, the following charities will remain among SHIC’s Recommended Charities:

  • The Against Malaria Foundation - provides long-lasting insecticide-treated bednets.

  • Mercy for Animals - spreads awareness about the horrors of factory farming.

  • Cool Earth - forms partnerships with villages bordering rainforests to determine the best ways to protect them.

  • Schistosomiasis Control Initiative - implements deworming programs to rid children of neglected tropical diseases.

  • GiveDirectly - provides unconditional cash transfers to help people escape poverty.

  • Development Media International -  promotes healthy living in developing countries through radio programming.

  • Future of Humanity Institute - researches potential causes of and solutions to global catastrophic risks.

  • Living Goods - employees locals in developing countries to sell affordable health-related items door-to-door.

Charities added to the list

The following charities will be added to SHIC’s list of Recommended Charities:

  • Malaria Consortium - for their seasonal malaria chemoprevention program.

  • Project Healthy Children - food nutrient fortification.

  • The Humane League - interventions including corporate outreach for veganism.

  • The Good Food Institute - promotion and development of meat/dairy alternatives.

  • Machine Intelligence Research Institute - studying responsible implementation of artificial intelligence.

To make our growing list of charities more digestible, we have divided charities into their respective cause areas. We recognize that some charities could fall into multiple subgroups, but don’t see this as significant concern. This division allows visitors/participants to pick up on the general themes we endorse much more easily than if we simply listed the charities.

Disease Prevention

  • Against Malaria Foundation

  • Schistosomiasis Control Initiative

  • Malaria Consortium

  • Project Healthy Children

Human Empowerment

  • GiveDirectly

  • Development Media International

  • Living Goods

Animal Welfare

  • Mercy for Animals

  • The Humane League

  • The Good Food Institute

Environmental and Catastrophic Risk

  • Cool Earth

  • Future of Humanity Institute

  • Machine Intelligence Research Institute

--------

For more, including our reasoning for choosing to include or exclude specific charities in/from our list, read the full post here.

5

0
0

Reactions

0
0

More posts like this

Comments


No comments on this post yet.
Be the first to respond.
More from Baxter Bullock
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
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
 ·  · 8m read
 · 
In my past year as a grantmaker in the global health and wellbeing (GHW) meta space at Open Philanthropy, I've identified some exciting ideas that could fill existing gaps. While these initiatives have significant potential, they require more active development and support to move forward.  The ideas I think could have the highest impact are:  1. Government placements/secondments in key GHW areas (e.g. international development), and 2. Expanded (ultra) high-net-worth ([U]HNW) advising Each of these ideas needs a very specific type of leadership and/or structure. More accessible options I’m excited about — particularly for students or recent graduates — could involve virtual GHW courses or action-focused student groups.  I can’t commit to supporting any particular project based on these ideas ahead of time, because the likelihood of success would heavily depend on details (including the people leading the project). Still, I thought it would be helpful to articulate a few of the ideas I’ve been considering.  I’d love to hear your thoughts, both on these ideas and any other gaps you see in the space! Introduction I’m Mel, a Senior Program Associate at Open Philanthropy, where I lead grantmaking for the Effective Giving and Careers program[1] (you can read more about the program and our current strategy here). Throughout my time in this role, I’ve encountered great ideas, but have also noticed gaps in the space. This post shares a list of projects I’d like to see pursued, and would potentially want to support. These ideas are drawn from existing efforts in other areas (e.g., projects supported by our GCRCB team), suggestions from conversations and materials I’ve engaged with, and my general intuition. They aren’t meant to be a definitive roadmap, but rather a starting point for discussion. At the moment, I don’t have capacity to more actively explore these ideas and find the right founders for related projects. That may change, but for now, I’m interested in
Relevant opportunities
6
EAGxNordics in Norway: apply now
Amalie Farestvedt 🔸
· · 3m read
0
0
23
Last week to apply for the Futurekind AI Fellowship! (deadline: April 1)
Jay Luong
· · 1m read
0
0
45
Australians for AI Safety Launches New Election Campaign — Here's How You Can Help
Luke Freeman 🔸
· · 3m read
5
5
View more