ClaimsGiveWell

“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.”

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

Promise Their own work or organisation

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

Mostly true True in substance, wrong 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 said resolved false; the verdict shown is the first judge's.

What would count as true or false

True: by 2020-12-31 GiveWell had both completed its review of the New Incentives RCT results and made a decision (yes or no) on directing additional funding to New Incentives, as shown in dated GiveWell publications (e.g., a grant page, top charity announcement or review). Mostly true: both were done in 2020 with only a small slip in detail (e.g., the decision was made in December and published in early January 2021, with the decision documented as made in 2020). Mostly false: only one part was finished in 2020 (e.g., review finished but decision deferred), or both were done only in 2021 or later. False: GiveWell's late-2020 updates state the review or decision was still ongoing or postponed beyond 2020.

Set before the research began.

Evidence (3)

  1. E1 Recommendation to Open Philanthropy for Grants in November 2020 GiveWell · February 2021 Own record

    “Before the end of 2021, we expect to decide whether to recommend additional funding that would enable New Incentives to scale up to new cl”

  2. E2 New Incentives (Conditional Cash Transfers to Increase Infant Vaccination) - November 2020 Version GiveWell · November 2020 Own record

    “GiveWell has followed this RCT closely and believes that it meets high quality standards.”

  3. E3 Our recommendations for giving in 2020 - The GiveWell Blog GiveWell · 19 November 2020 Own record

    “We named New Incentives a top charity this year after considering many factors, including the results of a high-quality study of its program.”

Reasoning

GiveWell's November 2020 review page says it followed the New Incentives RCT closely and judged it to meet high quality standards (E2). Its November 19, 2020 recommendations post says it named New Incentives a top charity that year based partly on the RCT results (E3). Together these indicate the review was completed and a funding-related decision was made in 2020. However, E1 shows that a further decision on additional funding to scale New Incentives to new clinics was deferred to before the end of 2021, so the promise was only partly fulfilled; all evidence comes from GiveWell itself.

Cite this claim

GiveWell, “In 2020 GiveWell will complete its review of the New Incentives RCT results and decide whether to direct additional funding to New Incentives.” (said 28 May 2020). Verdict: mostly true. Reliability API, claim c_f3f4a6e2621f, method 0.1.0+7831dd9d, dataset release v1.1.2. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_f3f4a6e2621f

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 false Promise 28 May 2020
    “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…”

    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.

  3. 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.

  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.