The Rational Reminder Podcast

Episode 372: Elie Hassenfeld – (Approximately) Optimal Philanthropy

Date: August 28, 2025
Hosts: Benjamin Felix and Cameron Passmore
Guest: Elie Hassenfeld, Co-founder & CEO of GiveWell

Overview

This episode dives deep into the framework and philosophy behind optimal charitable giving, exploring how evidence, quantification, and moral values can be applied to maximize philanthropic impact. Ben and Cameron—chartered portfolio managers—draw strong parallels between sensible investing and sensible donating, discussing with Elie Hassenfeld from GiveWell how donors can do the most good with their money. The discussion covers GiveWell's rigorous evaluation process, transparency, business model, impact measurement, and the tricky subject of moral weights in philanthropy.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Introduction to GiveWell

• Purpose: GiveWell rigorously researches and recommends high-impact charities, primarily in global health and poverty alleviation.
• Dual Offering: Donors can use their research to give directly, or donate through GiveWell for re-granting.

  “We’re an organization that does rigorous research to identify places to direct charitable dollars to help people as much as possible in low income countries… We publish everything… Donors can either give directly or through us.” – Elie Hassenfeld [04:29]

2. Origins of GiveWell

• Frustration with Status Quo: Elie and his co-founder, seeking to give away a few thousand dollars, found a lack of transparency and relevant impact data from charities.

  "All I got was a 25-page annual report that was 95% pictures of kids… There were no answers to these questions." – Elie Hassenfeld [06:50]

• Motivation: Obsession with the question: What does the most good per dollar? Led them to leave finance jobs and start GiveWell in 2007.

3. GiveWell’s Growth & Scale

• Scale: Grew from $100,000 in early years to directing ~$395 million in 2024.
• Team: 80 staff; 50 focused on research.

  “I think we'd almost certainly be in the top 10 of private funders of global health programs and global health and development programs.” – Elie Hassenfeld [08:50]

4. Business Model & Funding

• Operations funded by separate donors; GiveWell does not take a cut from donations meant for causes, prioritizing transparency for users.
• Near indifference to whether donors give directly or through GiveWell, except for tracking impact and targeting funds where most effective.

  “At the end of the day, I mean, we're not completely indifferent to people giving through us versus giving directly, but we're nearly indifferent…” – Elie Hassenfeld [19:06]

5. Organizational Values

• North Star: Maximize impact for people in need.
• Transparency: Radical, sometimes uncomfortable for readers; all reasoning, data, and mistakes are published.
• Truth-Seeking: No “capital T” truth in philanthropy, but relentless self-questioning and openness to critique.
• Consideration: A conscious effort to remain approachable and avoid being coldly analytical, keeping beneficiaries front of mind.

  "We ask questions, we dig and we dig and we dig. The only thing that stops that digging is the fact that we're not an academic group... we actually have to direct money." – Elie Hassenfeld [15:12]

6. Evaluation Criteria (“The Four Buckets”)

• Evidence of Effectiveness: Is there robust, preferably RCT, evidence that the program works?

  Example: Malaria nets supported by “more than 20 randomized controlled trials.” [24:03]

• Cost-Effectiveness: What's the “bang per buck”? Holistically factors in leaks in the system, usage rates, real-world barriers, opportunity cost.
• Room for More Funding: Marginal impact of additional dollars given; not just historical effectiveness.
• Transparency of Grantees: Willingness of organizations to share data, admit problems, and give realistic assessments.

7. Identifying Top Charities & Cause Areas

• Process: Combines academic review, direct engagement with INGOs, and researcher networks in the field.
• Current Top Charities:
  • Against Malaria Foundation (AMF): Distribution of malaria nets
  • Malaria Consortium: Seasonal malaria chemoprevention
  • Helen Keller International: Vitamin A supplementation
  • New Incentives: Cash transfers to incentivize child vaccination

  "These programs... cost about $5 per person, per year. We estimate, very roughly, we're talking about $5,000 to avert the death of a young child from those programs." – Elie Hassenfeld [33:17]

8. Rationale for Global Poverty Focus

• Initially evaluated both US and international programs, but found the impact per donor dollar drastically higher globally.

  “A few thousand dollars per life saved overseas… versus a few thousand per year in school [per student] domestically.” – Elie Hassenfeld [34:31]

9. Static vs. Changing Recommendations

• Top charities list has become more stable, but GiveWell is committed to dropping/adding based on new evidence or changes in cost-effectiveness.

10. Measurement and Uncertainty

• Continuous Audit: Ongoing reassessment, regular reporting, but acknowledges limitations—some effects (like long-term child mortality change) are ultimately "unknowable".
• Uncertainty: Not modelled mathematically, but acknowledged; decisions blend quant with qualitative factors.

  "At some level, we just don't let our decisions be made only by the numbers." – Elie Hassenfeld [44:38]

11. The Crucial Role of Moral Weights

• Definition: The “exchange rate” between different kinds of good (e.g., averting a child’s death vs. doubling income for a family).
• Implementation: Currently, averting one child death ×100 = doubling income for 100 families for a year.
• Sensitivity: Small changes to moral weights can radically change organizational grant-making priorities.

  "If you doubled the weight on income… you’d be supporting a lot more income-increasing programs than we do today.” – Elie Hassenfeld [49:13]

Notable Discussion on Moral Weights ([47:04])

• Moral weights come from staff/donor surveys, academic ‘value of statistical life’ estimates, and (limited) input from recipient country populations.
• Elie is candid: “We know they’re not right, because that’s kind of impossible.” [52:30]
• Donors can use GiveWell’s tools to model giving based on their own moral preferences.

12. On Subjectivity & Behavioral Giving

• Elie refrains from telling people what they "should" do with their charitable dollars, but advocates for evidence-based giving for those moved by global suffering.
• Calls for parallel reasoning between major life decisions (investing, medicine for family) and charitable giving: best evidence, rigor, and impact.

13. Personal Reflections

• Defining Success: “Deep relationships, personal growth, and then direct impact.” [63:54]
• Elie derives personal fulfillment from family, growth as a leader, and demonstrable improvements in others’ lives.

Memorable Quotes & Timestamps

• "It's radically transparent... to the point of me as the reader being uncomfortable." – Benjamin Felix [11:56]
• "We're asking people to take their money, trust us to direct it 10,000 miles away. And there are a lot of worries people have about charitable organizations being scams." – Elie Hassenfeld [12:21]
• "Awesomely nerdy describes this pretty well. Or at least nerdy, hopefully awesomely nerdy.” – Elie Hassenfeld [39:06]
• "The subjective part of giving or the motivation comes from the emotional, subjective place. ...Instead, to me, I try to imagine, instead of thinking about this person suffered from cancer… instead say this person suffered. What can I do to alleviate suffering?” – Elie Hassenfeld [61:27]
• "If you buy an iPhone, you know the iPhone is good because you get to use the iPhone... This totally breaks down in the charitable market." – Elie Hassenfeld, on the broken feedback loop in charity vs. markets [28:06]

Notable Moments by Timestamp

• 05:33: Elie’s stories about the information vacuum pre-GiveWell.
• 09:43: The massive yearly increase in donations GiveWell is moving.
• 12:21: Transparency so radical it’s “uncomfortable.”
• 15:12: Why GiveWell isn’t exactly seeking Truth with a capital T.
• 24:03: The fourfold criteria for evaluating charities.
• 33:17: Costs per life saved and the real-world complexity behind those numbers.
• 47:04: Explanation of moral weights and their crucial significance.
• 53:44: Donor tools for customizing moral weight application.
• 61:27: On the subjectivity and emotional roots of charitable giving.

Closing Thoughts

This episode is a profound look at maximizing good through charitable giving, blending empirical rigor with philosophical depth. GiveWell stands out through radical transparency, sensitivity to uncertainty, and willingness to interrogate its own assumptions—especially when it comes to tricky, subjective issues like moral weights. The insights here are invaluable not just for donors, but for anyone interested in bringing more rationality and effectiveness to the act of giving.

For further information, check out GiveWell’s website for their published research, detailed cost-effectiveness spreadsheets, and tools for donors to model their own giving preferences.