[Edited, November 2023: finished materials here.] [Edited, June 2023: the name “task force” wasn’t very accurate and gave some wrong impressions; we decided to change the name to a “project,” since we think that’s more accurate. Thanks for the feedback on this!]
This post is an update on a project on reforms that EA organizations might make.
Currently the people on the project are Julia Wise (employee at Centre for Effective Altruism, board member at GiveWell), Ozzie Gooen (president at Quantified Uncertainty Research Institute, board member at Rethink Charity, former board member at Rethink Priorities), and Sam Donald (strategy fellow at Open Philanthropy, former staff at COVID taskforce at UK Cabinet Office, former staff at McKinsey). We also have a discussion space with a larger group of about a dozen people (experts in related fields, EA organization staff, and community members). Currently the total time on this project is about 1 full-time equivalent, mostly from Julia.
We realize a small group of people isn’t going to reflect all the views or types of expertise useful for a project like this. Our goal is to draw on that expertise, often from people who don’t have time to participate in frequent meetings about EA reforms, and to synthesize views and practical information from a range of sources.
If you have suggestions for people it would be useful for us to get input from (including yourself!) we’re happy to hear ideas at this form.
So far the process has included:
Reading and cataloging the problems identified and possible solutions proposed in posts aboutinstitutionalreform that have been written up on the Forum.
Speaking to ~25 people about which areas they see as most important for possible reforms in EA, and what best practices they think EA should be adapting from other fields. We’re trying to speak with a mix of people with significant experience in EA institutions, and people with significant work history in non-EA institutions (nonprofits, finance, government, management consulting.)
Researching existing whistleblowing platforms and laws
Next steps:
Better defining possible reforms based on the ideas collected and discussed.
Getting more advice from people with professional experience in those areas.
Understanding the pros and cons of a possible change
Understanding what’s legally feasible (e.g. given how different countries regulate nonprofit boards)
As we get closer to specific recommendations, discussing them with relevant staff at organizations, to learn more about barriers and feasibility of the possible changes.
Spelling out concrete recommendations to organizations. We expect this might be in the form of 5- to 15-page reports, with different reports for different organizations.
A further public update about the project, though this likely won’t include all the specifics of the recommendations made to organizations.
Shapes that our recommendations might take:
“Here’s a change we think organization X should make.” (Likely to focus on Open Philanthropy and Effective Ventures.)
“Here’s a change we think any organization in situation Y should make — we think there are a dozen organizations in that situation.” (Likely to focus on basic governance practices for small organizations, like having a staff handbook if there isn’t one.)
“Here’s a function/​service that doesn’t currently exist in EA; we think it’s probably good for it to be created and funded.”
After we have proposals clearly spelled out, we’ll present them to the various organizations. These will be recommendations, not requirements. We hope that doing this as a general effort across EA can save effort for organizations, rather than each of them doing this sort of project independently. But we expect organizations will think through the recommendations critically and will get independent advice as needed.
Update on project on reforms at EA organizations
[Edited, November 2023: finished materials here.]
[Edited, June 2023: the name “task force” wasn’t very accurate and gave some wrong impressions; we decided to change the name to a “project,” since we think that’s more accurate. Thanks for the feedback on this!]
This post is an update on a project on reforms that EA organizations might make.
Currently the people on the project are Julia Wise (employee at Centre for Effective Altruism, board member at GiveWell), Ozzie Gooen (president at Quantified Uncertainty Research Institute, board member at Rethink Charity, former board member at Rethink Priorities), and Sam Donald (strategy fellow at Open Philanthropy, former staff at COVID taskforce at UK Cabinet Office, former staff at McKinsey). We also have a discussion space with a larger group of about a dozen people (experts in related fields, EA organization staff, and community members). Currently the total time on this project is about 1 full-time equivalent, mostly from Julia.
We realize a small group of people isn’t going to reflect all the views or types of expertise useful for a project like this. Our goal is to draw on that expertise, often from people who don’t have time to participate in frequent meetings about EA reforms, and to synthesize views and practical information from a range of sources.
If you have suggestions for people it would be useful for us to get input from (including yourself!) we’re happy to hear ideas at this form.
So far the process has included:
Reading and cataloging the problems identified and possible solutions proposed in posts about institutional reform that have been written up on the Forum.
Speaking to ~25 people about which areas they see as most important for possible reforms in EA, and what best practices they think EA should be adapting from other fields. We’re trying to speak with a mix of people with significant experience in EA institutions, and people with significant work history in non-EA institutions (nonprofits, finance, government, management consulting.)
Researching existing whistleblowing platforms and laws
Next steps:
Better defining possible reforms based on the ideas collected and discussed.
Getting more advice from people with professional experience in those areas.
Understanding the pros and cons of a possible change
Understanding what’s legally feasible (e.g. given how different countries regulate nonprofit boards)
As we get closer to specific recommendations, discussing them with relevant staff at organizations, to learn more about barriers and feasibility of the possible changes.
Spelling out concrete recommendations to organizations. We expect this might be in the form of 5- to 15-page reports, with different reports for different organizations.
A further public update about the project, though this likely won’t include all the specifics of the recommendations made to organizations.
Shapes that our recommendations might take:
“Here’s a change we think organization X should make.” (Likely to focus on Open Philanthropy and Effective Ventures.)
“Here’s a change we think any organization in situation Y should make — we think there are a dozen organizations in that situation.” (Likely to focus on basic governance practices for small organizations, like having a staff handbook if there isn’t one.)
“Here’s a function/​service that doesn’t currently exist in EA; we think it’s probably good for it to be created and funded.”
After we have proposals clearly spelled out, we’ll present them to the various organizations. These will be recommendations, not requirements. We hope that doing this as a general effort across EA can save effort for organizations, rather than each of them doing this sort of project independently. But we expect organizations will think through the recommendations critically and will get independent advice as needed.