GiveWell
givewell.org · Company blog · on HN since 2010
GiveWell is a nonprofit that researches charities and recommends the ones it finds save or improve the most lives per dollar.
What HN saysHN commenters recommend it for donating effectively, praising its heavy research into cost-effectiveness and trustworthiness, and one has given through it for nearly a decade.
265HN people shared it
244linked it in comments
23stories submitted
127story points
3 months agolast shared
2010people per year2026
Most-shared posts
- 1Give Well: Make your dollar go further116 people · 6 points · first shared 2010 · discussion on HN
- 2Our Top Charities58 people · 4 points · first shared 2010 · discussion on HN
- 3Our Mistakes10 people · 12 points · first shared 2016 · 1 comments on HN
- 4Amf10 people · first shared 2018
- 5Track record of cash transfers as a means of giving9 people · 1 points · first shared 2013 · discussion on HN
- 6Give directly9 people · first shared 2016
- 7Give directly9 people · first shared 2013
- 8AMF8 people · first shared 2011
- 9Insecticide treated nets7 people · first shared 2013
- 10Your dollar goes further overseas6 people · first shared 2013
- 11Cost effectiveness models5 people · first shared 2017
- 12Impact estimates5 people · first shared 2022
- 13Impact5 people · first shared 2016
- 14Giving 101: the basics4 people · 4 points · first shared 2013 · discussion on HN
- 15Process4 people · first shared 2017
What HN people wrote when they linked it
derektank · 2025-11-11
>the track record of the effective altruism folks doesn’t seem all that great.
I've been donating 5-10% of my income to GiveWell[1] and their top charities like GiveDirectly[2] and the Against Malaria Foundation[3] for nearly a decade at this point and I think their track record has been fantastic. Effect altruism only gets shady when longtermists get involved and start speculating on the moral worth of lives in some distant future. If you focus on human beings alive today, effective altruists (and development economists) have done a great job identifying how to make your charitable donations go the farthest in reducing suffering.
[1] https://www.givewell.org/
[2] https://www.givedirectly.org/
[3] https://www.againstmalaria.com/
ericrosedev · 2025-05-19
I find GiveWells approach the most satisfying when I ask myself “how can I make my charity go the furthest”. https://www.givewell.org/ I also highly recommend Famine, Affluence, and Morality by Peter Singer, it’s a perspective changing book. Also, great comment!
vunderba · 2024-06-23
I've used Charity navigator for years. They have alway been a very good source of high-quality charities to ensure the bulk of the donation goes to the actual cause. It even has audit information breaking down the distribution of funds. Givewell is another recommendation.
https://www.charitynavigator.org
https://www.givewell.org/
alexwasserman · 2023-12-03
GiveDirectly is a great org that’s working in data driven experimental way to identify effective ways to donate. I’ve donated to them for years.
In a similar vein is GiveWell, https://givewell.org/, who research and identify the top charities to donate to to maximize dollar impact. Their mission is to simplify giving by just telling you a very small number of orgs, removing any need for analysis or choice.
GiveDirectly was a on the GiveWell list for a long time too.
Both are great orgs.
Finally, remember to check if your employer supports donation matching if you want to maximize your impact.
camel_Snake · 2023-05-22
Gonna go ahead and plug https://www.givewell.org/ here, since they do an obscene amount of research to verify the cost-efficacy and trustworthiness of all the charities they funnel money to.
yboris · 2023-05-15
I really hope that the person looks at the work done by GiveWell - https://www.givewell.org/ and that they focus on cost-effectiveness of their donations (the amount of good they can do per $1 donated) as the primary dimension worth caring about.
autarch · 2023-01-14
I donate about 15% of my income to various organizations, all focused on animal advocacy. If you prefer to focus on humans, I'd suggest donating to Givewell (https://www.givewell.org/) or to some of the charities they recommend.
If you're a software engineer in the US, you're earning _way_ more than most people in the world, and you can comfortable donate a large chunk of your income to help people (including non-human people) who are much worse off than you.
bradbeattie · 2022-11-16
> if only just to have some sort of open-system for rating charities
While the following examples aren't exactly _open_ systems, some organizations address the niche you highlight. Examples: https://www.givewell.org/, https://animalcharityevaluators.org/
orzig · 2022-10-02
Experienced 'survivor' here: You're going to feel (and sometimes be explicitly told) that your stress is not valid, because others have it worse. Both these things can be true. Others have it worse, and the stress you're feeling is real. If you don't acknowledge the effects and act on them (in whatever way works for you), you will undergo entirely avoidable suffering.
Again, others might be suffering more, but nobody wins when you self-flagellate.
If, in addition to taking care of your health, you want to take action on suffering, there are many options. I recommend considering an expansive moral circle and checking out: https://www.givewell.org/
eru · 2022-02-25
In general, if you want to help, have a look at https://www.givewell.org/ and just pick any one of their top charities.
(Yes, their top charities don't necessarily have anything to do with whatever cause is currently in the news. They go by 'greatest improvement in human lives per buck' regardless of where those people are.)
nmca · 2021-01-05
I think this analysis is a bit oversimplified. If your goal is to build houses, then local labour is clearly better. But if it's to recruit lifetime donors, then perhaps shipping out incompetent (but fabulously wealthy) Americans is the way forward.
Similarly for advocacy, our model should perhaps be that seemingly extreme proposals serve to stretch the Overton window before the middle-ground wins out.
Naively disregarding approaches that don't myopically optimise for first-order impact seems likely to have harmful reprocussions.
That said, lots of donations are deeply ineffective, and if you want to prioritize I'd suggest the excellent guides from https://www.givewell.org/ , who reach many of the same conclusions as you do, after more detailed reasoning.
xorfish · 2020-01-07
Have you looked at GiveWell?
"We search for the charities that save or improve lives the most per dollar."
https://www.givewell.org/
They don't care about overhead, they will recommend a charity that prevents a death per $5'000 and has a 50% overhead over a charity that prevents a death per $10'000 and has a 20% overhead.
stevenking86 · 2019-12-27
I use givewell ( https://www.givewell.org/ ) out of fear of this kind of thing. I have no affiliation with them but I do recommend them due to the way they evaluate charities.
atlasunshrugged · 2019-12-03
I usually follow Givewell's recommendations as they do a ton of research into which charities have the most impact (the maximum lives saved per $). I also like to give to some far future stuff, usually those associated or endorsed by the Effective Altruism movement just in case AI risk becomes a reality
https://www.givewell.org/
https://www.effectivealtruism.org/
aboutruby · 2019-02-25
Why not accept donations then redistribute them to those causes?
Also I recommend https://www.givewell.org
drngdds · 2019-01-20
Your best option is probably to make as much money as you can without being evil and donate a ton of it to Givewell[0]-approved effective charities. Givewell is a group that analyzes charities to determine which ones do the most good per dollar. The best ones are mostly initiatives to treat and prevent tropical diseases in Africa.
[0]https://www.givewell.org/
bliblah · 2018-12-18
If you wish to donate but have doubts about the effectiveness or transparency of many "charitable" organizations I recommend the following website to help guide your ultimate choice: https://www.givewell.org/
wcarron · 2018-07-25
Not OP; just thought I'd chip in organizations like GiveWell. They're a non-profit dedicated to reviewing and researching charities to find the "best", most efficient, cost-effective ones in need of funds. Their website explains better: https://www.givewell.org/
Seems like the charities they've selected are well versed in the issues they attempted to address and have done a lot of work finding the best way to address them. After all, the employees of these charities are dedicating their lives and careers to solving a specific problem.
Note: I am not affiliated with GiveWell or their charities in any way besides having used them to donate.
andrepd · 2018-04-18
I would like to add, Givewell agrees with you (https://www.givewell.org).
For those who don't know, Givewell is a charity devoted to evaluating charities and writing recommendations for the most efficient and effective use of your donation money.
yrio · 2017-07-02
Can I ask you to work excellently in your job & donate some % of your income to a charity for some amount of time (not just a one time thing) ? ;)
Any charity with good reviews in http://www.givewell.org/ and https://www.charitynavigator.org/ are OK.
erichocean · 2016-11-20
Not the OP, but the typical conclusion would be "effective altruism indicates I should stay in tech and give money to helping fisherman transition to seaweed farming."
It's very hard to pass this analysis, since "high tech" is almost universally more valuable to humanity, per unit, that something low tech like farming.
If you're already in tech and you want to "help the world", giving money is almost always the best choice.
http://www.givewell.org/ is a good resource for where to give effectively.
JamesBarney · 2016-08-16
Donating to a http://www.givewell.org/ recommended charity is probably a more scalable way to make the world a better place.
Xodarap · 2016-07-14
Thanks for the question – this is Ben (subject of OP).
I listed some causes I think are valuable in the interview, but in general I think GiveWell and ACE are good evaluators:
* http://www.givewell.org/
* http://www.animalcharityevaluators.org/
For each charity they recommend, they have estimates of number of lives saved per dollar.
cuchoi · 2016-06-28
GiveWell recommends charities where you should donate based on impact-per-dollar: http://www.givewell.org/
ljw1001 · 2016-02-06
Checkout GiveWell (http://www.givewell.org/).
They are ex-hedge-fund guys who wanted to apply quantitative methods to this very question.
Also, from a personal standpoint, I try to give in accordance with Peter Singer's recommendations that you should help the worst off first (So things like Malaria Nets and de-worming). It's easier to be sure you're making things better if the money goes to treating a life-threatening disease that can be prevented for a few dollars a head.
fantominous · 2015-12-31
GiveWell [1] does a lot of research to come up with their list of recommended charities - ones that will have the highest amount of impact for each dollar donated to them.
A couple times every year I look at their top charity and drop a few hundred dollars on them. IMO if you want to maximize the impact of your donation, you can't go wrong with this approach.
[1] http://www.givewell.org/
brokencup · 2015-06-27
GiveWell[1] and Open Philanthropy[2] would probably be of interest here. (I am a donor to some of GiveWell's recommended organizations but otherwise not affiliated with them)
[1] http://www.givewell.org/
[2] http://www.openphilanthropy.org/
comboy · 2015-06-05
For those wanting to help, I highly recommend Givewell[1]. I imagine many of HN readers are (were) also lesswrong readers. This article[2] gives you some insight how Givewell evaluates organizations that they support.
[1] http://www.givewell.org/
[2] http://lesswrong.com/lw/cbs/thoughts_on_the_singularity_institute_si/
michaelkeenan · 2015-05-08
I think you might be replying to a different idea than reverend_gonzo was proposing. I think he's just noting that not-obviously-useful technological advances can have unexpected applications. I don't read him as saying that not-obviously-useful technological advances are the best way to save lives in Nepal.
If you just want to save lives, donate to whichever charity GiveWell[1] says is the best charity at saving lives per dollar. Every other use of money is vulnerable to the "but you could save more lives a different way" criticism.
[1] http://www.givewell.org/
gsastry · 2014-01-22
The truth and opportunity is that donating to some charities creates disproportionately more good and well being in the world than other charities, so this is a very important question. http://www.givewell.org/ is one charity evaluator that tries to answer this with in-depth analyses. I recommend them!