To clarify, “Maximum Impact Fund” was our previous name for the fund that we allocated toward the highest-priority gaps within our top charities. The name of that fund is now “Top Charities Fund,” and it’ll continue to be used to fill top-charity funding gaps. The function hasn’t changed, only the name (and now, given our recent update to our criteria for top charities, it will be distributed among a smaller set of programs).
We think the All Grants Fund and Top Charities Fund will likely be of similar cost-effectiveness, since we are using the same cost-effectiveness bar (currently 10x cash) for grants from both funds. But because the All Grants Fund may be used for higher-expected-value opportunities that don’t necessarily meet the “confidence” criterion, it’s possible that All Grants Fund will be higher-expected-value overall.
I’m not 100% sure I’m interpreting your query correctly, so please let me know if I can clarify anything further!
Hi, Nuno,
To clarify, “Maximum Impact Fund” was our previous name for the fund that we allocated toward the highest-priority gaps within our top charities. The name of that fund is now “Top Charities Fund,” and it’ll continue to be used to fill top-charity funding gaps. The function hasn’t changed, only the name (and now, given our recent update to our criteria for top charities, it will be distributed among a smaller set of programs).
We think the All Grants Fund and Top Charities Fund will likely be of similar cost-effectiveness, since we are using the same cost-effectiveness bar (currently 10x cash) for grants from both funds. But because the All Grants Fund may be used for higher-expected-value opportunities that don’t necessarily meet the “confidence” criterion, it’s possible that All Grants Fund will be higher-expected-value overall.
I’m not 100% sure I’m interpreting your query correctly, so please let me know if I can clarify anything further!
Best,
Miranda
Received, cheers