Executive summary: The effective giving ecosystem grew to ~$1.2B in 2024, with Founders Pledge and the Navigation Fund driving diversification beyond Open Philanthropy and GiveWell, while new risks like USAID’s funding cuts and questions about national fundraising models shape the landscape.
Key points:
Overall money moved grew from ~$1.1B to ~$1.2B; excluding Open Philanthropy the ecosystem grew ~20% (to ~$500M), and excluding both Open Phil and GiveWell it grew ~50% (to ~$300M).
Founders Pledge and Navigation Fund emerged as major players: Founders Pledge scaled from $25M (2022) to $140M (2024), while Navigation Fund began moving $10–100M annually.
All four main fundraising strategies (broad direct, broad pledge, ultra-high-net-worth (U)HNW direct, and (U)HNW pledge) now exceed $10M each, with GWWC, The Life You Can Save, Longview, and Founders Pledge as exemplars.
National fundraising groups (e.g. Doneer Effectief, Ge Effektivt, Ayuda Efectiva) continue to grow, though saturation limits are emerging (Effektiv Spenden plateauing at ~$20–25M).
Cause-area allocations (excluding Open Phil/GiveWell) lean more toward catastrophic risk reduction and climate mitigation, suggesting future donor diversification.
USAID’s 2025 foreign-assistance freeze may reduce global health funding by ~35–50%, triggering rapid-response efforts (e.g. Founders Pledge’s Catalytic Impact Fund).
Operational funding remains heavily reliant on Open Phil, Meta Charity Funding Circle, EA Infrastructure Fund, and Founders Pledge, with counterfactual ROI thresholds shaping grantmaking.
GWWC deprioritized building an “earning to give” community to focus on its core strategy, though some grassroots EtG activity continues.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, and contact us if you have feedback.
Executive summary: The effective giving ecosystem grew to ~$1.2B in 2024, with Founders Pledge and the Navigation Fund driving diversification beyond Open Philanthropy and GiveWell, while new risks like USAID’s funding cuts and questions about national fundraising models shape the landscape.
Key points:
Overall money moved grew from ~$1.1B to ~$1.2B; excluding Open Philanthropy the ecosystem grew ~20% (to ~$500M), and excluding both Open Phil and GiveWell it grew ~50% (to ~$300M).
Founders Pledge and Navigation Fund emerged as major players: Founders Pledge scaled from $25M (2022) to $140M (2024), while Navigation Fund began moving $10–100M annually.
All four main fundraising strategies (broad direct, broad pledge, ultra-high-net-worth (U)HNW direct, and (U)HNW pledge) now exceed $10M each, with GWWC, The Life You Can Save, Longview, and Founders Pledge as exemplars.
National fundraising groups (e.g. Doneer Effectief, Ge Effektivt, Ayuda Efectiva) continue to grow, though saturation limits are emerging (Effektiv Spenden plateauing at ~$20–25M).
Cause-area allocations (excluding Open Phil/GiveWell) lean more toward catastrophic risk reduction and climate mitigation, suggesting future donor diversification.
USAID’s 2025 foreign-assistance freeze may reduce global health funding by ~35–50%, triggering rapid-response efforts (e.g. Founders Pledge’s Catalytic Impact Fund).
Operational funding remains heavily reliant on Open Phil, Meta Charity Funding Circle, EA Infrastructure Fund, and Founders Pledge, with counterfactual ROI thresholds shaping grantmaking.
GWWC deprioritized building an “earning to give” community to focus on its core strategy, though some grassroots EtG activity continues.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, and contact us if you have feedback.