ClaimsGiveWell

“We hope to conduct in-depth reviews of one to two other charities (most likely Precision Agriculture for Development and/or Sanku, though possibly others) as well, but may have limited capacity to do so due to COVID-19-responsive work.”

GiveWell, unsigned blog post 28 May 2020 GiveWell's plans for 2020 (The GiveWell Blog) archived copy

Promise Their own work or organisation

GiveWell hopes to conduct in-depth reviews of one to two other charities in 2020, most likely Precision Agriculture for Development and/or Sanku, but may have limited capacity due to COVID-19 work.

Mostly false False in substance, right in a detail.

Promise: Commitments to the person's or organisation's own future action, with something to deliver: was it delivered?

The second judge would not resolve this claim; the verdict shown is the first judge's.

What would count as true or false

True: during 2020 GiveWell conducted in-depth reviews of at least one and up to two charities other than New Incentives (Precision Agriculture for Development, Sanku or others), as shown by published review pages or dated reports. Mostly true: one or two such reviews were substantially carried out in 2020 though publication came in early 2021, with dated evidence that the work was done in 2020. Mostly false: only preliminary or shallow investigations were done in 2020, or in-depth reviews happened only after 2020. False: GiveWell's later updates state no such in-depth reviews were done in 2020 (e.g., deprioritised due to COVID-19 work). The hedging means a shortfall is not a broken promise, but the verdict reflects whether the reviews happened.

Set before the research began.

Evidence (4)

  1. E1 Precision Development - November 2020 Version GiveWell · November 2020 Own record

    “We have not conducted an in-depth review of the information PAD collects from its users on engagement, knowledge, and reported behavior change.”

  2. E2 Precision Development - November 2020 Version GiveWell · November 2020 Own record

    “To date, our investigation process has consisted of:”

  3. E3 Intervention Reports - March 2021 Version GiveWell · March 2021 Own record

    “Precision Agriculture for Development (mobile-based agricultural advice) | Yes, but at a shallow level”

  4. E4 Our recommendations for giving in 2020 - The GiveWell Blog GiveWell · 19 November 2020 Own record

    “We spent several months in 2020 assessing potential giving opportunities that could mitigate the effects of COVID-19.”

Reasoning

GiveWell published a November 2020 page on Precision Agriculture for Development, but that page describes its investigation to date as limited to conversations and document review, and says some aspects had not been reviewed in depth (E1, E2). GiveWell's March 2021 intervention table classifies the PAD evidence review as done only at a shallow level (E3). GiveWell's November 2020 summary of its 2020 work notes months spent on COVID-19 work and does not name PAD or Sanku among completed research (E4). Under the criteria, this fits only preliminary or shallow investigation in 2020, though all of the evidence comes from GiveWell itself.

Cite this claim

GiveWell, “GiveWell hopes to conduct in-depth reviews of one to two other charities in 2020, most likely Precision Agriculture for Development and/or Sanku, but may have limited capacity due to COVID-19 work.” (said 28 May 2020). Verdict: mostly false. Reliability API, claim c_2c34a5cbd66e, method 0.1.0+7831dd9d, dataset release v1.1.2. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_2c34a5cbd66e

This claim is in dataset release v1.1.2, with the same verdict.

Reply to this claim

For GiveWell, or someone speaking for them: a correction or counter-evidence. Replies are read before anything is shown; an approved reply shows your name, role, date, statement and link. Your email address is never shown and is deleted 30 days after the decision (privacy).

More promise claims by GiveWell

  1. Delivered on time Promise 6 April 2022
    “Winners will be announced by December 15, 2022.”

    GiveWell will announce contest winners by December 15, 2022.

  2. Mostly true Promise 28 May 2020
    “We will make these grants if we believe they are more cost-effective than the opportunities to which we would otherwise direct funds.”

    GiveWell will make additional COVID-19 response grants if it believes they are more cost-effective than the opportunities to which it would otherwise direct funds.

  3. Mostly true Promise 28 May 2020
    “This year, we expect to complete our review of the RCT results and to make a decision about whether to direct additional funding to support New Incentives’ work.”

    In 2020 GiveWell will complete its review of the New Incentives RCT results and decide whether to direct additional funding to New Incentives.

  4. Resolved true Promise 7 January 2010
    “we’ll be trying to examine ourselves as dispassionately and critically as possible, and sharing our self-review in something close to real time via this blog.”

    GiveWell will examine itself critically over the coming weeks and share its self-review in near real time on its blog.

  5. Resolved true Promise 7 January 2010
    “For all of these questions, we intend to discuss”

    GiveWell intends to discuss, for each of its self-review questions, its progress since November 2008, where it stands today relative to success, and what it can do to improve.

All of them

Verdicts are made automatically; how verdicts are made.