ClaimsPeople

GiveWell

GiveWell is a US-based nonprofit charity evaluator that researches and recommends high-impact giving opportunities, mainly in global health and poverty reduction.

190 claims collected, 76 researched, 23 resolved. Report of 10 October 2026, method 0.1.0+7831dd9d.

Scores by kind of claim

Each kind of claim is scored on its own, out of 100: the share that held up, with the range it likely falls in. Fewer resolved claims give a wider range.

  • Factual claims

    Statements about the present or the past, checked against the record: did they hold up?

    76 63 88

    Medium confidence, 15 factual claims resolved. From 7 documents, 2010 to 2026; 8 documents sampled from 34 candidates found.

    Not scored: 13 unresolvable, 25 checkable only against their own records.

  • Predictions

    Statements about events outside the person's control, checked once they fell due: did they come true?

    Insufficient record: 1 prediction resolved, 5 needed for a score.

    Not scored: 5 unresolvable, 2 checkable only against their own records. 2 more fall due later.

    Does not yet allow for how likely each prediction was when made.

  • Promises

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

    70 52 87

    Low confidence, 7 promises resolved. From 3 documents, 2010 to 2022; 8 documents sampled from 34 candidates found.

    Not scored: 4 unresolvable, 2 checkable only against their own records.

All types combined: 74 (likely 64 to 84, medium confidence), from 22 claims: 15 factual claims, 7 promises. It mixes kinds of claim in different proportions for different people, so compare people kind by kind.

GiveWell's claims

76 claims, sorted by newest said. Choose a claim to read it in full.
VerdictKindSaidClaimTopic
Not yet due Prediction 30 Sep 2026 GiveWell expects to direct nearly three times as much malaria funding in 2026 as in 2025. Prediction · 30 Sep 2026 Their own work or organisation
Unresolvable Factual 30 Sep 2026 The three Senior Communications Officer roles will be the first of their kind at GiveWell. Factual · 30 Sep 2026 Field building and careers
Unresolvable Prediction 30 Sep 2026 Gaps in the global supply of family planning products are large and growing, and GiveWell expects its funding to make more contraceptives available to people who want them. Prediction · 30 Sep 2026 Biosecurity
Own records only Factual 30 Sep 2026 Over the past two years GiveWell increased its research team from 38 people to 85 and is continuing to hire across the organization. Factual · 30 Sep 2026 Their own work or organisation
Mostly true Factual 30 Sep 2026 GiveWell's Cross-Cutting research subteam investigates the impact of funded programs, works to resolve the largest uncertainties, and strengthens data collection and analysis. Factual · 30 Sep 2026 Their own work or organisation
Resolved true Factual 30 Sep 2026 GiveWell's 2025 fundraising of $616 million was its largest fundraising year to date. Factual · 30 Sep 2026 Their own work or organisation
Mostly true Factual 30 Sep 2026 More than four million children under five die each year in low- and middle-income countries, and most of those deaths are preventable. Factual · 30 Sep 2026 Biosecurity
Unresolvable Prediction 30 Sep 2026 The programs GiveWell funded with 2025 donations will save about 86,000 lives in total. Prediction · 30 Sep 2026 Their own work or organisation
Resolved true Factual 31 Aug 2026 GiveWell responded in 2025 to urgent needs generated by foreign aid cuts. Factual · 31 Aug 2026 Economics and markets
Own records only Prediction 31 Aug 2026 GiveWell estimates that programs supported by the funds it directed in 2025 will save an additional 86,000 lives. Prediction · 31 Aug 2026 Their own work or organisation
Unresolvable Factual 31 Aug 2026 GiveWell has spent years growing its research capacity and scope to direct significantly more funding to the most impactful opportunities, and 2025 was a milestone in that growth. Factual · 31 Aug 2026 Their own work or organisation
Resolved true Factual 31 Aug 2026 Around $124 million (29% of funds directed) in 2025 went to GiveWell's four Top Charities. Factual · 31 Aug 2026 Their own work or organisation
Resolved true Factual 31 Aug 2026 In 2025 GiveWell directed around $427 million to high-impact programs and organizations, an 8% increase in funds directed compared to 2024. Factual · 31 Aug 2026 Their own work or organisation
Not yet due Prediction 31 Aug 2026 GiveWell's total grantmaking in 2026 is likely to approach or exceed $1 billion. Prediction · 31 Aug 2026 Their own work or organisation
Own records only Promise 6 Apr 2022 Each contest entry will be reviewed by at least one GiveWell researcher with substantial experience with its cost-effectiveness analyses. Promise · 6 Apr 2022 Their own work or organisation
Unresolvable Promise 6 Apr 2022 GiveWell will publish winning contest entries online, anonymously if requested. Promise · 6 Apr 2022 Science and research methods
Resolved true Prediction 6 Apr 2022 GiveWell likely will not be able to share a full response to all contest entries, due to limited research capacity. Prediction · 6 Apr 2022 Their own work or organisation
Unresolvable Factual 6 Apr 2022 Each of the six listed analyses relates to a program to which GiveWell has directed substantial funding (generally tens of millions of dollars) and which it intends to consider for substantial future funding. Factual · 6 Apr 2022 Their own work or organisation
Unresolvable Prediction 6 Apr 2022 Excellent contest entries may lead to changes in how GiveWell allocates millions of dollars of funding. Prediction · 6 Apr 2022 Science and research methods
Delivered on time Promise 6 Apr 2022 GiveWell will announce contest winners by December 15, 2022. Promise · 6 Apr 2022 Their own work or organisation
Unresolvable Promise 6 Apr 2022 GiveWell will give a $500 participation prize to other qualifying entries, capped at 50 prizes for the first 50 submissions. Promise · 6 Apr 2022 Science and research methods
Unresolvable Prediction 6 Apr 2022 Most strong contest entries will focus on one of the six listed programs. Prediction · 6 Apr 2022 Their own work or organisation
Resolved false Factual 6 Apr 2022 GiveWell is launching a contest for critiques of its cost-effectiveness analyses. Factual · 6 Apr 2022 Science and research methods
Unresolvable Promise 6 Apr 2022 GiveWell will share a full, substantive response to the winning and runner-up contest entries. Promise · 6 Apr 2022 Their own work or organisation
Mostly true Factual 6 Apr 2022 GiveWell makes its cost-effectiveness analyses publicly available. Factual · 6 Apr 2022 Science and research methods
Delivered on time Promise 6 Apr 2022 GiveWell will award $20,000 to the first-place entry, $10,000 to the runner-up and $5,000 to the honorable mention in its contest. Promise · 6 Apr 2022 Science and research methods
Unresolvable Prediction 6 Apr 2022 Contest entries focused on the six listed programs will likely have a higher chance of meaningfully influencing GiveWell's overall allocation of funding. Prediction · 6 Apr 2022 Their own work or organisation
Mostly true Factual 28 May 2020 GiveWell shares its plans for the year each spring. Factual · 28 May 2020 Their own work or organisation
Own records only Factual 28 May 2020 GiveWell staff may work remotely and GiveWell accommodates flexible work schedules, including flexible hours. Factual · 28 May 2020 Field building and careers
Own records only Factual 28 May 2020 Many of GiveWell's successful past hires came through the community of people who engage with its work. Factual · 28 May 2020 Field building and careers
Mostly false Promise 28 May 2020 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. Promise · 28 May 2020 Their own work or organisation
Own records only Factual 28 May 2020 GiveWell's investigation of a potential alcohol policy grant was delayed because the potential grantee shifted its focus to COVID-19 response. Factual · 28 May 2020 Their own work or organisation
Mostly true Promise 28 May 2020 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. Promise · 28 May 2020 Their own work or organisation
Resolved true Factual 28 May 2020 As of 28 May 2020, GiveWell had made three grants for COVID-19 mitigation. Factual · 28 May 2020 Their own work or organisation
Own records only Prediction 28 May 2020 Much of GiveWell's work in 2020 will go forward as anticipated. Prediction · 28 May 2020 Their own work or organisation
Own records only Factual 28 May 2020 GiveWell made limited progress in 2019 in assessing public health regulation, a relatively new domain for it. Factual · 28 May 2020 Their own work or organisation
Own records only Promise 28 May 2020 After completing its alcohol policy grant investigation, GiveWell will reflect on what it has learned about public health regulation before deciding whether to do additional work in this area. Promise · 28 May 2020 Their own work or organisation
Own records only Factual 28 May 2020 The GiveWell post on 2020 plans does not include a complete accounting of everything GiveWell plans to do in 2020. Factual · 28 May 2020 Their own work or organisation
Own records only Factual 28 May 2020 GiveWell's plans laid out internally at the beginning of 2020 were disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Factual · 28 May 2020 Their own work or organisation
Own records only Factual 28 May 2020 In early 2020 GiveWell conducted research that led it to prioritize alcohol policy and pesticide suicide prevention and to deprioritize air pollution, tobacco and road safety. Factual · 28 May 2020 Their own work or organisation
Resolved true Factual 28 May 2020 Dispensers for Safe Water is a GiveWell standout charity. Factual · 28 May 2020 Their own work or organisation
Own records only Factual 28 May 2020 GiveWell's marketing team is examining how users engage with the GiveWell website and where they may become confused or misinterpret its work. Factual · 28 May 2020 Their own work or organisation
Own records only Factual 28 May 2020 GiveWell has paused work on public health regulation as of May 2020. Factual · 28 May 2020 Their own work or organisation
Own records only Factual 28 May 2020 GiveWell does not typically focus on high-uncertainty, short-timeline reviews of funding opportunities. Factual · 28 May 2020 Their own work or organisation
Mostly true Promise 28 May 2020 In 2020 GiveWell will complete its review of the New Incentives RCT results and decide whether to direct additional funding to New Incentives. Promise · 28 May 2020 Their own work or organisation
Unresolvable Factual 2018 Among donors who gave in 2015, about 35% gave again in 2016, down from about 40% who gave again in 2015. Factual · 2018 Their own work or organisation
Own records only Factual 2018 If GiveWell influenced the same proportion of unattributed donations as attributed ones, it would have influenced an additional $20 million not in its headline money moved figure. Factual · 2018 Their own work or organisation
Resolved true Factual 2018 In 2016 GiveWell saw growth in the number of donors and amount donated in every donor size category reviewed, except donors giving $1 million or more per year. Factual · 2018 Their own work or organisation
Unresolvable Factual 2018 In 2016, donors who gave $2,000 or more accounted for about 90% of GiveWell's money moved, excluding Good Ventures. Factual · 2018 Their own work or organisation
Own records only Factual 2018 GiveWell's best guess is that it is undercounting money moved by $10-20 million. Factual · 2018 Their own work or organisation
Own records only Factual 2018 GiveWell estimates about one-third of its 2016 expenses ($2.0 million) supported traditional top charity work and about two-thirds supported the Open Philanthropy Project, the same breakdown as in 2015. Factual · 2018 Their own work or organisation
Own records only Factual 2018 GiveWell's best guess is that it played a significant role in influencing an additional $10-20 million of donations to AMF, GiveDirectly and SCI in 2016 that are not counted in its headline money moved. Factual · 2018 Their own work or organisation
Unresolvable Factual 2018 GiveWell's true money moved in 2016 may be somewhat higher than recorded, since some donors giving directly to recommended charities may have been influenced by its research without reporting it. Factual · 2018 Their own work or organisation
Unresolvable Factual 2018 GiveWell's direct web traffic increased and traffic from other non-paid sources decreased between 2015 and 2016. Factual · 2018 Their own work or organisation
Mostly true Factual 2015 In 2014, GiveWell tracked $27.8 million in money moved to its recommended charities. Factual · 2015 Their own work or organisation
Own records only Factual 2015 The limited donor growth in 2014 is largely due to many new 2013 donors, particularly those giving under $1,000, not giving again in 2014. Factual · 2015 Their own work or organisation
Unresolvable Factual 2015 GiveWell's true 2014 money moved may be somewhat higher than the amount it recorded. Factual · 2015 Their own work or organisation
Unresolvable Factual 2015 GiveWell's money moved calculation includes only donations it is confident it influenced. Factual · 2015 Their own work or organisation
Own records only Factual 2015 GiveWell generally averages Google Analytics and Clicky website traffic data. Factual · 2015 Their own work or organisation
Own records only Factual 2015 GiveWell estimates about half of its 2014 expenses supported its traditional top charity work and about half the Open Philanthropy Project. Factual · 2015 Their own work or organisation
Own records only Factual 2015 Of the 8,970 donors who gave to GiveWell's recommended charities in 2014, GiveWell knows where 3,558 (about 40%) learned of its work. Factual · 2015 Their own work or organisation
Own records only Factual 2015 The measured donor retention of about one third may understate true retention because some donors are anonymous or share partial information. Factual · 2015 Their own work or organisation
Own records only Factual 2015 In 2014 the number of donors giving to GiveWell's recommended charities or GiveWell unrestricted rose 9% to about 9,300. Factual · 2015 Their own work or organisation
Own records only Factual 2015 GiveWell believes it tracked the majority of donations it influenced in 2014, though the amount of donations it is uncertain about is larger than in past years. Factual · 2015 Their own work or organisation
Resolved true Factual 2015 In 2014, GiveWell recommended and Good Ventures made two grants: $250,000 to Evidence Action and about $34,000 to IDinsight. Factual · 2015 Their own work or organisation
Own records only Factual 2015 GiveWell guesses about 50% of the $1.9 million in unattributed 2014 donations to AMF were influenced by GiveWell, and did not include this in money moved. Factual · 2015 Their own work or organisation
Unresolvable Promise 12 Mar 2013 If GiveWell reaches its reserves limit, it would grant out unrestricted funds and count those grants in its money moved. Promise · 12 Mar 2013 Their own work or organisation
Own records only Factual 12 Mar 2013 GiveWell currently collects donation information at the individual level and can follow how donors change their giving over time. Factual · 12 Mar 2013 Their own work or organisation
Own records only Factual 12 Mar 2013 The GiveWell figure in the comparison chart includes only giving processed through its website, not all money moved, to match the online-giving data available for the others. Factual · 12 Mar 2013 Their own work or organisation
Unresolvable Factual 12 Mar 2013 GiveWell's website traffic continued to grow in 2012. Factual · 12 Mar 2013 Their own work or organisation
Unresolvable Factual 12 Mar 2013 GiveWell's money moved grew robustly in 2012 for every donor size category. Factual · 12 Mar 2013 Their own work or organisation
Unresolvable Factual 12 Mar 2013 As in prior years, search traffic (organic and AdWords) provided the majority of traffic to GiveWell's website. Factual · 12 Mar 2013 Their own work or organisation
Unresolvable Factual 7 Jan 2010 GiveWell's reviews of other organizations tend to focus on the end product and stay agnostic on those organizations' progress and how they can improve. Factual · 7 Jan 2010 Their own work or organisation
Mostly true Factual 7 Jan 2010 GiveWell last laid out a business plan in November 2008. Factual · 7 Jan 2010 Their own work or organisation
Resolved true Promise 7 Jan 2010 GiveWell will examine itself critically over the coming weeks and share its self-review in near real time on its blog. Promise · 7 Jan 2010 Their own work or organisation
Resolved true Promise 7 Jan 2010 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. Promise · 7 Jan 2010 Their own work or organisation
Back to the list

GiveWell

Open its page

Promise Their own work or organisation

“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, unsigned blog post 7 January 2010 GiveWell's self-evaluation and plan (The GiveWell Blog)

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

Resolved true The record shows it happened or was so.

What would count as true or false

True: in the weeks after 2010-01-07, GiveWell's blog published self-review / self-evaluation posts (e.g., a series examining its own performance, mistakes, strengths and weaknesses) posted progressively as the review proceeded, not only as a single post long after the review ended. Mostly true: self-review posts appeared on the blog in early 2010 but with notable lag or fewer installments than implied, while still clearly sharing the review publicly as it went. Mixed: some self-review content was posted, but most of the review was published only as a final summary months later. Mostly false: only a brief mention or a single late summary appeared, with no near-real-time sharing. False: blog archives for January–April 2010 show no self-review posts, or GiveWell states the self-review was dropped or not shared.

Evidence

  1. Self-evaluation: GiveWell as a donor resource - The GiveWell Blog GiveWell Blog · 9 February 2010 Own record
    “This is the first post (of four) we’re planning to make over the next two weeks focused on our self-evaluation and future plans.”
  2. Self-evaluation: GiveWell as a project - The GiveWell Blog GiveWell Blog · 11 February 2010 Own record
    “This is the second post (of four) we’re planning to make over the next two weeks focused on our self-evaluation and future plans. The first post is here.”
  3. GiveWell's plan: Top-level priorities - The GiveWell Blog GiveWell Blog · 16 February 2010 Own record
    “This is the third post (of four) we’re planning to make focused on our self-evaluation and future plans. The first post is here, and the second post is here.”

Reasoning

GiveWell's blog published a series of self-evaluation posts in installments: the first on 2010-02-09 (E1), the second on 2010-02-11 (E2) and the third on 2010-02-16 (E3). Each was framed as part of a planned four-post series on self-evaluation and future plans. This shows the review being shared progressively, within weeks of the 2010-01-07 statement, rather than as a single late summary. The posts are the subject's own published output, which counts as a specific record of delivery. The evidence does not show the fourth post, but the progressive sharing the criteria require is clearly documented.

Cite this claim

GiveWell, “GiveWell will examine itself critically over the coming weeks and share its self-review in near real time on its blog.” (said 7 January 2010). Verdict: resolved true. Reliability API, claim c_c3854ed90a2c, method 0.1.0+7831dd9d. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_c3854ed90a2c

Claims without a verdict

Is a verdict here wrong, or do you speak for GiveWell? Reply on the claim's own page, with the form at its foot (how replies work). Verdicts are made automatically; how verdicts and scores are made.