Thanks Ben! Can you give a sense of how sensitive your answer is to the specific org(s) someone gives to? Would your rating change if someone gave the same amount to e.g. the global development or animal welfare funds?
We asked leaders their views on the relative cost-effectiveness of donations to four funds operated by the community. The median view was that the Long-Term Future fund was 1.6x as cost-effective as the EA Community fund, which in turn was 10 times more cost-effective than the Animal Welfare fund, and twenty times as cost-effective as the Global Health and Development fund.
This suggests that someone giving $60k/year to the Global Health or Animal Welfare Funds (or one of the orgs they’re likely to support) would probably be rated as a single plan change even after impact adjustment (at least in a quick and dirty assessment). I would have guessed giving such a substantial amount to highly effective charities would be scored much higher.
Thanks Ben! Can you give a sense of how sensitive your answer is to the specific org(s) someone gives to? Would your rating change if someone gave the same amount to e.g. the global development or animal welfare funds?
That’s a complex topic, but our starting point for conversions would be the figures in the EA leaders survey: https://80000hours.org/2018/10/2018-talent-gaps-survey/
This suggests that someone giving $60k/year to the Global Health or Animal Welfare Funds (or one of the orgs they’re likely to support) would probably be rated as a single plan change even after impact adjustment (at least in a quick and dirty assessment). I would have guessed giving such a substantial amount to highly effective charities would be scored much higher.