Charity evaluators like GiveWell have identified a handful of highly effective nonprofits that have shown they can save and improve lives at fractions of the cost of other charities’ operations.  For example, the Against Malaria Foundation distributes basic medical supplies in the places where they are needed most, saving lives at the remarkable average cost of about $5,500, according to randomized control trials analyzing its efforts.  Given how much each dollar donated to highly cost-effective charities can help others, some advocates argue that people in wealthy countries should prioritize donating a meaningful fraction of their incomes to these charities, sometimes prioritizing them over opportunities to give in one's local community.

Does it make sense to prioritize charitable donations based on considerations like cost-effectiveness and the availability of randomized control trials showing strong evidence of positive effects?  If so, what are some best guesses about where we ought to donate?  If not, what should we prioritize instead?  Please join HLS Effective Altruism for a discussion about these and other questions related to effective charitable giving.

Can't make it on Thursday? Here is another way to get involved: If you are interested in donating to highly effective nonprofits, you might consider taking the "One for the World" pledge, which is a pledge to contribute at least 1% of your career income to nonprofits with strong track records of effectively serving and improving the lives of people living in extreme poverty.  To learn more, please visit https://bit.ly/HLS-OFTW-2022.