The Nonlinear Library EA - My quick thoughts on donating to EA Funds' Global Health and Development Fund and what it should do by Vasco Grilo
Dec 15, 2023
06:40
Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: My quick thoughts on donating to EA Funds' Global Health and Development Fund and what it should do, published by Vasco Grilo on December 15, 2023 on The Effective Altruism Forum.
I think there is a strong case for donating to EA Funds'
Global Health and Development Fund (GHDF) if one wants to support interventions in
global health and development without attending to their
effects on animals. On the other hand, given this goal, I believe one had better donate to GiveWell's
All Grants Fund (AGF) or
unrestricted funds (GWUF), or Giving What We Can's (GWWC's)
Global Health and Wellbeing Fund (GHWF). In addition, I encourage GHDF to:
Let its donors know that donating to GHDF in its current form has a similar effect to donating to AGF (if that is in fact the case).
Consider appointing additional fund managers independent from GiveWell.
Consider accepting applications.
In any case, the goal of this post is mostly about starting a discussion about the future of GHDF rather than providing super informed takes about it. So feel free to share your thoughts or vision below!
Case for donating to GiveWell's All Grants Fund or unrestricted funds
Donating to AGF or GWUF instead of GHDF seems better if one highly trusts GiveWell's prioritisation:
Donating to GHDF in its current form appears to have the same effect as donating to AGF or GWUF:
Like AGF and GWUF, GHDF "aims to improve the health or economic empowerment of people around the world as effectively as possible".
My understanding is that GHDF makes more uncertain or riskier grants than GiveWell's
Top Charities Fund[1] (TCF), but AGF,
launched in August 2022, now makes such grants too. AGF
funds:
GiveWell's top charities.
Organisations implementing potentially cost-effective and scalable programs.
Established organisations implementing cost-effective programs that GiveWell does not expect to scale.
Organisations aiming to influence public health policy.
Organisations producing research to aid our grantmaking process.
Organizations that raise funds for our recommended charities.
GHDF "is managed by Elie Hassenfeld,
GiveWell's co-founder [and CEO]".
GHDF does not accept applications, and neither does AGF.
People in the United Kingdom can support GiveWell's funds and top charities through tax deductible donations via
GiveWell UK, which
was launched in August 2022 as AGF.
Having EA Funds as an additional intermediary seems unnecessary unless it is doing some extra evaluation, which does not appear to be the case.
As a side note, I would also say there is a pretty small difference between which one of GiveWell's
funds, TCF, AGF or GWUF, one donates to:
Due to
funging, more donations to TCF will result in AGF granting less money to GiveWell's
top charities.
GiveWell arguably has tiny room for more funding given Open Philanthropy's
support, so donating to GWUF is similar to donating to AGF[2].
However, if you highly trust GiveWell's prioritisation, donating to GWUF
is the best option given its greatest flexibility, followed by the AGF and TCF. Yet, donors may prefer donating to TCF to facilitate explanations of their effective giving (e.g. skipping the need to go into expected value or
funging).
Case for donating to Giving What We Can's Global Health and Wellbeing Fund
Donating to GHWF instead of GHDF seems better if one:
Welcomes further evaluation of the process behind the recommendations of GiveWell and other evaluators in the global health and wellbeing space (e.g. Happier Lives Institute), trusts GWWC's research team to identify evaluators to rely on, and wants the evaluations to be published, as in GWWC's
evaluations of evaluators. These would be my main reasons for donating to GHWF instead of GHDF, which has not produced public evaluations of GiveWell's recommendations.
Is open to donating to funds or organisations not suppo...
I think there is a strong case for donating to EA Funds'
Global Health and Development Fund (GHDF) if one wants to support interventions in
global health and development without attending to their
effects on animals. On the other hand, given this goal, I believe one had better donate to GiveWell's
All Grants Fund (AGF) or
unrestricted funds (GWUF), or Giving What We Can's (GWWC's)
Global Health and Wellbeing Fund (GHWF). In addition, I encourage GHDF to:
Let its donors know that donating to GHDF in its current form has a similar effect to donating to AGF (if that is in fact the case).
Consider appointing additional fund managers independent from GiveWell.
Consider accepting applications.
In any case, the goal of this post is mostly about starting a discussion about the future of GHDF rather than providing super informed takes about it. So feel free to share your thoughts or vision below!
Case for donating to GiveWell's All Grants Fund or unrestricted funds
Donating to AGF or GWUF instead of GHDF seems better if one highly trusts GiveWell's prioritisation:
Donating to GHDF in its current form appears to have the same effect as donating to AGF or GWUF:
Like AGF and GWUF, GHDF "aims to improve the health or economic empowerment of people around the world as effectively as possible".
My understanding is that GHDF makes more uncertain or riskier grants than GiveWell's
Top Charities Fund[1] (TCF), but AGF,
launched in August 2022, now makes such grants too. AGF
funds:
GiveWell's top charities.
Organisations implementing potentially cost-effective and scalable programs.
Established organisations implementing cost-effective programs that GiveWell does not expect to scale.
Organisations aiming to influence public health policy.
Organisations producing research to aid our grantmaking process.
Organizations that raise funds for our recommended charities.
GHDF "is managed by Elie Hassenfeld,
GiveWell's co-founder [and CEO]".
GHDF does not accept applications, and neither does AGF.
People in the United Kingdom can support GiveWell's funds and top charities through tax deductible donations via
GiveWell UK, which
was launched in August 2022 as AGF.
Having EA Funds as an additional intermediary seems unnecessary unless it is doing some extra evaluation, which does not appear to be the case.
As a side note, I would also say there is a pretty small difference between which one of GiveWell's
funds, TCF, AGF or GWUF, one donates to:
Due to
funging, more donations to TCF will result in AGF granting less money to GiveWell's
top charities.
GiveWell arguably has tiny room for more funding given Open Philanthropy's
support, so donating to GWUF is similar to donating to AGF[2].
However, if you highly trust GiveWell's prioritisation, donating to GWUF
is the best option given its greatest flexibility, followed by the AGF and TCF. Yet, donors may prefer donating to TCF to facilitate explanations of their effective giving (e.g. skipping the need to go into expected value or
funging).
Case for donating to Giving What We Can's Global Health and Wellbeing Fund
Donating to GHWF instead of GHDF seems better if one:
Welcomes further evaluation of the process behind the recommendations of GiveWell and other evaluators in the global health and wellbeing space (e.g. Happier Lives Institute), trusts GWWC's research team to identify evaluators to rely on, and wants the evaluations to be published, as in GWWC's
evaluations of evaluators. These would be my main reasons for donating to GHWF instead of GHDF, which has not produced public evaluations of GiveWell's recommendations.
Is open to donating to funds or organisations not suppo...