Open Philanthropy Project

Many foundations decide how much and where to give based on their founders' personal precommitments to specific issues, geographies, and/or institutions. If a grantmaking organization instead wanted to select problems based on a general measure of impact per dollar spent, how should it approach this goal? What tools could it use to identify promising cause areas (climate change, education, or health, for example) or to compare grants that achieve different results? This paper focuses on an approach followed by the grantmaking organization Open Philanthropy for its “Global Health and Wellbeing” portfolio, with an emphasis on two key frameworks: equalizing marginal philanthropic returns, as well as importance, neglectedness, and tractability. It describes measurement and comparability under the first framework, and then applies the second framework to the example of reducing exposure to lead. It concludes by considering critiques and areas for improvement.

Science philanthropy is experiencing a growth spurt, propelled by the newly acquired wealth of individuals and foundations, as well as a desire to address challenges such as infectious disease, fire, drought, and food and water security. Especially in the United States, this is altering the dynamics of the research ecosystem, which has been dominated by government funding since the end of World War II. This change comes with new perspectives and approaches to solving the world's problems. And it comes with a commitment to increase equity in funding.

Solar geoengineering is no substitute for cutting emissions, but could nevertheless help reduce the atmospheric carbon burden. In the extreme, if solar geoengineering were used to hold radiative forcing constant under RCP8.5, the carbon burden may be reduced by ∼100 GTC, equivalent to 12–26% of twenty-first-century emissions at a cost of under US$0.5 per tCO2.

Abstract An understanding of cultural elements that are critical in determining how fundraising is carried out in a particular society and country is vital for professionals who seek philanthropic support for their organizations.

Abstract Fundraising still lags behind in the universal push toward representation by diverse populations in the United States. Lack of diversity in the profession presents both problems and opportunities.

National Municipal ReviewVolume 4, Issue 3 p. 437-447 Article Are women a force for good government? An analysis of the returns in the eecent municipal election in Chicago† Edith Abbott, Edith Abbott Chicago Associate Director of the Chicago School of Civics and Philanthropy.Search for more papers by this author Edith Abbott, Edith Abbott Chicago Associate Director of the Chicago School of Civics and Philanthropy.Search for more papers by this author First published: July 1915 https://doi.org/10.1002/ncr.4110040309 † See article entitled “DO Women Vote,” by Ellis Meredith, National Municipal Review, vol. iii, p. 663. AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Volume4, Issue3July 1915Pages 437-447 RelatedInformation