Thanks for the comment! While we did find issues that we think imply Founders Pledge’s BOTECs don’t convincingly show that the FP GHDF’s grants surpass 10x GiveDirectly in expectation in terms of marginal cost-effectiveness, we don’t think we can justifiably conclude from this that we are confident these grants don’t pass this bar. As mentioned in the report, this is partly because:
FP may have been sufficiently conservative in other inputs to compensate for the problems we identified
There are additional direct benefits (for example, morbidity benefits) to the grants that FP acknowledged but decided not to model
There may be additional large positive externalities from funding these early-stage and more neglected opportunities
Rosie’s comment also covers some other considerations that bear on this and provides useful context that is relevant here.
Thanks for the comment! While we did find issues that we think imply Founders Pledge’s BOTECs don’t convincingly show that the FP GHDF’s grants surpass 10x GiveDirectly in expectation in terms of marginal cost-effectiveness, we don’t think we can justifiably conclude from this that we are confident these grants don’t pass this bar. As mentioned in the report, this is partly because:
FP may have been sufficiently conservative in other inputs to compensate for the problems we identified
There are additional direct benefits (for example, morbidity benefits) to the grants that FP acknowledged but decided not to model
There may be additional large positive externalities from funding these early-stage and more neglected opportunities
Rosie’s comment also covers some other considerations that bear on this and provides useful context that is relevant here.