Generally speaking, organizations that tend to do well in EA clear a higher bar of rigor on theory of change. For example, being able to show an ROI comparable to one of GiveWell’s top recommended charities, or have some sort of global multiplier effect (ex: reducing risks of future pandemics.)
Your organization seems off to a great start and will probably continue to thrive in the social impact community—if you’d like to learn more about what EAs tend to care about, take a look at the problem profiles on 80,000 Hours.org.
For transparency, though, I personally focus and donate to organizations closer to what 80,000 Hours is talking about, because I think huge public health threats have an outsized impact on poverty and wellbeing.
I’m also surprised to see this—lots and lots of EAs focus on wellbeing / reducing global poverty (see Givewell for helpful summary). Obviously reducing risk of nuclear war, etc, has implications for poverty, but try GiveWell for a more direct focus.
Generally speaking, organizations that tend to do well in EA clear a higher bar of rigor on theory of change. For example, being able to show an ROI comparable to one of GiveWell’s top recommended charities, or have some sort of global multiplier effect (ex: reducing risks of future pandemics.)
Your organization seems off to a great start and will probably continue to thrive in the social impact community—if you’d like to learn more about what EAs tend to care about, take a look at the problem profiles on 80,000 Hours.org.
Our org isn’t “thriving”. It has been exceedingly difficult to obtain major funding.
We focus on Appropriate Technology and School Building, which are listed.
Our model is low-cost infrastructure, to facilitate rollouts in many regions.
I’m sorry, and I really wish you guys the best of luck! It’s super competitive and many great orgs don’t clear the hurdle.
I’m amazed that “Poverty” isn’t listed as one of the most pressing world problems.
https://80000hours.org/problem-profiles/
They do have it as a problem area: https://80000hours.org/topic/causes/global-poverty/
I think they might consider it less neglected and tractable than other interventions, with few opportunities for outsized impact
I don’t know if their “Global Poverty” problem area would qualify my org for support. Do you think so?
We focus on Appropriate Technology and School Building, which are listed.
For transparency, though, I personally focus and donate to organizations closer to what 80,000 Hours is talking about, because I think huge public health threats have an outsized impact on poverty and wellbeing.
“Closer”? You mean, you don’t consider Poverty to be an 80,000 Hours priority?
I’m also surprised to see this—lots and lots of EAs focus on wellbeing / reducing global poverty (see Givewell for helpful summary). Obviously reducing risk of nuclear war, etc, has implications for poverty, but try GiveWell for a more direct focus.