GiveWell will share a full, substantive response to the winning and runner-up contest entries.

Delivered (true): GiveWell published a substantive response addressing the content of each winning and each runner-up entry in the Change Our Mind contest. Mostly true: every such entry got a response, with one response noticeably brief. Mostly false: responses covered only some of the winning and runner-up entries. False: a later record (for example the results post or a later update) shows no such responses were published or that the plan was dropped. No deadline was given; record when the responses appeared.

Set before the research began.

1. E1 The winners of the Change Our Mind Contest—and some reflections - The GiveWell Blog GiveWell · 15 December 2022 Own record

   “Winners are listed below, followed by our reflections on this contest and responses to the winners.”

2. E2 The winners of the Change Our Mind Contest—and some reflections - The GiveWell Blog GiveWell · 15 December 2022 Own record

   “We’re not sure if conducting the full uncertainty modeling recommended by the entry is the right approach for GiveWell, and we’d like to explore alternative approaches to addressing this issue.”

3. E3 The winners of the Change Our Mind Contest—and some reflections - The GiveWell Blog GiveWell · 15 December 2022 Own record

   “We believe the authors understand our analysis well and were able to identify some weak points in our cost-effectiveness analysis; we expect to make some but not all of the changes they propose.”

4. E4 Four prize-winning posts from 2022 - Happier Lives Institute Happier Lives Institute · 23 December 2022

   “We believe HLI’s feedback is likely to change some of our funding recommendations, at least marginally, and perhaps, more importantly, improve our decision-making across multiple interventions.”

GiveWell's 15 December 2022 results post says it includes responses to the winners (E1). It gives substantive responses to the Haber first-place entry (E2) and the Romer & Romer first-place entry (E3), and the Happier Lives Institute quotes a GiveWell response to its prize-winning entry (E4). The fetched text shows no individual responses to the honorable-mention (runner-up) entries, but it was cut off partway (E3), so their absence does not show those responses were never published. The evidence therefore does not settle whether every runner-up entry received a substantive response.