Season 2 Episode 372
In this episode, we are joined by Elie Hassenfeld, Co-Founder and CEO of GiveWell to discuss how data, transparency, and moral trade-offs can guide charitable giving with maximum impact. Elie brings his background in finance and philosophy to the world of global philanthropy—explaining how GiveWell rigorously evaluates programs to determine which ones save or improve lives most effectively. We explore how GiveWell assesses cost-effectiveness, why transparency is a core organizational value, and how moral weights shape grantmaking priorities. Elie also opens up about the challenges of running a high-stakes nonprofit that directs nearly $400 million annually, why global health interventions are often overlooked by traditional donors, and how they navigate philosophical dilemmas like saving a life versus doubling someone’s income. This conversation blends finance, ethics, and effective altruism into a compelling framework for anyone who wants to do the most good with their giving.
Key Points From This Episode:
(0:01:00) Why charitable giving is a financial decision—and why it deserves evidence-based thinking.
(0:02:20) GiveWell’s mission: Using rigorous research to direct donor funds where they’ll do the most good.
(0:03:44) How Elie’s frustration with vague charity claims led him to co-found GiveWell in 2007.
(0:08:35) The scope of impact: GiveWell’s 80-person team now directs ~$395M annually.
(0:10:43) The weight of responsibility: Why directing hundreds of millions of dollars is both gratifying and stressful.
(0:12:22) Radical transparency: Publishing internal debates and mistakes as a matter of principle.
(0:13:06) GiveWell’s core values: Maximize impact, transparency, truth-seeking, and deep consideration.
(0:16:25) How GiveWell differs from traditional charity evaluators (like those focused on overhead ratios).
(0:18:15) The business model: GiveWell is a nonprofit funded by donors—no cut taken from giving funds.
(0:21:20) Who gives: A mix of finance and tech professionals across the U.S., Canada, and the UK.
(0:22:16) EA and SBF: How distancing from the effective altruism label insulated GiveWell from the fallout.
(0:24:04) GiveWell’s four criteria for evaluating programs: Evidence, cost-effectiveness, room for more funding, and transparency.
(0:29:45) How GiveWell identifies top charities—through academic research, NGO outreach, and sector immersion.
(0:31:07) Current top charities: Against Malaria Foundation, Malaria Consortium, Helen Keller Intl, and New Incentives.
(0:34:31) Why GiveWell shifted to global poverty after early comparisons showed massive cost-effectiveness differences.
(0:39:24) Why the cost to save a life is higher than people think—nets don’t reach everyone, and malaria risk is probabilistic.
(0:43:27) How GiveWell measures “good”: lives saved, health improved, income increased—standardized into one metric.
(0:46:47) Moral weights matter: Why GiveWell equates saving a life with doubling 100 families’ income.
(0:50:37) Where moral weights come from: surveys, literature, and direct community input from Kenya and Ghana.
(0:53:44) Letting donors tweak the model: Tools exist to adjust for your personal moral priorities.
(0:54:57) Do top charities cannibalize each other’s impact? (Spoiler: Not really.)
(0:56:20) Capacity assessment: How GiveWell determines how much money an organization can productively absorb.
(1:00:15) Why even on-the-ground observations (like chlorine testing methods) shape their assessments.
(1:01:27) Why evidence matters—especially when tryi
Published on 17 hours ago
If you like Podbriefly.com, please consider donating to support the ongoing development.
Donate