This will not be fully theoretical: I’ve already been donating 5% for the last 2 year. First pick would be the Malaria Consortium. It seems to be very cost-effective ($5,000 per life saved on average, $7 ). It also has strong evidence of impact.
Second option would be the Against Malaria Foundation. It is pretty similar to the first choice in target, effectiveness and evidence of impact, but numbers are slightly worse (perhaps?). Cost per life is $2000 dollars more, which looks worse, but cost of output (per bednet output cost, as opposed to the consortium’s children treated with a full course of medicine) is a bit lower, at $6. Also, working on prevention seems more far-sighted and perhaps controlable.
Third choice, Helen Keller International. Cost of outcome is practically the same as in the two previous cases, although it is much cheaper in cost of output (just $2 for supplements), but I am more uncertain about the specific results.
Part B.
For all the reasons exposed above, if I have to choose only one, it would be the Malaria Consortium.
Part C.
Generally, decisions relating to investments for retirement in 20 years’s time. Perhaps I should also consider alternative jobs or job promotion through this quantitative mindset.
Part A.
This will not be fully theoretical: I’ve already been donating 5% for the last 2 year. First pick would be the Malaria Consortium. It seems to be very cost-effective ($5,000 per life saved on average, $7 ). It also has strong evidence of impact.
Second option would be the Against Malaria Foundation. It is pretty similar to the first choice in target, effectiveness and evidence of impact, but numbers are slightly worse (perhaps?). Cost per life is $2000 dollars more, which looks worse, but cost of output (per bednet output cost, as opposed to the consortium’s children treated with a full course of medicine) is a bit lower, at $6. Also, working on prevention seems more far-sighted and perhaps controlable.
Third choice, Helen Keller International. Cost of outcome is practically the same as in the two previous cases, although it is much cheaper in cost of output (just $2 for supplements), but I am more uncertain about the specific results.
Part B.
For all the reasons exposed above, if I have to choose only one, it would be the Malaria Consortium.
Part C.
Generally, decisions relating to investments for retirement in 20 years’s time. Perhaps I should also consider alternative jobs or job promotion through this quantitative mindset.