Thanks for asking! I wrote the current version of that page and would like for it to read cleanly, without double-counting concerns. I basically put together a bullet list and sanity-checked with a couple of other people before publishing, so additional feedback like this is very welcome.
I’ll take a look at the page tonight and see about resolving the issues you identified. (I might also publish it on the Forum soon and see what other feedback people have, and what other examples should be on the page.)
The page has now been updated. I added the following caveat:
Note that some of the funding described here has gone toward the charities described above. This means that certain “impacts” on this page may appear twice — for example, grants from Open Philanthropy help to fund GiveDirectly’s work. We discuss both the work and the funding to provide a more complete picture of the movement, but we caution you not to count the impact twice.
Given that I expect this page to keep including examples of fundraising success and actions by charities, and to add more examples of both over time, I think a caveat is better than trying to avoid ever featuring a grant and its outcome at the same time.
(One could argue that the actions are more important to discuss than the funding, but I think the funding numbers provide a sense of EA’s overall scale that doesn’t appear if you just look at a sample of charities.)
Thanks for asking! I wrote the current version of that page and would like for it to read cleanly, without double-counting concerns. I basically put together a bullet list and sanity-checked with a couple of other people before publishing, so additional feedback like this is very welcome.
I’ll take a look at the page tonight and see about resolving the issues you identified. (I might also publish it on the Forum soon and see what other feedback people have, and what other examples should be on the page.)
The page has now been updated. I added the following caveat:
Note that some of the funding described here has gone toward the charities described above. This means that certain “impacts” on this page may appear twice — for example, grants from Open Philanthropy help to fund GiveDirectly’s work. We discuss both the work and the funding to provide a more complete picture of the movement, but we caution you not to count the impact twice.
Given that I expect this page to keep including examples of fundraising success and actions by charities, and to add more examples of both over time, I think a caveat is better than trying to avoid ever featuring a grant and its outcome at the same time.
(One could argue that the actions are more important to discuss than the funding, but I think the funding numbers provide a sense of EA’s overall scale that doesn’t appear if you just look at a sample of charities.)
This looks like a great solution! FYI I don’t see it up yet, maybe it hasn’t been deployed or something.
Maybe you’re not looking at the right section? It’s been here:
My mistake! You’re right, I see it now.