Great to understand that more and more organizations are being formed and that they still have room for more funding to grow.
However, when is someone going to raise (or continue to discuss) the point that most of the EA funds are being given to only 2 organizations? (At least for Animal Welfare). If you scope around on the websites of all these organizations, they will eventually disburse whatever they make to only ACE evaluated NGOs (at the moment, only 2 names stand out for many years).
I’m not taking the credit away from these 2 organizations, which are amazing btw. But at some point we need to come back talking about: 1) fair distribution of funds; 2) new systems of evaluating who is or isn’t effective in the animal welfare movement; 3) come back to the discussion of who’s evaluating the evaluators? I hope I find more people that agree with my thinking out there. This can become a bigger discussion. Thank you!
(Disclaimer: I work at Giving What We Can but I was not involved in this program, and this is just my personal take)
Hi Daniela, could you clarify what you mean by “most of the EA funds are being given to only 2 organizations? (At least for Animal welfare)”
There is no consensus on what counts as “EA funds”, but people usually include Open Philanthropy, which is by far the largest funder and funds many organizations. Are you referring to the EA Animal Welfare Fund? They also support many organizations.
Many national effective giving orgs currently only show The Humane League and Good Food Institute on their website, but that does not imply “most of the EA funds” are being given to them. Also, Giving What We Can allows donors to support several other projects in animal welfare, I imagine that as other effective giving organizations grow, they might also add more projects if there’s enough interest from donors (but I’m just speculating.)
On “evaluating the evaluators” you might be interested in this page from Giving What We Can and the evaluation of ACE and the EA Animal Welfare Fund
Great to understand that more and more organizations are being formed and that they still have room for more funding to grow.
However, when is someone going to raise (or continue to discuss) the point that most of the EA funds are being given to only 2 organizations? (At least for Animal Welfare). If you scope around on the websites of all these organizations, they will eventually disburse whatever they make to only ACE evaluated NGOs (at the moment, only 2 names stand out for many years).
I’m not taking the credit away from these 2 organizations, which are amazing btw. But at some point we need to come back talking about: 1) fair distribution of funds; 2) new systems of evaluating who is or isn’t effective in the animal welfare movement; 3) come back to the discussion of who’s evaluating the evaluators?
I hope I find more people that agree with my thinking out there. This can become a bigger discussion. Thank you!
(Disclaimer: I work at Giving What We Can but I was not involved in this program, and this is just my personal take)
Hi Daniela, could you clarify what you mean by “most of the EA funds are being given to only 2 organizations? (At least for Animal welfare)”
There is no consensus on what counts as “EA funds”, but people usually include Open Philanthropy, which is by far the largest funder and funds many organizations. Are you referring to the EA Animal Welfare Fund? They also support many organizations.
Many national effective giving orgs currently only show The Humane League and Good Food Institute on their website, but that does not imply “most of the EA funds” are being given to them. Also, Giving What We Can allows donors to support several other projects in animal welfare, I imagine that as other effective giving organizations grow, they might also add more projects if there’s enough interest from donors (but I’m just speculating.)
On “evaluating the evaluators” you might be interested in this page from Giving What We Can and the evaluation of ACE and the EA Animal Welfare Fund