The GiveWell Blog

All GiveWell’s approach Posts

Podcast Episode 6: Forecasting the Future of Global Health Funding

| by GiveWell Staff

In the face of potential major cuts to foreign aid, how can we anticipate the impact on global health and effectively direct resources to the areas of greatest need?

In this episode, GiveWell’s CEO and co-founder, Elie Hassenfeld, speaks with Principal Researcher Alex Cohen to discuss the forecasting work GiveWell has undertaken to better understand what the future of global health funding might look like. They explore the potential size of the funding gaps, which programs might be affected, and how GiveWell is preparing to respond in a new era for global health philanthropy.

Read More

Podcast Episode 5: Exploring HIV/AIDS Funding Cuts and Emerging Needs

(updated on: ) | by GiveWell Staff

Historically, the US government has been a major funder of HIV/AIDS programs through PEPFAR and other initiatives, providing around $5 to $6 billion annually. With anticipated major reductions in US government foreign aid, including potential cuts of 20% to 50% to HIV/AIDS funding, GiveWell is assessing where new, cost-effective needs might emerge.

GiveWell aims to find programs where additional funding can have the greatest impact. While HIV/AIDS has not historically been a focus for GiveWell due to substantial US government support, the current funding cuts might lead to potential cost-effective opportunities within HIV/AIDS programming. In the latest episode in our podcast series, GiveWell CEO and co-founder Elie Hassenfeld speaks with Program Officer Alice Redfern about our initial exploration into HIV/AIDS programming.

Read More

May 2025 Updates

| by Chandler Brotak

Every month we send an email newsletter to our supporters sharing recent updates from our work. We publish selected portions of the newsletter on our blog to make this news more accessible to people who visit our website. For key updates from the latest installment, please see below!

If you’d like to receive the complete newsletter in your inbox each month, you can subscribe here.

Read More

What we fund, #1: We fund many opportunities outside our top charities

(updated on: ) | by Isabel Arjmand

GiveWell aims to find and fund programs that have the greatest impact on global well-being. We’re open to funding whichever global health and development opportunities seem most cost-effective. So while our top charities list is still what we’re best known for, it’s only part of our impact; we also dedicate substantial funding and research effort to opportunities beyond top charities.

In 2022, 71% of the funds we directed supported our four current top charities, and 29% were directed to other programs. However, most of our research capacity goes toward programs other than our top charities. This is because (a) most programs we direct funding to aren’t top charities (we have four top charities but directed funding to about 40 other grantees in 2022), and (b) it requires more effort to investigate a program we know less deeply.

In this post we’ll share:

  • The overall scope of our grantmaking
  • Why we dedicate funding and research capacity to programs other than our top charities
  • The types of opportunities we support

Read More

How we work, #3: Our analyses involve judgment calls

(updated on: ) | by Isabel Arjmand

This post is the third in a multi-part series, covering how GiveWell works and what we fund. Through these posts, we hope to give a better understanding of our research and decision-making.

Our goal is to recommend funding to the programs we believe have the greatest impact per dollar donated. There’s no simple algorithm for this question. Answering it necessarily involves making judgment calls. Our first post in this series discussed the importance of cost-effectiveness analyses and the many factors we consider; in this post, we’ll share:

Read More

How we work, #2: We look at specific opportunities, not just general interventions

(updated on: ) | by Isabel Arjmand

This post is the second in a multi-part series, covering how GiveWell works and what we fund. The first post, on cost-effectiveness, is here. Through these posts, we hope to give a better understanding of our research and decision-making.

Looking forward, not just backward

When we consider recommending funding, we don’t just want to know whether a program has generally been cost-effective in the past—we want to know how additional funding would be used.

People sometimes think of GiveWell as recommending entire programs or organizations. This was more accurate in GiveWell’s early days, but now we tend to narrow in on specific opportunities. Rather than asking whether it is cost-effective to deliver long-lasting insecticide-treated nets in general, we ask more specific questions, such as whether it is cost-effective to fund net distributions in 2023 in the Nigerian states of Benue, Plateau, and Zamfara, given the local burden of malaria and the costs of delivering nets in those states.

Geographic factors affecting cost-effectiveness

The same program can vary widely in cost-effectiveness across locations. The burden of a disease in a particular place is often a key factor in determining overall cost-effectiveness. All else equal, it’s much more impactful to deliver vitamin A supplements in areas with high rates of vitamin A deficiency than in areas where almost everyone consumes sufficient vitamin A as part of their diet. Similarly, one of our top charities, New Incentives, has chosen to operate in northern Nigeria largely because relatively low baseline vaccination rates mean its work is especially impactful there.

Read More

Next Page »