Project Manager at ACE by day, artist by night. Ask me about my grand painting-to-give plans 😆
Re: the 2019 EA Survey donation data, I think ACE was categorized under Meta? If you take ACE out of that list above the data looks more accurate (~$330k for Animal Welfare).
I echo Kieran's points on the difference between EA AWF and ACE Movement Grants. The only other distinguishing factor I'd mention is that because the grant managers and processes differ, the projects that end up being funded tend to have different trends between funds. You can find a list of previous Movement Grant recipients on this page which may give you a better idea of the types of projects funded as well as the size of those grants for each round.
Keeping in mind that website traffic stats are not exact, here are the numbers I have from Animal Charity Evaluators for Jan 01 - Dec 31 2020.
The team overseeing recommendation decisions is typically well aligned in making these decisions, and by the time reviews have been drafted for each charity, there are fairly clear levels in the charities’ overall performance. That said, we do of course have disagreements. I think these are more likely to arise when a charity’s status may be changing from the previous year, e.g. an existing charity changing recommendation status or a new charity that might be recommended for the first time. When disagreements arise, we provide as much time as possible to reach an agreement, first in a meeting to understand our points of disagreement, followed up by email discussion if necessary. We then take a final vote to decide. If there is a split decision, the Executive Director makes the final call.
Hi Michael, I'll respond on behalf of Leah/ACE:
The competition for roles at ACE varies depending on the position. We receive around 10 intern applications every month, so this is by far the most competitive of all positions at ACE.
Given our niche area of work, replaceability is a challenge; when we're looking for someone who has a research background, is interested in effective altruism, and is passionate about animal advocacy, we're looking at a very narrow group of people.
Speaking more generally, people are replaceable, but the costs—in terms of both time and money—can be very high. It can take months for managers and leadership to recruit, vet, and interview new candidates and up to six months to fully onboard a new hire. During the time we are rehiring for a role, the work assigned to that position is either stagnant or has to be redistributed to other team members who are already operating at capacity. There’s also the opportunity cost for the managers and leadership participating in the process whose time (and corresponding wages) could be better spent on programs and other activities more directly fulfilling our mission.
And while the costs of turnover are high, it’s important to note that the primary reason ACE prioritizes its people is for their inherent value. Each ACE team member is an individual with their own experiences and talents that contribute to achieving our goals. We use job descriptions as guidelines, but welcome the unique insight, ideas, and skills each person brings into their role.
Year after year, we’re able to maintain, and even improve, the quality of evaluations, research, and grant-making for which ACE is internationally known by investing in our people—people with exceptional competencies and the dedication to finding and promoting the most effective ways to help animals.
Thanks for the question, NunoSempere! Could you clarify whether you are referring to ACE specifically? Or the EAA movement as a whole?
Thank you for pointing this out! There should only be one email address field, I'll edit the form to fix this error :)
Minor suggestion: I often share posts from EA Forum on social media, but the posts do not have a default "share image" attached. If you added some metadata identifying a default image for all posts I think that the social shares would get a lot more traction.
Here is a link to the webpage with the map embed. You can also view it directly via this Data Studio dashboard. We weren't able to parse the outcome types by geographic location, but we are looking at other software we can use. For now, at least, you can see the grant amounts by geographic location. I will keep you posted.
Thanks for clarifying, I had a feeling that is what you meant. I will let you know when the map is published :)