Smart Giving promotes thoughtful philanthropy. Our goal is to encourage Georgia's legal community to direct its donated dollars to charities that can accomplish the most good. Our goals generally align with those of the effective altruism movement.
Just as some law firms are more effective than their competitors, some charities are more effective than other charities. In the charity world, the differences may starker because at least all lawyers have to pass the bar exam.
Some charities have chosen great missions, worked hard to figure out how to accomplish those missions, tracked data to assess their performance, and continually sought to improve. Others are well-intentioned but ineffective or inefficient. Many charities rely on emotional pleas or social connections, rather than evidence of their effectiveness, to raise money. Others are tax shelters. Others are frauds. We encourage giving to the first category.
Yep. In doing so we aren't trying to cast shade upon well-intentioned folks, but you asked the question (well ok, we asked it, but you looked at it), so here are two examples.
(1) Education is important, and donating to educational causes is generally good. But to take an example from GiveWell, if you focused on education in New York City, it would cost over $100,000 to educate a student through twelve years of school. Educating young people is laudable, but what else could be done with that money? You could save about twenty lives, because the most effective charities can save a life for about $5,000. Either goal is laudable, but we believe one path accomplishes more good than the other.
(2) The Make-a-Wish foundation grants wishes for children with critical illnesses. That's a good thing, and far better than spending the money on whiskey or spa treatments. But could you accomplish more good with your donated dollar? Here we quote Peter Singer:
“The average cost of realizing the wish of a child with a life-threatening illness is $7,500. That sum, if donated to the Against Malaria Foundation and used to provide bed nets to families in malaria-prone regions, could save the lives of [one or two] children (and that’s a conservative estimate). If donated to the Fistula Foundation, it could pay for surgeries for approximately 17 young mothers who, without that assistance, will be unable to prevent their bodily wastes from leaking through their vaginas and hence are likely to be outcasts for the rest of their lives. If donated to the Seva Foundation to treat trachoma and other common causes of blindness in developing countries, it could protect 100 children from losing their sight as they grow older.”
Yes, he was. Effective altruism is a good idea and SBF was one of many who believed in it, or at least claimed to. We regret that SBF tarnished the phrase, but effective altruism remains fantastic even if SBF turned out not to be.
Please! Just email us.
We use cookies to analyze website traffic and optimize your website experience. By accepting our use of cookies, your data will be aggregated with all other user data.