The GiveWell Blog

Month: July 2025

Podcast Episode 7: Deepening GiveWell’s Focus on Livelihoods Programs

(updated on: ) | by GiveWell Staff

GiveWell has long grappled with fundamental questions about how to value different positive impacts and make funding decisions across diverse programs. In particular, how much more valuable it is to save a life than to substantially improve it? And how can we prioritize between programs that achieve those outcomes in different measures when there’s no “right” answer to that question?

In this episode, GiveWell CEO and co-founder Elie Hassenfeld speaks with Senior Program Officer Julie Faller about why GiveWell is dedicating more capacity to researching livelihoods programs that aim to increase people’s incomes. They discuss how we’re building on existing work, searching for new cost-effective opportunities, and exploring more of the impactful programs we’ve long cared about.

Read More

What We’ve Learned from Our First Lookbacks

(updated on: ) | by Alex Cohen

Bar chart showing the change in expected deaths averted. For New Incentives, the estimate increased from 17,000 to 27,000. For Helen Keller Intl, the estimate decreased from 2,000 to 450.

At GiveWell, we’re committed to understanding the impact of our grantmaking and improving our decisions over time. That’s why we’ve begun conducting “lookbacks”—reviews of past grants, typically two to three years after making them, that assess how well they’ve met our initial expectations and what we can learn from them.

We conduct lookbacks for two main reasons: accountability and learning. By examining both the successes and challenges of past grants and publishing those findings on our website, we aim to be transparent about the impact of donor funding. Systematically reviewing past grants also helps us identify ways to improve our decision-making. When lookbacks identify challenges, lower-than-expected impact, or key questions that we think we should have an answer to, we use these findings to adjust our approach to similar grants in the future or prioritize follow-up research. When lookbacks show higher-than-expected impact, that’s valuable, too—in those cases, we made the error of underestimating impact and might be granting too little to certain programs.

Read More