Effective giving

New Shortform New Post
Sorted by New & upvoted, Posts collapsed


SOME TAKES ON PATIENT PHILANTHROPY Epistemic status: I’ve done work suggesting that AI risk funders be spending at a higher rate [https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/s/yZXNkf5uGBWzGfJzd], and I'm confident in this result. The other takes are less informed! I discuss * Whether I think we should be spending less now * Useful definitions of patient philanthropy * Being specific about empirical beliefs that push for more patience   * When patient philanthropy is counterfactual * Opportunities for donation trading between patient and non-patient donors WHETHER I THINK WE SHOULD BE SPENDING LESS NOW In principle I think the effective giving community could be in a situation where we should marginally be saving/investing more than we currently do (being ‘patient’).  However, I don’t think we’re in such a situation and in fact believe the opposite. My main crux is AI timelines; if I thought that AGI was less likely than not to arrive this century, then I would almost certainly believe that the community should marginally be spending less now.  USEFUL DEFINITIONS OF PATIENT PHILANTHROPY I think patient philanthropy could be thought of as saying one of: 1. The community is spending at the optimal rate  - let’s create a place to save/invest so ensure we don’t (mistakenly) overspend and keep our funds secure. 2. The community is spending above the optimal rate - let’s push for more savings on the margin, and create a place to save/invest and give later I don’t think we should call (1) patient philanthropy. Large funders (e.g. Open Philanthropy) already do some form of (1) by just not spending all their capital all this year. Doing (1) is instrumentally useful for the community and is necessary in any case where the community is not spending all of its capital this year. I like (2) a lot more. This definition is relative to the community’s current spending rate and could be intuitively ‘impatient’. Throughout, I’ll use ‘patient’ to refer to (2): t
WELCOME TO THE EFFECTIVE GIVING SUBFORUM! This is a dedicated space for discussions about effective giving.  Get involved: * ❤️  Donate via Giving What We Can [https://www.givingwhatwecan.org/giving-season] * Join the discussion * Share where you're donating [https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/LNbzDCgCH2py3cnJv/where-are-you-donating-this-year-and-why-open-thread] this giving season — and why! * Start a new thread in this subforum[1] * Ask questions about donation decisions * Discuss strategic considerations about giving * Explore other opportunities for donating or raising money * Explore updated giving recommendations from GiveWell [https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/NeK9XYY2mDsH5bJdD/our-recommendations-for-giving-in-2022], Animal Charity Evaluators [https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/cGn5HrDKdCkaf3REy/announcing-our-2022-charity-recommendations], Giving What We Can [https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/ebN8eB7DoN2Frd7Wy/announcing-gwwc-s-new-giving-recommendations], and Happier Lives Institute [https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/uY5SwjHTXgTaWC85f/don-t-just-give-well-give-wellbys-hli-s-2022-charity] * Book an effective giving talk [https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/cNHbgp2MsGRZBAqjG/book-a-corporate-event-for-giving-season] at your workplace * Give the Forum team feedback about this beta subforum * Reach us at forum@centreforeffectivealtruism.org [forum@centreforeffectivealtruism.org]  or comment on this post [https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/fLYiwuxyFF9q3pe6B/effective-giving-subforum-and-other-updates-bonus-forum]. 1. ^ Threads can be casual! This will only appear in this subforum or for people who've joined the subforum. 
Hi everyone, I am Jia, co-founder of Shamiri Health, an affordable mental health start-up in Kenya. I am thinking of writing up something on the DALY cost-effectiveness of investing in our company. I am very new to the community, and I wonder if I can solicit some suggestions on what is a good framework to use to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of impact investment into Healthcare companies. I think there could be two ways to go about this: 1) take an investment amount, and using some cashflow modeling, we can figure out how many users we can reach with that investment and calculate based on the largest user base we can reach, with the investment amount; or 2) we can do a comparative analysis with another more mature company in a different country, and use its % of population reach as our "terminal impact reach". Then, use that terminal user base as the base of the calculation.  The first approach is no doubt more conservative, but the latter, in my opinion, is the true impact counterfactual. Without the investment, we will likely not be able to raise enough funding since our TAM is not particularly attractive for non-impact investors. The challenge to using the latter is the "likelihood of success" of us carrying out the plan to reach our terminal user base. How would you go about this "likelihood number"? I would think it varies case by case, and one should factor in the team, the business model, the user goal, and the market, which is closer to venture capital's model of evaluating companies. What is the average number for impact ventures to succeed?  TLDR:  1. What is the counterfactual of impact investing? The immediate DALY that could be averted or the terminal DALY that could be averted? 2. What is the average success rate of impact healthcare ventures to reach their impact goal?
PROJECT IDEA: 'COST TO SAVE A LIFE' INTERACTIVE CALCULATOR PROMOTION What about making and promoting a ‘how much does it cost to save a life’ quiz and calculator.  This could be adjustable/customizable (in my country, around the world, of an infant/child/adult, counting ‘value added life years’ etc.) … and trying to make it go viral (or at least bacterial) as in the ‘how rich am I’ [https://howrichami.givingwhatwecan.org/how-rich-am-i] calculator?  The case  1. People might really be interested in this… it’s super-compelling (a bit click-baity, maybe, but the payoff is not click bait)! 2. May make some news headlines too (it’s an “easy story” for media people, asks a question people can engage with, etc. … ’how much does it cost to save a life? find out after the break!) 3. if people do think it’s much cheaper than it is, as some studies suggest [https://www.givewell.org/cost-to-save-a-life], it would probably be good to change this conception… to help us build a reality-based impact-based evidence-based community and society of donors 4. similarly, it could get people thinking about ‘how to really measure impact’ --> consider EA-aligned evaluations more seriously While GiveWell has a page with a lot of tech details [https://www.givewell.org/cost-to-save-a-life], but it’s not compelling or interactive  in the way I suggest above, and I doubt  they market it heavily. GWWC probably doesn't have the design/engineering time for this (not to mention refining this for accuracy and communication).  But if someone else (UX design, research support, IT) could do the legwork I think they might be very happy to host it.  It could also mesh well with academic-linked research so I may have  some ‘Meta academic support ads’ funds that could work with this.   Tags/backlinks (~testing out this new feature)  @GiveWell [https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/users/givewell?mention=user]  @Giving What We Can [https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/u
Two houses (the forum and EA twitter), both alike in dignity, are being brought together in a time of great need. We're at $35,980 on our fundraiser [https://www.givingwhatwecan.org/fundraisers/ea-meme-2022] for GiveWell and ACE and there are only 3 days left, please donate! Especially if you have $44,020 laying around and you want to see Dustin on the 80k podcast disclaimer: *long discussion of counterfactualness and tax implications*
I thought we could do a thread for Giving What We Can pledgers and lessons learnt or insights since pledging!  I'll go first: I was actually really worried about how donating 10% would feel, as well as it's impact on my finances - but actually it's made me much less stressed about money - to know I can still have a great standard of living with 10% less. It's actually changed the way I see money and finances and has helped me think about how I can increase my giving in future years.
MY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SMALL DONORS I think there are benefits to thinking about where to give (fun, having engagement with the community, skill building, fuzzies)[1] but I think that most people shouldn’t think too much about it and - if they are deciding where to give - should do one of the following. 1 Give to the donor lottery I primarily recommend giving through a donor lottery and then only thinking about where to give in the case you win. There are existing arguments for the donor lottery. 2 Deliberately funge with funders you trust Alternatively I would recommend deliberately ‘funging’ with other funders (e.g. Open Philanthropy), such as through GiveWell’s Top Charities Fund. However, if you have empirical or value disagreements with the large funder you funge with or believe they are mistaken, you may be able to do better by doing your own research.[2]  3 If you work at an ‘effective’[3] organisation, take a salary cut Finally, if you work at an organisation whose mission you believe effective, or is funded by a large funder (see previous point on funging), consider taking a salary cut[4]. I DON’T RECOMMEND (a) Saving now to give later I would say to just give to the donor lottery and if you win: first, spend some time thinking and decide whether you want to give later. If you conclude yes, give to something like the Patient Philanthropy Fund, set-up some new mechanism for giving later or (as you always can) enter/create a new donor lottery. (b) Thinking too long about it - unless it's rewarding for you Where rewarding could be any of: fun, interesting, good for the community, gives fuzzies, builds skills or something else. There’s no obligation at all in working out your own cost effectiveness estimates of charities and choosing the best. (c) Thinking too much about funging, counterfactuals or Shapley values My guess is that if everyone does the ‘obvious’ strategy of “donate to the things that look most cost effective[5]” and you’re broadly
I'm wondering whether anyone here has used particular tools or frameworks for balancing future financial targets (buying a home, having children, etc) with current giving. For instance, one might: 1. Simply give X% of their income every year, and make their financial goals fit within their adjusted income. 2. Estimate how much capital and cash flow they might need given certain life goals, and then work out how much they need to save in order to meet those targets, donating everything else they make. 3. Save more early in their career and donate more mid or late career, expecting early savings to help build wealth and meet financial goals and unlocking more donations later on.
Load more (8/26)

Effective giving is about finding especially promising and cost-effective charities and donation opportunities, discussing giving strategies, and coordinating with other donors.