Stay up to date with Giving What We Can's blog. Featuring the latest news about our community, how to donate effectively, charity evaluation, community events and more!

Blog

Giving What We Can's blog, featuring the latest news from our community.

Donate

Pledge

footerNavigation

About us

Contact us

Our team

Our values

Our members

Our events

Transparency

Our mistakes

Our impact

Donate to Giving What We Can

Careers

Leave feedback or make a complaint

About

Our best charities

Take a giving pledge

Get involved

Make a bequest

Videos, books, podcasts

FAQs

Learn more

Press kit

Media coverage

Case studies: People who pledge to give

Media

Footer Navigation

topNavigation

Our research team’s 2026 recommendations

How we choose which charities to recommend

Other places to donate

Create a fundraiser

Best charities

The 10% Pledge

The Trial Pledge

Pledging vs. donating

View all pledgers

Share your pledge to inspire others

Giving pledges

About our research

Browse our guides and resources

Connect with our community

Read our blog

Help others discover effective giving

Birth Lottery (New)

How Rich Am I

Research and resources

Who we are & what we do

Our structure

Mistakes

Top Navigation

Gleb Tsipursky

Why you should be public about your good deeds

When I first started donating, I did so anonymously. My default is to be humble and avoid showing off. I didn’t want others around me to think that I have a stuffed head and hold too high an opinion of myself. I also didn’t want them to judge my giving decisions, as some may have judged them negatively.

I wish I had known back then that I could have done 

much more good by publicizing my donations and other goods deeds, such as signing the 

 to donate 10% of my income to effective charities.

Why did I change my mind about being public? Let me share a bit of my background to give you the appropriate context.

As long as I can remember, I have been interested in analyzing how and why individuals and groups evaluated their environment and made their decisions to reach their goals – rational thinking. This topic became the focus of my research as a professor at Ohio State in the history of science, studying the intersection of psychology, cognitive neuroscience, behavioral economics, and other fields.

While most of my colleagues focused on research, I grew more passionate about sharing my knowledge with others, focusing my efforts on high-quality, 

. I perceived my work as cognitive altruism, sharing my knowledge about rational thinking, and students expressed much appreciation for my focus on helping them make better decisions in their lives. Separately, I engaged in anonymous donations to causes such as poverty alleviation.

Yet over time, I realized that by teaching only in the classroom, I would have a very limited impact, since my students were only a small minority of the population I could potentially reach. I began to consult academic literature on how to spread my knowledge broadly. Through reading classics in the field of social influence such as 

, I learned a great many strategies to multiply the impact of my cognitive altruism work, as well as my charitable giving.

the value of being public about my activities.

 and subsequent research showed that our peers deeply impact our thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. We tend to evaluate ourselves based on what our peers think of us, and try to model behaviors that will cause others to have positive opinions about us. This applies not only to in-person meetings, but also 

, illustrates how we evaluate appropriate behavior based on how we see others behaving. However, 

 that people who exhibit more beneficial behaviors tend to avoid expressing themselves to those with less beneficial behaviors, resulting in overall social harm.

Learning about the importance of being public, including in online communities that reach far more people than in-person communities, especially by people engaging in socially beneficial habits, led to a deep transformation in my civic engagement. While it was not easy to overcome my shyness, I realized I had to do it if I wanted to optimize my positive impact on the world – both in cognitive altruism and in effective giving.

I shared this journey of learning and transformation with my wife, Agnes Vishnevkin, an MBA and non-profit professional. Together, we decided to co-found a nonprofit dedicated to spreading rational thinking and effective giving to a broad audience using research-based strategies for maximizing social impact, 

. Uniting with others committed to this mission, we write articles, blogs, make videos, author books, program apps, and collaborate with other organizations to share these ideas widely.

I also rely on research to make other decisions, such as my decision to take the 

 is key here – we make a decision in a state where we have the time to consider their consequences in the long term, and specifically wish to constrain the options of our future selves. That way, we can plan within a narrowed range of options and make the best possible use of the resources available to us.

Thus, I can plan to live on 90% of my income over my lifetime, and plan to decrease some of my spending in the long term so that I can 

give to charities that I believe are most effective for making the kind of impact I want to see in the world.

Knowing about the importance of publicizing my good deeds and commitments, I recognize that 

I can do much more good by sharing my decision to take the pledge with others.

 All of us have friends, and the large majority of us have social media channels and we all have the power to be public about our good deeds. You can also consider joining or creating a new 

 for effective altruism in your community. 

, letting others hear about effective altruism and motivating them to give more and more effectively.

According to the scholarly literature, by being public about our good deeds we can bring about much good in the world. Even though it may not feel as tangible as direct donations, sharing with others about our good deeds and supporting others doing so may in the end allow us to do even more good.

Eleanor Stephens

Six ways to double your impact this New Year's

If you're reading this, you may have already taken the Giving What We Can pledge. Nevertheless, we want to let you know that 

 this New Year. We are looking to get as many new people to take the pledge as possible, and we need your help. If you can persuade somebody to commit 10% of their income to effective charities, you can potentially double your impact.

Most of our society doesn't even consider the idea of pledging to give 10% to effective charities yet. So if you're someone who has taken the pledge, you've made an rare and amazing commitment. You're probably giving away thousands of pounds each year. You wouldn't be doing that unless you had a good reason, and it's probably not just because you get your name on a cool list.

Do you think all of us living safe lives in rich countries have a duty to those less fortunate? Does it bring you joy to save lives? Do you have a deep sense of empathy for people suffering around the world? Does it sadden you that our world is as broken and contains as much suffering as it does?

This New Year, think about the people in your life who might understand and share those reasons. Maybe you know someone who also cares for others or feels that they have a duty to those less fortunate, but they're currently giving to charities that are less effective than they could be. Perhaps they have a deep sense of empathy and are saddened by the suffering in the world, but they haven't yet noticed that giving 10% is a way to help. Maybe they're even giving 10% or more already, but they haven't made the public commitment of taking the pledge.

If you know anyone like that, please reach out to them. 

We want as many people as possible to join us in taking the pledge this New Year. Whatever driving passions or deeply held moral beliefs or lofty ambitions made you take the pledge, we want you to share them with people, to show them to those who need inspiring, and be extraordinarily proud of the good you do in the world.

 Here is a list of things you can do to help us inspire more people:

 was a tool which broadcasted our message across social media only if enough people signed up to share the post at the same time.

https://www.facebook.com/events/556956541147412/

. As well as sharing - both on your facebook wall and in any groups you are a part of and pages you manage - and clicking 'interested', you can click 'invite' and select the names of all of your friends who might possibly be interested in the pledge.

 to anyone whom you think might take the pledge, explaining the reasons you took it and suggesting that they join you.

. Several people have done so already. Check out these links for inspiration:    

Sinesalvatorem Tumblr: Making a Difference

Slate Star Codex: Nobody is Perfect, Everything is Commensurable

Aceso Under Glass: the Giving What We Can Pledge

80,000 Hours: what's the easiets way anyone can have a big social impact?

Giving What We Can: do something incredible this New Year

Consider writing an article for your local newspaper or student publication

 about Giving What We Can and taking the pledge as a New Year’s Resolution. And, if you have other media connections, please contact Linchuan Zhang (

), one of the organisers of this event, about spreading the word further.

And if you haven't pledged yet, you can take the pledge at 

https://www.givingwhatwecan.org/get-involved/become-member

. Or if you don't feel ready to commit to giving 10%, but you want to learn more about what giving feels like, you can Try Giving at 

https://www.givingwhatwecan.org/get-involved/try-giving/

show people that taking the pledge doesn't make your life any less fun by having a very Merry Christmas!

Hauke Hillebrandt

Malaria may be the worst killer in history. But this map — using the latest data — shows a surprising, and encouraging result.

Bednets Have Prevented 450 Million Cases of Malaria

Malaria may be the worst killer in history. It still kills thousands of people — mostly children — every year.

 that in 2015 alone, 438,000 people died of malaria - 292,000 of whom were children under 5 in sub-Saharan Africa.

But this map shows a surprising, and encouraging result.

The animation shows the percentage of children in Africa who had malarial fevers over the last 15 years. Dark red means 100% -- that is, all children in the area -- had at least one episode of clinical malaria within a given year. Green means 50%, and blue means that no children had a malaria fever within a given year.

Here’s another map using data for people of all ages

 — you can see the same pattern. A massive decrease in malaria cases over the last 15 years.

These maps show a clear trend — in fact, rates of malaria have halved over the past 15 years

. But why has there been such a dramatic decrease in malaria?

The reduction in malaria has been caused — in large part — by people sleeping under bednets. Green means everyone is sleeping under bednets and is protected, yellow means half of all people are protected, and red means nobody is protected from malaria.

Long lasting insecticide-treated bednets are a powerful weapon against malaria

, not only because they’re a physical barrier between mosquitoes and sleeping children — the insecticide coating kills mosquitoes, so they don’t infect other members of the family (and the village) who don’t have mosquito nets.

The data used for these animations comes from a new paper published in 

 (widely regarded as the top science journal). We already had very strong evidence that bednets prevent children from dying of malaria (and related complications like anemia) based on a meta-analysis of 22 experimental trials

But this new paper uses a “spatiotemporal Bayesian geostatistical model of bednet coverage with 27,573 georeferenced population clusters and an optimised suite of temporally dynamic environmental and sociodemographic covariates”.

In other words, this paper tells us about the bigger picture, showing that bednets are incredibly effective, not just at the level of individual villages, but at the level of whole populations. Essentially, the case that we should be distributing bednets just got even stronger.

Women and children carrying insecticide-treaded mosquito nets distributed by the Against Malaria Foundation in Ntcheu, Malawi

The research suggests that anti-malarial interventions have prevented about 

Long-lasting insecticide treated bed nets

 stand out as being particularly effective — being responsible for around 68% of the malaria reduction. This means that 

bednets have prevented around 450 million cases of malaria

 over the last 15 years because of malaria interventions 

We’ve made great progress. But we’re only halfway there.

Notice that, even in 2015, there are red and yellow spots on the map. 45% of all people in Africa are still at risk of disease and death from malaria 

, because they are too poor to buy nets, 

and an additional 245 million nets are needed in the next 2 years.

Blood smear showing Plasmodium Falciparum, the parasite which causes malaria (commons.wikimedia.org)

Malaria is also an immense economic burden on health systems and people: since 2000, malaria treatment in sub-Saharan Africa has cost almost $300 million

. We can see the flip side of this in places in the United States, Brazil and Uganda — children born after malaria was eradicated or heavily controlled and so were not exposed to malaria during pregnancy, had substantially higher income later in life 

We urgently need to keep funding the distribution of bednets, because 

bednet distributions are one of the most cost-effective ways of preventing disease and death.

 Since 2000, one billion bednets have been distributed (costing around 5 dollars each), and have averted 450 million cases of malaria — this suggests that, on average, one episode of clinical malaria can be prevented for about $11 (malarial fevers can be very painful. One recent study suggests that in Kenya, bednet distributions between 2003 and 2008 have prevented a death of a child for about $1,011 on average

The charity evaluator Givewell estimates that the cost per child death averted through bed net distributions funded by the 

 (even though these estimates are uncertain, they're roughly comparable to the new malaria vaccine, which is not 100% effective and experts say should be used in combination with bednets

, and we at Giving What We Can, rank the Against Malaria Foundation as 

. This is not only because we think it is the most cost-effective charity one can donate to, but also because of Against Malaria Foundation’s outstanding transparency and accountability.

 you can see video footage from distributions, as well as detailed financial statements. They also check if the nets they distributed are still hung every 6 months in a random sample of 5% the households (two years after distribution, 81% of nets distributed were still being hung up and the most comprehensive study suggests that bednets are almost never used for things like fishing

preventing deaths will not lead to overpopulation

We can all help to make the maps above more blue and green. The Against Malaria Foundation needs a minimum of $13.4 million to fill their funding gap next year 

. And if you want to keep up the fight long-term, why not join us, and more than 1400 people — among them 

development economists, moral philosophers, students, nurses, entrepreneurs, scientists and teachers

 to give 10% of your income to the charities that you think are most effective (or just 1% for those who don’t work full time).

We’re winning some impressive battles against one of history’s biggest killers. As more people start donating to a cause that is rigorously evidence-based and extremely cost-effective, we can start to win the war.

Giving What We Can’s Recommendations for Giving Season 2015

With the 2015 Giving Season upon us, we’ve reviewed our top charity recommendations so that you can make an informed decision about where to give.

This year we have extensively reviewed our 

We continue to believe that both the Against Malaria Foundation and the Schistosomiasis Control Initiative are some of the most effective giving opportunities and continue to recommend giving to them this season.

, which are charities we are not as certain about as our top charities, but that might have an even higher impact. 

The Against Malaria Foundation, which funds and provides technical assistance with distributions of long-lasting insecticide treated bednets, remains a top charity.We have written an 

 on the effectiveness of AMF’s bednet distributions

The charity evaluator Givewell has also updated their 

 and ranks AMF as their #1 charity. In brief, AMF has funded 

, which have and will avert much suffering and death due to malaria.

. However, there is still a major funding gap 

 for insecticide treated nets - which means that in the long-term there is a funding gap for AMF.

In the the short term, there is also a funding gap for AMF. Givewell estimates that even after taking into account the Good Ventures grant of $22.5 Million and what Givewell donors will give until February 2015 (~$15 million), and what other donors (which includes Giving What We Can donors) are expected to give until February 2015 ($1.6 million), AMF still needs about $13.4 million dollars in order for there to be at least a 50% chance for AMF to not to be funding constrained in the next year

In sum, because there is a big funding gap, and AMF has a good track record of distributing bednets as well as being accountable and transparent, we highly recommend donating to AMF this winter.

The Schistosomiasis Control Initiative provides technical assistance to governments with deworming programmes. We have written an 

 on SCI this year and Givewell has also recently updated their 

SCI has helped implement large deworming programmes in 2015 and plans to scale up and assist with even bigger operations in 2016

. For instance, SCI reports that up to the end March 2015, SCI contributed to delivering about 47 million deworming treatments overall, and from 1st April 2015 to 31st March 2016 alone it plans to help deliver 36 million treatments

unmet need for deworming treatment globally

 and thus a long-term funding gap. In the short-term, Givewell estimates that SCI needs about $4.9 million dollars in order for there to be at least a 50% chance for SCI to not to be funding constrained in the next year.

In sum, SCI remains a top charity. We believe it is one of the most effective charities one can donate to.

Deworm the World Initiative as part of Evidence Action (DtWI)

The Deworm the World Initiative (DtWI), like SCI, provides technical assistance to governments with deworming programmes. We have written an 

 on DtWI this year and Givewell has also recently updated their 

DtWI has helped implement large deworming programmes in 2015 and plans to scale up to other countries and assist with even bigger operations in 2016. For instance, DtWI helped coordinate the first national deworming day in India this year, and 89.9 million children in 12 Indian states were targeted. Next year they will try to include all 36 Indian states and try to intensify their work in Kenya and India and potentially expand their work into Ethiopia, Vietnam, Pakistan

 DtWI will likely receive a grant of $10.8 million dollars from Good Ventures

 and thus a long-term funding gap. However, because of the Good Ventures grant, in the short-term, Givewell estimates that DtWI does not have a funding gap, defined as there being at least a 50% chance for DtWI to not to be funding constrained in the next year.

It is important to note that this calculation takes into account the $2.5 million that Giving What We Can and other non-Givewell influenced donors have donated to DtWI

. Currently, we estimate that Giving What We Can influenced donors will donate $300,000 to Deworm the World Initiative. Moreover, Givewell also estimates that there is a small 5% probability that DtWI might be able to spend an additional $8.2 million, if existing programmes move forward quickly.

Thus, we will keep up our current recommendation of DtWI for now, in order to not disrupt their existing activities or slow down their scale up. However, we might change our recommendation next year, in case we believe that donors following Giving What We Can’s recommendation of DtWI will donate too much for DtWI to productively absorb in the short-term.

In sum, DtWI remains a promising charity, and we believe it is one of the most effective charities one can donate to.

Project Healthy Children provides technical assistance governments with micronutrient fortification programmes (the fortification of staple foods such as oil and salt with vitamins and minerals). We have written an 

 this year and the charity evaluator Givewell is also 

PHC has worked on micronutrient fortification legislation in 2015 and they report that they have made good progress: for instance, a cooking oil supplier holding 60% of the market share in Burundi now fortifies their oil with Vitamin A. There is still large 

unmet need for micronutrient fortification globally

It is important to note that we cannot be as certain about PHC’s effectiveness, because the impact of technical assistance is hard to measure. We also do not know as much about PHC as about the other charities we recommend. However, 

 suggests that micronutrient fortification at (industrial) scales might potentially avert a lot of ill health, that micronutrient deficiency is a very tractable problem, and that the countries that PHC is active in (small countries with a population of less than 20 million) are potentially neglected by larger development agencies and other charities. Next year we will look in more detail into GAIN and IGN, two other charities in the micronutrient space.

In sum, PHC remains a promising charity and we believe it is one of the most effective charities one can donate to.

Concerns about fungibility of donations and Room for more funding

Because the Good Ventures foundation has made grants to AMF, SCI, and DtWI, some people have been concerned about fungibility, i.e. that small donors do not really have an impact with their donations, because a bigger donor might easily fill the funding gap of these charities anyway and will just strategically leave them open.

Givewell has written about their views on this 

. In brief, they will only fill 50% of the funding gap that is related to the scale up and leave the other half for other donors to fill. Givewell also reports that they will not recommend more grants to Good Ventures in the next year.

We do not believe that fungibility is a grave concern against giving to our charities currently. First, Good Ventures is trying to give money away in the most effective way, which is what we are trying to do too. That means that if we’re fungible with each other that effectively leaves the other with with more money to give to other effective charities - which is what we all want.

 giving opportunities in the future and we won’t ‘run out’ of very effective causes to give to. A lot of money is needed for health globally — just look at the differences in health expenditure between countries. In the United Kingdom, $3598 is spent per person per year on health

Blog

Why you should be public about your good deeds

Six ways to double your impact this New Year's

Bednets Have Prevented 450 Million Cases of Malaria

Giving What We Can’s Recommendations for Giving Season 2015

Do something incredible this New Year

What can the Reach Act do for Global Health?

Mental Health interventions may be more cost-effective than we think

Giving What We Can needs your support this Christmas

Quadruple your donation to SCI!

Happy #GivingTuesday!