Open Philanthropy donations made (filtered to cause areas matching Migration policy)

This is an online portal with information on donations that were announced publicly (or have been shared with permission) that were of interest to Vipul Naik. The git repository with the code for this portal, as well as all the underlying data, is available on GitHub. All payment amounts are in current United States dollars (USD). The repository of donations is being seeded with an initial collation by Issa Rice as well as continued contributions from him (see his commits and the contract work page listing all financially compensated contributions to the site) but all responsibility for errors and inaccuracies belongs to Vipul Naik. Current data is preliminary and has not been completely vetted and normalized; if sharing a link to this site or any page on this site, please include the caveat that the data is preliminary (if you want to share without including caveats, please check with Vipul Naik). We expect to have completed the first round of development by the end of March 2023. See the about page for more details. Also of interest: pageview data on analytics.vipulnaik.com, tutorial in README, request for feedback to EA Forum.

Table of contents

Basic donor information

ItemValue
Country United States
Affiliated organizations (current or former; restricted to potential donees or others relevant to donation decisions)GiveWell Good Ventures
Best overview URLhttps://causeprioritization.org/Open%20Philanthropy%20Project
Facebook username openphilanthropy
Websitehttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/
Donations URLhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/giving/grants
Twitter usernameopen_phil
PredictionBook usernameOpenPhilUnofficial
Page on philosophy informing donationshttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/about/vision-and-values
Grant application process pagehttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/giving/guide-for-grant-seekers
Regularity with which donor updates donations datacontinuous updates
Regularity with which Donations List Website updates donations data (after donor update)continuous updates
Lag with which donor updates donations datamonths
Lag with which Donations List Website updates donations data (after donor update)days
Data entry method on Donations List WebsiteManual (no scripts used)

Brief history: Open Philanthropy (Open Phil for short) spun off from GiveWell, starting as GiveWell Labs in 2011, beginning to make strong progress in 2013, and formally separating from GiveWell as the "Open Philanthropy Project" in June 2017. In 2020, it started going by "Open Philanthropy" dropping the "Project" word.

Brief notes on broad donor philosophy and major focus areas: Open Philanthropy is focused on openness in two ways: open to ideas about cause selection, and open in explaining what they are doing. It has endorsed "hits-based giving" and is working on areas of AI risk, biosecurity and pandemic preparedness, and other global catastrophic risks, criminal justice reform (United States), animal welfare, and some other areas.

Notes on grant decision logistics: See https://www.openphilanthropy.org/blog/our-grantmaking-so-far-approach-and-process for the general grantmaking process and https://www.openphilanthropy.org/blog/questions-we-ask-ourselves-making-grant for more questions that grant investigators are encouraged to consider. Every grant has a grant investigator that we call the influencer here on Donations List Website; for focus areas that have Program Officers, the grant investigator is usually the Program Officer. The grant investigator has been included in grants published since around July 2017. Grants usually need approval from an executive; however, some grant investigators have leeway to make "discretionary grants" where the approval process is short-circuited; see https://www.openphilanthropy.org/giving/grants/discretionary-grants for more. Note that the term "discretionary grant" means something different for them compared to government agencies, see https://www.facebook.com/vipulnaik.r/posts/10213483361534364 for more.

Notes on grant publication logistics: Every publicly disclosed grant has a writeup published at the time of public disclosure, but the writeups vary significantly in length. Grant writeups are usually written by somebody other than the grant investigator, but approved by the grant investigator as well as the grantee. Grants have three dates associated with them: an internal grant decision date (that is not publicly revealed but is used in some statistics on total grant amounts decided by year), a grant date (which we call donation date; this is the date of the formal grant commitment, which is the published grant date), and a grant announcement date (which we call donation announcement date; the date the grant is announced to the mailing list and the grant page made publicly visible). Lags are a few months between decision and grant, and a few months between grant and announcement, due to time spent with grant writeup approval.

Notes on grant financing: See https://www.openphilanthropy.org/giving/guide-for-grant-seekers or https://www.openphilanthropy.org/about/who-we-are for more information. Grants generally come from the Open Philanthropy Fund, a donor-advised fund managed by the Silicon Valley Community Foundation, with most of its money coming from Good Ventures. Some grants are made directly by Good Ventures, and political grants may be made by the Open Philanthropy Action Fund. At least one grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/criminal-justice-reform/working-families-party-prosecutor-reforms-new-york was made by Cari Tuna personally. The majority of grants are financed by the Open Philanthropy Project Fund; however, the source of financing of a grant is not always explicitly specified, so it cannot be confidently assumed that a grant with no explicit listed financing is financed through the Open Philanthropy Project Fund; see the comment https://www.openphilanthropy.org/blog/october-2017-open-thread?page=2#comment-462 for more information. Funding for multi-year grants is usually disbursed annually, and the amounts are often equal across years, but not always. The fact that a grant is multi-year, or the distribution of the grant amount across years, are not always explicitly stated on the grant page; see https://www.openphilanthropy.org/blog/october-2017-open-thread?page=2#comment-462 for more information. Some grants to universities are labeled "gifts" but this is a donee classification, based on different levels of bureaucratic overhead and funder control between grants and gifts; see https://www.openphilanthropy.org/blog/october-2017-open-thread?page=2#comment-462 for more information.

Miscellaneous notes: Most GiveWell-recommended grants made by Good Ventures and listed in the Open Philanthropy database are not listed on Donations List Website as being under Open Philanthropy. Specifically, GiveWell Incubation Grants are not included (these are listed at https://donations.vipulnaik.com/donor.php?donor=GiveWell+Incubation+Grants with donor GiveWell Incubation Grants), and grants made by Good Ventures to GiveWell top and standout charities are also not included (these are listed at https://donations.vipulnaik.com/donor.php?donor=Good+Ventures%2FGiveWell+top+and+standout+charities with donor Good Ventures/GiveWell top and standout charities). Grants to support GiveWell operations are not included here; they can be found at https://donations.vipulnaik.com/donor.php?donor=Good+Ventures%2FGiveWell+support with donor "Good Ventures/GiveWell support".The investment https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/farm-animal-welfare/impossible-foods in Impossible Foods is not included because it does not fit our criteria for a donation, and also because no amount was included. All other grants publicly disclosed by open philanthropy that are not GiveWell Incubation Grants or GiveWell top and standout charity grants should be included. Grants disclosed by grantees but not yet disclosed by Open Philanthropy are not included; some of them may be listed at https://issarice.com/open-philanthropy-project-non-grant-funding

Donor donation statistics

Cause areaCountMedianMeanMinimum10th percentile 20th percentile 30th percentile 40th percentile 50th percentile 60th percentile 70th percentile 80th percentile 90th percentile Maximum
Overall 22 500,000 604,731 24,000 50,000 150,000 285,000 375,000 500,000 700,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,184,720 1,800,000
Migration policy 22 500,000 604,731 24,000 50,000 150,000 285,000 375,000 500,000 700,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,184,720 1,800,000

Donation amounts by cause area and year

If you hover over a cell for a given cause area and year, you will get a tooltip with the number of donees and the number of donations.

Note: Cause area classification used here may not match that used by donor for all cases.

Cause area Number of donations Number of donees Total 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014
Migration policy (filter this donor) 22 12 13,304,091.00 600,000.00 3,700,000.00 1,784,888.00 400,000.00 1,800,000.00 1,324,000.00 915,000.00 2,780,203.00
Total 22 12 13,304,091.00 600,000.00 3,700,000.00 1,784,888.00 400,000.00 1,800,000.00 1,324,000.00 915,000.00 2,780,203.00

Graph of spending by cause area and year (incremental, not cumulative)

Graph of spending should have loaded here

Graph of spending by cause area and year (cumulative)

Graph of spending should have loaded here

Donation amounts by subcause area and year

If you hover over a cell for a given subcause area and year, you will get a tooltip with the number of donees and the number of donations.

For the meaning of “classified” and “unclassified”, see the page clarifying this.

Subcause area Number of donations Number of donees Total 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014
Migration policy/labor mobility 5 2 5,194,608.00 0.00 1,500,000.00 709,888.00 0.00 1,800,000.00 0.00 0.00 1,184,720.00
Migration policy/refugee migration 4 2 3,075,000.00 0.00 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 700,000.00 375,000.00 0.00
Migration policy/labor mobility/seasonal migration 4 3 2,910,483.00 0.00 1,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 600,000.00 0.00 1,310,483.00
Migration policy/politics 3 1 960,000.00 0.00 200,000.00 0.00 400,000.00 0.00 0.00 360,000.00 0.00
Migration policy/high-skilled migraation 1 1 600,000.00 600,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Migration policy/low-skilled migration promotion 2 1 435,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 150,000.00 285,000.00
Migration policy/refugee migration/family reunification 1 1 75,000.00 0.00 0.00 75,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Migration policy/labor mobility/RCT 1 1 30,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 30,000.00 0.00
Migration policy/humanitarian migration/free migration 1 1 24,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 24,000.00 0.00 0.00
Classified total 22 12 13,304,091.00 600,000.00 3,700,000.00 1,784,888.00 400,000.00 1,800,000.00 1,324,000.00 915,000.00 2,780,203.00
Unclassified total 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 22 12 13,304,091.00 600,000.00 3,700,000.00 1,784,888.00 400,000.00 1,800,000.00 1,324,000.00 915,000.00 2,780,203.00

Graph of spending by subcause area and year (incremental, not cumulative)

Graph of spending should have loaded here

Graph of spending by subcause area and year (cumulative)

Graph of spending should have loaded here

Donation amounts by donee and year

Donee Cause area Metadata Total 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014
Center for Global Development (filter this donor) FB Tw WP Site 3,984,720.00 0.00 1,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 1,800,000.00 0.00 0.00 1,184,720.00
International Refugee Assistance Project (filter this donor) Migration policy/refugee assistance/legal help FB Tw Site 2,775,000.00 0.00 1,000,000.00 1,075,000.00 0.00 0.00 700,000.00 0.00 0.00
U.S. Association for International Migration (filter this donor) 1,310,483.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,310,483.00
Labor Mobility Partnerships (filter this donor) 1,209,888.00 0.00 500,000.00 709,888.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mercy Corps (filter this donor) FB Tw WP Site 1,000,000.00 0.00 1,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Niskanen Center (filter this donor) WP 960,000.00 0.00 200,000.00 0.00 400,000.00 0.00 0.00 360,000.00 0.00
Federation of American Scientists (filter this donor) 600,000.00 600,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Protect the People (filter this donor) 600,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 600,000.00 0.00 0.00
ImmigrationWorks Foundation (filter this donor) 435,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 150,000.00 285,000.00
MoveOn.org Civic Action (filter this donor) 375,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 375,000.00 0.00
New York University (filter this donor) FB Tw WP Site 30,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 30,000.00 0.00
Free Migration Project (filter this donor) 24,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 24,000.00 0.00 0.00
Total -- -- 13,304,091.00 600,000.00 3,700,000.00 1,784,888.00 400,000.00 1,800,000.00 1,324,000.00 915,000.00 2,780,203.00

Graph of spending by donee and year (incremental, not cumulative)

Graph of spending should have loaded here

Graph of spending by donee and year (cumulative)

Graph of spending should have loaded here

Donation amounts by influencer and year

If you hover over a cell for a given influencer and year, you will get a tooltip with the number of donees and the number of donations.

For the meaning of “classified” and “unclassified”, see the page clarifying this.

Influencer Number of donations Number of donees Total 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014
Alexander Berger 18 10 10,204,091.00 0.00 1,200,000.00 1,784,888.00 400,000.00 1,800,000.00 1,324,000.00 915,000.00 2,780,203.00
Zachary Robinson|Alexander Berger 2 2 1,500,000.00 0.00 1,500,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Alexander Berger|Zachary Robinson 1 1 1,000,000.00 0.00 1,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Emily Oehlsen|Alexander Berger 1 1 600,000.00 600,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Classified total 22 12 13,304,091.00 600,000.00 3,700,000.00 1,784,888.00 400,000.00 1,800,000.00 1,324,000.00 915,000.00 2,780,203.00
Unclassified total 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 22 12 13,304,091.00 600,000.00 3,700,000.00 1,784,888.00 400,000.00 1,800,000.00 1,324,000.00 915,000.00 2,780,203.00

Graph of spending by influencer and year (incremental, not cumulative)

Graph of spending should have loaded here

Graph of spending by influencer and year (cumulative)

Graph of spending should have loaded here

Donation amounts by disclosures and year

Sorry, we couldn't find any disclosures information.

Donation amounts by country and year

If you hover over a cell for a given country and year, you will get a tooltip with the number of donees and the number of donations.

For the meaning of “classified” and “unclassified”, see the page clarifying this.

Country Number of donations Number of donees Total 2021 2020 2018 2016 2015 2014
United States 8 5 2,719,000.00 600,000.00 200,000.00 400,000.00 724,000.00 510,000.00 285,000.00
United States|Haiti 3 2 1,910,483.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 600,000.00 0.00 1,310,483.00
Nigeria 1 1 1,000,000.00 0.00 1,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
United States|Syria 1 1 375,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 375,000.00 0.00
India|United Arab Emirates 1 1 30,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 30,000.00 0.00
Classified total 14 10 6,034,483.00 600,000.00 1,200,000.00 400,000.00 1,324,000.00 915,000.00 1,595,483.00
Unclassified total 8 3 7,269,608.00 0.00 2,500,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,184,720.00
Total 22 12 13,304,091.00 600,000.00 3,700,000.00 400,000.00 1,324,000.00 915,000.00 2,780,203.00

Graph of spending by country and year (incremental, not cumulative)

Graph of spending should have loaded here

Graph of spending by country and year (cumulative)

Graph of spending should have loaded here

Full list of documents in reverse chronological order (10 documents)

Title (URL linked)Publication dateAuthorPublisherAffected donorsAffected doneesAffected influencersDocument scopeCause areaNotes
Understanding Open Philanthropy’s work on migration policy2021-11-19Vipul Naik Open Borders: The CaseOpen Philanthropy Labor Mobility Partnerships Center for Global Development Protect the People Niskanen Center Federation for American Scientists Mercy Corps International Refugee Assistance Project Third-party coverage of donor strategyMigration policyIn a similar vein as past blog posts https://openborders.info/blog/overview-of-the-open-philanthropy-projects-work-on-migration-liberalisation/ and https://openborders.info/blog/update-open-philanthropy-projects-work-migration-liberalisation/ on the site, the post reviews Open Philanthropy's grantmaking in the migration policy space. It discusses evidence and possible reasons for Open Philanthropy reducing its grantmaking in the area. See https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/mhp8pofioZpoW6k34/understanding-open-philanthropy-s-evolution-on-migration (GW, IR) for a cross-post to the EA Forum.
Suggestions for Individual Donors from Open Philanthropy Staff - 20192019-12-18Holden Karnofsky Open PhilanthropyChloe Cockburn Jesse Rothman Michelle Crentsil Amanda Hungerfold Lewis Bollard Persis Eskander Alexander Berger Chris Somerville Heather Youngs Claire Zabel National Council for Incarcerated and Formerly Incarcerated Women and Girls Life Comes From It Worth Rises Wild Animal Initiative Sinergia Animal Center for Global Development International Refugee Assistance Project California YIMBY Engineers Without Borders 80,000 Hours Centre for Effective Altruism Future of Humanity Institute Global Priorities Institute Machine Intelligence Research Institute Ought Donation suggestion listCriminal justice reform|Animal welfare|Global health and development|Migration policy|Effective altruism|AI safetyContinuing an annual tradition started in 2015, Open Philanthropy Project staff share suggestions for places that people interested in specific cause areas may consider donating. The sections are roughly based on the focus areas used by Open Phil internally, with the contributors to each section being the Open Phil staff who work in that focus area. Each recommendation includes a "Why we recommend it" or "Why we suggest it" section, and with the exception of the criminal justice reform recommendations, each recommendation includes a "Why we haven't fully funded it" section. Section 5, Assorted recomendations by Claire Zabel, includes a list of "Organizations supported by our Committed for Effective Altruism Support" which includes a list of organizations that are wiithin the purview of the Committee for Effective Altruism Support. The section is approved by the committee and represents their views.
Suggestions for Individual Donors from Open Philanthropy Project Staff - 20182018-12-20Holden Karnofsky Open PhilanthropyChloe Cockburn Lewis Bollard Amanda Hungerford Alexander Berger Luke Muelhhauser National Council for Incarcerated and Formerly Incarcerated Women and Girls Texas Organizing Project Effective Altruism Funds The Humane League Center for Global Development International Refugee Assistance Project Donor lottery Donation suggestion listCriminal justice reform|Animal welfare|Global health and development|Migration policy|Effective altruismOpen Philanthropy Project staff give suggestions on places that might be good for individuals to donate to. Each suggestion includes a section "Why I suggest it", a section explaining why the Open Philanthropy Project has not funded (or not fully funded) the opportunity, and links to relevant writeups. The post continues a tradition of similar posts published once a year.
Suggestions for Individual Donors from Open Philanthropy Project Staff - 20162016-12-14Holden Karnofsky Open PhilanthropyJaime Yassif Chloe Cockburn Lewis Bollard Daniel Dewey Nick Beckstead Blue Ribbon Study Panel on Biodefense Alliance for Safety and Justice Cosecha Animal Charity Evaluators Compassion in World Farming USA Machine Intelligence Research Institute Future of Humanity Institute 80,000 Hours Ploughshares Fund Donation suggestion listAnimal welfare|AI safety|Biosecurity and pandemic preparedness|Effective altruism|Migration policyOpen Philanthropy Project staff describe suggestions for best donation opportunities for individual donors in their specific areas.
Update on the Open Philanthropy Project’s Work on Migration Liberalisation2016-04-08Sebastian Nickel Open Borders: The CaseOpen Philanthropy Center for Global Development U.S. Association for International Migration Protect the People ImmigrationWorks Foundation No Lean Season Niskanen Center New York University Third-party coverage of donor strategyMigration policyThe blog post provides an update to https://openborders.info/blog/overview-of-the-open-philanthropy-projects-work-on-migration-liberalisation/ (a blog post from a year ago), providing updates on the grants discussed in the previous post, as well as descriptions of new grants. A section titled "Closing thoughts" gives the author's take on events; it stresses the difficulty of figuring out how best to effect political change, and the longer time horizon needed for efforts to bear fruit.
Overview of the Open Philanthropy Project’s work on migration liberalisation2015-03-18Sebastian Nickel Open Borders: The CaseOpen Philanthropy Center for Global Development ImmigrationWorks Foundation U.S. Association for International Migration Evidence Action Third-party coverage of donor strategyMigration policyThe blog post reviews Open Philanthropy's philanthropy strategy related to promoting freer migration in the context of their broader thinking, and discusses grants made so far to the Center for Global Development, ImmigrationWorks Foundation, and U.S. Association for International Migration. It also has a section on work related to migration within national borders that Open Philanthropy is funding. A conclusion section discusses the author's overall takeaways, and includes the sentence: "I am very impressed with the Open Philanthropy Project’s work on labour mobility."
Open Philanthropy Project Update: U.S. Policy2015-03-10Holden Karnofsky Open PhilanthropyOpen Philanthropy Broad donor strategyCause prioritization,Criminal justice reform,Animal welfare,Macroeconomic stabilization policy,Migration policy,Drug policyOriginally published on the GiveWell blog at https://blog.givewell.org/2015/03/10/open-philanthropy-project-update-u-s-policy/ where comments can still be found. This is an annual update on where the Open Philanthropy Project stands on its investigation of United States policy issues. Some of the cause areas covered under what they call United States policy would later include grants to outside the United States (in particular, animal welfare), while others, such as criminal justice reform and macroeconomic stabilization policy, would remain within the United States.
Potential U.S. Policy Focus Areas2014-05-29Holden Karnofsky Open PhilanthropyOpen Philanthropy Broad donor strategyCause prioritization|Criminal justice reform|Drug policy|Migration policy|Macroeconomic stabilization policy|Global health and development|Climate change|Tax policyThe blog post reviews the current understanding of the Open Philanthropy Project of various cause areas that they are considering for their grantmaking. They break up the cause areas discussed as: Windows of opportunity: outstanding tractability (i.e., "the time is right"), Ambitious longshots: outstanding importance, and Green fields: outstanding "room for more philanthropy". Other causes of interest (that do not neatly fit into one of these boxes) are also discussed.
GiveWell Labs Update2013-09-26Holden Karnofsky Open PhilanthropyOpen Philanthropy Broad donor strategyMigration policy/labor mobility|Geoengineering research|Criminal justice reform|Animal welfare/factory farming|Open science|Global health/malaria|History of philanthropyThe blog post provides a general update on GiveWell Labs (that would later become Open Philanthropy). It lists seven causes that it considers promising and plans to investigate further.
Labor Mobility2013-05-01Open PhilanthropyOpen Philanthropy Review of current state of cause areaMigration policy/labor mobilityInitial findings from a shallow investigation into the current state of labor mobility, with more focus on the United States.

Full list of donations in reverse chronological order (22 donations)

Graph of top 10 donees by amount, showing the timeframe of donations

Graph of donations and their timeframes
DoneeAmount (current USD)Amount rank (out of 22)Donation dateCause areaURLInfluencerNotes
Federation of American Scientists600,000.00102021-07Migration policy/high-skilled migraationhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/us-policy/immigration-policy/federation-of-american-scientists-high-skilled-immigration-policyEmily Oehlsen Alexander Berger Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant "to support work on high-skilled immigration policy."

Other notes: Intended funding timeframe in months: 24; affected countries: United States.
International Refugee Assistance Project1,000,000.0042020-11Migration policy/refugee migrationhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/international-refugee-assistance-project-general-support-2020Alexander Berger Intended use of funds (category): Organizational general support

Donor reason for selecting the donee: The grant page links to the grant page for the first grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/international-refugee-assistance-project-general-support (2016-05) for the rationale for supporting the grantee.

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): No explicit reason is given for the amount, but both the amount and the timeframe match the previous grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/international-refugee-assistance-project-general-support-2019 (2019-01).

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The grant is made right around the end of the timeframe of the previous two-year grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/international-refugee-assistance-project-general-support-2019 (2019-01).
Intended funding timeframe in months: 24
Labor Mobility Partnerships500,000.00122020-08Migration policy/labor mobilityhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/labor-mobility-partnerships-international-labor-mobilityZachary Robinson Alexander Berger Intended use of funds (category): Organizational general support

Intended use of funds: Grant "to support work to enhance international labor mobility. LaMP aims to ensure workers can access employment opportunities abroad. It focuses on connecting governments, employers, researchers, and advocates to bridge gaps in international labor markets, and creating and curating resources to design and implement mobility partnerships."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: Open Philanthropy had provided the original grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/center-global-development-labor-mobility-partnerships (2019-03) to incubate the organization. This is a renewal of that grant and also an exit grant.

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): The amount was chosen to provide a year of operating support, which is a typical amount for an exit grant.

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The grant is made at around the end of the timeframe of the previous grant (the incubation grant) https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/center-global-development-labor-mobility-partnerships (2019-03).
Intended funding timeframe in months: 12

Donor thoughts on making further donations to the donee: This is an exit grant; there are no plans for followup grants.
Mercy Corps1,000,000.0042020-04Migration policy/labor mobility/seasonal migrationhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/mercy-corps-seasonal-migration-pilot-project-and-rctZachary Robinson Alexander Berger Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant "in partnership with the Immigration Policy Lab at Stanford University, to conduct a pilot project with a randomized control trial (RCT) on seasonal migration for rural Nigeriens. The project and the RCT will examine the drivers and returns to seasonal migration, and will subsidize the transportation of underemployed men in the rural Tillabéri region to urban centers in Niger and surrounding countries."

Other notes: Intended funding timeframe in months: 24; affected countries: Nigeria.
Center for Global Development (Earmark: Michael Clemens)1,000,000.0042020-03Migration policy/labor mobilityhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/center-global-development-migration-program-2020Alexander Berger Zachary Robinson Donation process: This renews a previous grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/center-global-development-migration-program (2017-03). A conversation https://www.openphilanthropy.org/sites/default/files/Michael_Clemens_11-29-17_%28public%29.pdf (2017-11-29) with Michael Clemens happens between the two grants.

Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant "to support its migration program, led by Dr. Michael Clemens. [...] this funding includes one additional year at the previous funding level and two subsequent years at a funding level that we believe may be more sustainable for the long run. This funding is intended to support Dr. Clemens’s ongoing research and policy work on immigration." https://www.openphilanthropy.org/files/Grants/CGD/CGD_Migration_Program_Description.pdf describes the activities that the previous grant (renewed by this) funded; this grant is likely similar.

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): The grant page says: "this funding includes one additional year at the previous funding level and two subsequent years at a funding level that we believe may be more sustainable for the long run." The previous funding level was $600,000 per year, so this breaks down to $600,000 for one year and $200,000 each for the next two years.

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The grant is made right at the end of the timeframe for the previous three-year grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/center-global-development-migration-program#About_the_grant (2017-03).
Intended funding timeframe in months: 36

Donor thoughts on making further donations to the donee: The framing "funding level that we believe may be more sustainable for the long run" in the grant page suggests that Open Philanthropy is planning to renew funding at the reduced level ($200,000/year) after this three-year grant ends.
Niskanen Center200,000.00172020-01Migration policy/politicshttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/niskanen-center-research-on-immigration-policy-2020Alexander Berger Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant "to support [grantee's] work on immigration policy. The Niskanen Center, a libertarian think tank, seeks to reduce barriers to immigration by developing and disseminating information, arguments, and policy ideas."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: This is a renewal of a previous grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/niskanen-immigration-2018 (2018-01) and is being offered as an exit grant to give the grantee time to transition out.

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): The amount is at the same rate per year ($200,000) as the previous grant, that was $400,000 over two years. The shorter timeframe (and hence lower amount) is a reflection of the "exit grant" nature.

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The grant is made at the end of the timeframe foor the previous two-year grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/niskanen-immigration-2018 (2018-01).
Intended funding timeframe in months: 12

Donor thoughts on making further donations to the donee: This is an exit grant, so there are no plans for further grants.

Other notes: Affected countries: United States.
International Refugee Assistance Project75,000.00192019-05Migration policy/refugee migration/family reunificationhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/international-refugee-assistance-project-family-reunificationAlexander Berger Donation process: Discretionary grant

Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant "to support a family reunification pilot project. IRAP intends to try to reunite approximately 125 refugee children with their families."
Labor Mobility Partnerships (Earmark: Lant Pritchett|Rebekah Smith)709,888.0082019-03Migration policy/labor mobilityhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/center-global-development-labor-mobility-partnershipsAlexander Berger Donation process: The grant page cites https://www.cgdev.org/sites/default/files/goldilocks-solution-just-right-promotion-labor-mobility.pdf as the working paper that led to the idea of the organizattion being incubated by the grant.

Intended use of funds (category): Organizational general support

Intended use of funds: Grant "to the Center for Global Development to support a working group on and incubation of a new organization aimed at enhancing international labor mobility. The new organization, called LaMP (Labor Mobility Partnerships), hopes to assist countries negotiating new legal channels for migration on terms of mutual benefit and to generate research and evidence on effective labor mobility regimes, in the ultimate service of reducing global poverty and inequality. Rebekah Smith and Lant Pritchett, who will be working together on the incubation and launch, proposed the idea for this type of organization in a 2016 CGD working paper."

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The timing seems related to the timing of the incubated organization's start, and is dependent on the release of the 2016 working paper https://www.cgdev.org/sites/default/files/goldilocks-solution-just-right-promotion-labor-mobility.pdf that proposed the idea.
Intended funding timeframe in months: 18

Donor retrospective of the donation: Labor Mobility Partnerships would get off the ground and Open Philanthropy would make a followup grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/labor-mobility-partnerships-international-labor-mobility (2020-08) to Labor Mobility Partnerships that would also serve as an exit grant.

Other notes: The grant was made to the Center for Global Development to incorporate Labor Mobility Partnerships, but we're listing it as a grant to Labor Mobility Partnerships here. Announced: 2019-04-18.
International Refugee Assistance Project1,000,000.0042019-01Migration policy/refugee migrationhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/international-refugee-assistance-project-general-support-2019Alexander Berger Donation process: Between the previous grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/international-refugee-assistance-project-general-support (2016-05) and this grant, Open Philanthropy had four conversations with Becca Heller, director of the grantee organization: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/sites/default/files/Becca_Heller_05-09-16_%28public%29.pdf (2016-05-09), https://www.openphilanthropy.org/sites/default/files/Becca_Heller_07-06-16_%28public%29.pdf (2016-07-06), https://www.openphilanthropy.org/sites/default/files/Becca_Heller_10-05-17_%28public%29.pdf (2017-10-05), and https://www.openphilanthropy.org/sites/default/files/Becca_Heller_03-15-18_%28public%29.pdf (2018-03-15).

Intended use of funds (category): Organizational general support

Intended use of funds: Grant "for general support. IRAP plans to expand its work to Europe, focusing on family reunification, asylum, and humanitarian visas."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: The grant page says: "In the past, our immigration policy work has not focused much on refugee resettlement, which we had assumed would be more crowded than other aspects of immigration policy with funders aimed at supporting increased opportunities for people to move to the U.S. for humanitarian reasons. While we continue to believe that is directionally correct, our increased interest in supporting advocacy around refugee resettlement is partially based on learning more about the fairly limited foundation funding for advocacy around refugee resettlement."

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): No explicit reasons for the amount are given; the amount is slightly larger than the previous two-year grant of $700,000.

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The grant is made a few months after the end of the timeframe for the previous two-year grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/international-refugee-assistance-project-general-support (2016-05).
Intended funding timeframe in months: 24

Donor retrospective of the donation: The followup grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/international-refugee-assistance-project-general-support-2020 (2020-11) suggests continued satisfaction with the grantee.

Other notes: Announced: 2019-03-29.
Niskanen Center400,000.00132018-01Migration policy/politicshttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/niskanen-immigration-2018Alexander Berger Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant "to support [grantee's] work on immigration policy. [...] Niskanen has grown its immigration program to approximately $1M/year."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: The grant page says: "Because we do not expect significant positive movement on immigration at the federal level over the next few years [a likely reference to the Trump presidency at the time], we view this support primarily as a way to ensure the Niskanen Center is able to continue developing relationships and policy ideas in advance of any future opportunities for progress."

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): The previous grant was $360,000 for two years; this grant amount is pretty comparable. The grant page says: "Niskanen has grown its immigration program to approximately $1M/year." So this grant now accounts for only 20% of the cost of the program.

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The grant is made around the end of the timeframe for the previous two-year grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/niskanen-immigration (2015-10).
Intended funding timeframe in months: 24

Donor retrospective of the donation: The followup grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/niskanen-center-research-on-immigration-policy-2020 (2020-01) would be an exit grant. Open Philanthropy does not provide reasons for the exit, so its retrospective evaluation of this grant isn't clear.

Other notes: Affected countries: United States; announced: 2018-01-30.
Center for Global Development (Earmark: Michael Clemens)1,800,000.0012017-03Migration policy/labor mobilityhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/center-global-development-migration-programAlexander Berger Donation process: The grant page does not discuss the process explicitly, but it's likely based on the follow-up exeecuted as part of https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/center-global-development-labor-mobility-research#Follow-up_expectations for the previous grant.

Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant to fund the CGD 2017-2019 Migration Program. https://www.openphilanthropy.org/files/Grants/CGD/CGD_Migration_Program_Description.pdf has some details of activities funded. https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/center-global-development-migration-program#Budget_and_room_for_more_funding says: "Our funding will continue to support Dr. Clemens’ salary, as well as costs of travel and working with consultants. Most of the increase in funding will cover the hiring of a full-time research fellow, plus additional support from administrative, communications, and policy staff."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/center-global-development-migration-program#About_the_grant gives the reasons for the grant, mostly centered around a positive evaluation of the outcome of the previous grant. Relevant excerpts include "the team has taken on some promising research projects" and "Our expectation is that this type of work may take a fairly long time to have noticeable effects, so even without concrete evidence of impact at this stage, extending our support seems to us like a worthwhile bet, and the immediate projects that Dr. Clemens’ team has proposed seem reasonable and potentially promising to us, though it is difficult for us to assess the value of the projects individually."

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/center-global-development-migration-program#Budget_and_room_for_more_funding says: "This grant represents an increase in our yearly funding for CGD over our previous grant, from roughly $400,000 to roughly $600,000 per year. Our funding will continue to support Dr. Clemens’ salary, as well as costs of travel and working with consultants. Most of the increase in funding will cover the hiring of a full-time research fellow, plus additional support from administrative, communications, and policy staff."

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The grant is made right at the end of the timeframe for the previous three-year grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/center-global-development-labor-mobility-research (2014-03).
Intended funding timeframe in months: 36

Donor thoughts on making further donations to the donee: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/center-global-development-migration-program#Plans_for_learning_and_follow-up lists key questions and follow-up expectations. It also says: "We will likely consider it successful if Dr. Clemens’ upcoming book is extremely well-received (which we do not anticipate, just because of the prior unlikelihood of any given book selling especially well), if any of the team’s initiatives have an impact such that a rough cost-effectiveness estimate suggests a good return on our investment, or if ambitious plans lead us to significantly increase our support in the future. We believe there is only a roughly 50% chance that at least one of the above happens, but that the grant is still justified in expected value terms."

Donor retrospective of the donation: A followup conversation with Michael Clemens happens at https://www.openphilanthropy.org/sites/default/files/Michael_Clemens_11-29-17_%28public%29.pdf (2017-11-29). The grant gets renewed at https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/center-global-development-migration-program-2020 (2020-03) though with a reduced funding level.

Other notes: Announced: 2017-06-27.
Protect the People50,000.00202016-10Migration policy/labor mobility/seasonal migrationhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/protect-people-exit-grantAlexander Berger Donation process: This exit grant came out of the evaluation process for the previous grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/protect-people-seasonal-migration-haiti (2016-02) including a conversation https://www.openphilanthropy.org/sites/default/files/Sarah_Williamson_09-09-16_%28public%29.pdf (2016-09-09).

Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant is an exit grant to "to close out [Open Philanthropy's] support of its program helping workers from Haiti to access seasonal work in the U.S." https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/october-2017-update-protect-people-seasonal-migration-haiti more specifically says it was to "ensure a safe return to Haiti for the workers whose travel they had facilitated, and to continue pursuing funding from other sources."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/october-2017-update-protect-people-seasonal-migration-haiti gives more background on the reasons for the original grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/protect-people-seasonal-migration-haiti (2016-02) and the grant outcomes. The original grant write-up already indicated plans to not renew if fewer than 75 workers participated in 2016, and only 58 participated, explaining the "exit" part. The reason the grant was made at all despite the reduced participation was due to unexpected costs incurred by the grantee running the program, and Open Phil's desire to help the grantee smoothly continue the 2016 program.

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): The relatively small amount was likely chosen to be enough to support the intended uses of funds to close out the program and seek additional funding.

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The grant timing is near the end of 2016, by which time the performance of the original grant is known, and the need for additional funds to facilitate the safe return of workers is also known.

Donor thoughts on making further donations to the donee: This is an exit grant so there are no plans for further donations.

Donor retrospective of the donation: The October 2017 update https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/october-2017-update-protect-people-seasonal-migration-haiti#Updates_since_deciding_not_to_renew mentions that two of the farms participating in the 2016 program ended up using 59 Haitian H-2As in 2017, suggesting a possibility that the work done in 2016 had already created a small sustainable flow, something that they had not expected when deciding to exit. Open Phil says: "We hope to monitor the flow of Haitian workers to U.S. farms in future years, and we acknowledge that we may turn out to have been mistaken in withdrawing funding at the point when we did."

Other notes: The program funded by the grant would be covered by The Economist in https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2017/01/26/visas-as-aid (January 2017). Unfortunately for the long-term prospects in terms of creating sustainable flows, Haiti was removed from the Eligible Countries List for H-2A visas by the United States government on 2018-01-18. See https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2018-01-18/pdf/2018-00812.pdf and https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr-topics/talent-acquisition/pages/dhs-countries-eligible-h2-visas.aspx for more details. Affected countries: United States|Haiti; announced: 2017-10-20.
International Refugee Assistance Project (Earmark: Becca Heller)700,000.0092016-05Migration policy/refugee migrationhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/international-refugee-assistance-project-general-supportAlexander Berger Donation process: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/international-refugee-assistance-project-general-support#Our_process says: "After meeting with Becca Heller, we investigated IRAP’s track record by talking to one of their funders, several other organizations that work with them on refugee issues, and by reviewing documents about their historical role in increasing the number of SIVs. We then requested a proposal for how IRAP would use additional funds for advocacy and decided to contribute unrestricted funds instead." The proposal is at https://www.openphilanthropy.org/files/Grants/IRAP/International_Refugee_Assistance_Project_Proposal_Open_Philanthropy_2016.pdf

Intended use of funds (category): Organizational general support

Intended use of funds: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/international-refugee-assistance-project-general-support#Proposed_activities says: "IRAP plans to hire two new policy staff and one communications person. Focus areas for the policy hires will likely include: (1) Expanding its advocacy for eligible refugees to receive Special Immigrant Visas (SIVs) (2) Creating new resettlement processes and pipelines to ensure that existing visas are effectively distributed [...] (3) Advocating for private refugee resettlement. IRAP does not plan to focus on advocating for higher refugee resettlement commitments from the United States [...]. Instead, IRAP believes its comparative advantage lies in identifying and fixing visa and refugee admission processes that might otherwise prevent current resettlement targets from being met." https://www.openphilanthropy.org/files/Grants/IRAP/International_Refugee_Assistance_Project_Proposal_Open_Philanthropy_2016.pdf has more details.

Donor reason for selecting the donee: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/international-refugee-assistance-project-general-support#Case_for_the_grant cites IRAP's "fairly strong track record of getting more refugees admitted and resettled with fairly limited staff capacity." It attributes a causal role to IRAP in "expanding access to SIVs for tens of thousands of Iraqis and Afghans who worked with the U.S. military (and their families). These visas do not count against the U.S.’s annual cap on refugee admissions." It mentions being impressed with IRAP's impact in the policy sphere, and in particular with its director Becca Heller; this grant is partly a bet on her.

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): The funding proposal https://www.openphilanthropy.org/files/Grants/IRAP/International_Refugee_Assistance_Project_Proposal_Open_Philanthropy_2016.pdf includes a request for $267,250; however, the amount actually granted is substantially higher ($700,000).

Donor retrospective of the donation: Followup conversations with Becca Heller, director of grantee organization at https://www.openphilanthropy.org/sites/default/files/Becca_Heller_05-09-16_%28public%29.pdf (2016-05-09), https://www.openphilanthropy.org/sites/default/files/Becca_Heller_07-06-16_%28public%29.pdf (2016-07-06), https://www.openphilanthropy.org/sites/default/files/Becca_Heller_10-05-17_%28public%29.pdf (2017-10-05), and https://www.openphilanthropy.org/sites/default/files/Becca_Heller_03-15-18_%28public%29.pdf (2018-03-15). The followup grants https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/international-refugee-assistance-project-general-support-2018 (2019-01) and https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/international-refugee-assistance-project-general-support-2020 (2020-11) suggest continued satisfaction with the grantee.

Other notes: Intended funding timeframe in months: 24; affected countries: United States; announced: 2016-06-16.
Free Migration Project (Earmark: David Bennion)24,000.00222016-05Migration policy/humanitarian migration/free migrationhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/free-migration-project-planning-grantAlexander Berger Donation process: The grantee was introduced to Alexander Berger of Open Philanthropy via an email from Vipul Naik. After that, a funding proposal https://www.openphilanthropy.org/files/Grants/Free_Migration_Project/Free_Migration_Project_funding_proposal_(OPP)_final.pdf was submitted by David Bennion, the founder of the grantee organization being started up.

Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: The grant is a planning grant for the Free Migration Project, a nonprofit organization formed on May 7, 2016 by David Bennion. The funding proposal https://www.openphilanthropy.org/files/Grants/Free_Migration_Project/Free_Migration_Project_funding_proposal_(OPP)_final.pdf says the grant is " to engage in a planning and visioning process during Free Migration Project’s start-up phase. This process will involve soliciting feedback from immigrant rights organizers and migration policy thinkers, identifying and analyzing potential obstacles to the organization’s mission, and formulating broad-stroke strategies based on that feedback and analysis." The proposed timeframe of the planning process is May 15, 2016, to November 15, 2016.

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): The amount is as requested in https://www.openphilanthropy.org/files/Grants/Free_Migration_Project/Free_Migration_Project_funding_proposal_(OPP)_final.pdf (the funding proposal).

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The funding happens shortly after the organization is started, and its timing is influenced by the organization's start time.
Intended funding timeframe in months: 6

Donor thoughts on making further donations to the donee: Open Philanthropy does not publicly outline its thoughts on followup donations, but the funding proposal https://www.openphilanthropy.org/files/Grants/Free_Migration_Project/Free_Migration_Project_funding_proposal_(OPP)_final.pdf (submitted by the grantee) says: "This planning process will [...] help the Open Philanthropy Project determine whether additional funding would further its own objectives."

Donor retrospective of the donation: No followup grants are made by Open Philanthropy, despite the possibility of followup grants being mentioned in the funding proposal. A conversation https://www.openphilanthropy.org/sites/default/files/David_Bennion_11-07-16_%28public%29.pdf is conducted between Open Philanthropy and David Bennion on 2016-11-07, around the end of the timeframe for the planning. No explicit retrospective is published by Open Philanthropy.

Other notes: Affected countries: United States; announced: 2017-01-10.
Protect the People550,000.00112016-02Migration policy/labor mobility/seasonal migrationhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/protect-people-seasonal-migration-haitiAlexander Berger Donation process: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/protect-people-seasonal-migration-haiti#Process refers to a previous grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/usaim-seasonal-migration-haiti#Case_for_this_grant (2014-07) to support seasonal migration from Haiti. The idea for the current grant arose from discussions with the current grantee, Protect the People, that had provideed support on the project funded by the previous grant. The grant page says: "We negotiated the grant structure described above to ensure that PTP would have adequate funds to attempt the project but to limit our downside in case PTP faces barriers and is unable to reach the desired number of participants." https://files.givewell.org/files/shallow/international-migration/grants/ptp_gv_qa.pdf has a Q&A with Protect the People about the program. $50,000 of the grant was made personally by Cari Tuna due to urgency.

Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/protect-people-seasonal-migration-haiti#Grant_structure says the grant is "to continue to try to facilitate Haitian access to the H-2A program for another year. [...] The grant is structured conditionally, such that if the project enables more than 75 Haitian workers to use H-2A visas to work in the U.S., we will provide PTP with additional funding to cover costs for the additional workers. This support will scale up proportionally with the number of workers participating in the project, up to a maximum grant total of $1,000,000 for 2016. PTP currently projects that around 150 Haitian workers will be able to participate in the program in 2016, though our best guess is that the total is likely to be lower (because we anticipate that some of the problems previously encountered in the visa process may recur)."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/protect-people-seasonal-migration-haiti#Case_for_the_grant says: "We estimate that each Haitian worker in the U.S. earns about $5,000 for about 3 months of work. Since agricultural workers in Haiti earn around $1,000 per year, this increase in income is substantial. Although the pilot project failed to enable many Haitians to work in the U.S., we think that this could have been due to bad luck more than fundamental problems in the program design." The section further details challenges with the earlier grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/usaim-seasonal-migration-haiti (2014-07) and updates the potential upside estimate from $50 million to $25 million.

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): The amount is about 1/3 the amount of the previous grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/usaim-seasonal-migration-haiti (2014-07), with the reduction reflective of the desire to take a more cautious approach after the previous grant underperformed.

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The grant happens after sufficient evaluation time has passed for the previous grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/usaim-seasonal-migration-haiti (2014-07), and after discussions between Open Philanthropy and Protect the People on the grant structure.
Intended funding timeframe in months: 12

Donor thoughts on making further donations to the donee: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/protect-people-seasonal-migration-haiti#Plans_for_learning_and_follow-up says that further funding is unlikely if the grant enables fewer than 75 workers to participate. Future funding is uncertain if the grant enables between 75 and 150 workers. Future funding is highy likely if more than 150 workers participate, with a goal of transition to sustainability without philanthropic support.

Donor retrospective of the donation: Followup conversation with Sarah Williamson at https://www.openphilanthropy.org/sites/default/files/Sarah_Williamson_09-09-16_%28public%29.pdf (2016-09-09). 58 workers would participate in the program in 2016, leading Open Philanthropy to provide a $50,000 exit grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/protect-people-exit-grant (2016-10). https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/october-2017-update-protect-people-seasonal-migration-haiti has a detailed retrospective of the whole effort.

Other notes: The program funded by the grant would be covered by The Economist in https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2017/01/26/visas-as-aid (January 2017). Unfortunately for the long-term prospects in terms of creating sustainable flows, Haiti was removed from the Eligible Countries List for H-2A visas by the United States government on 2018-01-18. See https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2018-01-18/pdf/2018-00812.pdf and https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr-topics/talent-acquisition/pages/dhs-countries-eligible-h2-visas.aspx for more details. Affected countries: United States|Haiti; announced: 2016-02-29.
ImmigrationWorks Foundation150,000.00182015-12Migration policy/low-skilled migration promotionhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/immigrationworks-general-support-2016Alexander Berger Donation process: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/immigrationworks-general-support-2016#Our_process says: "We began discussing the possibility of renewing our support of ImmigrationWorks as the previous grant period drew to a close. Tamar Jacoby spoke with us about potential activities for ImmigrationWorks over the next 18 months, and about ImmigrationWorks’ current funding situation."

Intended use of funds (category): Organizational general support

Intended use of funds: A list of proposed activities is submitted by the granteee at https://files.givewell.org/files/shallow/international-migration/grants/IW-2015-2017-memo.pdf (2015-10-23) and summarized at https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/immigrationworks-general-support-2016#footnoteref6_elw4mih including activities such as: mobilize a donor collaborative, develop a strategy for future Congressional advocacy, advance a worker-visa pilot program, develop a communications strategy, and colllaboration with the Niskanen Center.

Donor reason for selecting the donee: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/immigrationworks-general-support-2016#Case_for_the_new_grant says: "We see IW as a small organization which shares the Open Philanthropy Project’s goal of increasing lower-skill immigration, an aspect of immigration policy that does not receive much other support. IW is experiencing a funding shortfall while focus has shifted away from immigration reform in Congress, and we believe that this grant could play a significant role in keeping IW operating at its current capacity. In particular, we believe that our grant will allow IW to continue to do more work on immigration, rather than shift resources partially or entirely to Opportunity America (or close down)."

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): The amount was chosen to meet the limited goal of continuing to keep ImmigrationWorks running during a lean time when prospects for immigration reform in Congress are limited. It is about half the size of the pre vious one-year grant. https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/immigrationworks-general-support-2016#Case_for_the_new_grant says: "[W]we believe that this grant could play a significant role in keeping IW operating at its current capacity. In particular, we believe that our grant will allow IW to continue to do more work on immigration, rather than shift resources partially or entirely to Opportunity America (or close down). [...] [W]e are hopeful that our grant will allow IW to continue operations and maintain good relationships with policymakers and others so that it can be present and involved when the issue of CIR is raised again in Congress (likely in 2017)"

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The timing is based on the end of the timeframe for the previous grant and the progress of conversations with the grantee, as https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/immigrationworks-general-support-2016#Our_process explains.
Intended funding timeframe in months: 18

Donor thoughts on making further donations to the donee: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/immigrationworks-general-support-2016#Plans_for_learning_and_follow-up includes details on expectations from the grant and plans for a more holistic evaluation.

Donor retrospective of the donation: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/sites/default/files/Tamar_Jacoby_03-31-16_%28public%29.pdf (2016-03-31) has a followup conversation with Tamar Jacoby of the grantee organization. No followup grants are made as of 2021.

Other notes: The grant page https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/immigrationworks-general-support-2016 has several sections including a section reviewing the previous grant and a section on risks. Affected countries: United States; announced: 2015-12-14.
Niskanen Center360,000.00152015-10Migration policy/politicshttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/niskanen-immigrationAlexander Berger Donation process: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/niskanen-immigration#Our_review_process says: "We approached Niskanen in June 2015 to discuss funding opportunities relating to advocacy for lower-skill immigration, and a series of conversations about its work culminated in a request for funding. We solicited background feedback about the Center from a few other sources prior to making a decision about funding it." The immigration policy counsel proposal https://files.givewell.org/files/shallow/international-migration/grants/Niskanen-Immigration-Policy-Counsel-Proposal.pdf is what the grant would ultimately fund; the Sources section includes links to that and to many conversations in the "series of conversations" mentioned.

Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/niskanen-immigration#Budget_and_proposed_activities says: "Niskanen asked us for $360,000 over two years, which would be enough to pay for an additional full-time Immigration Policy Counsel along with associated costs." https://files.givewell.org/files/shallow/international-migration/grants/Niskanen-Immigration-Policy-Counsel-Proposal.pdf is the full Immigration Policy Counsel Proposal.

Donor reason for selecting the donee: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/niskanen-immigration#Case_for_the_grant says: "Our conversations with staff from the Niskanen Center gave us the sense that they share our goal of allowing significantly more migration, including by lower-skilled people and those from low-income countries. [...] The Niskanen Center’s strategy is to try to get information, arguments, and new policy ideas directly into the hands of key decision-makers, rather than building long-term interest group alignment or changing public opinion. [...] We can imagine a scenario in which Niskanen is able to popularize a proposal that ends up as part of comprehensive immigration reform package in 2017, or is able to provide information that leads to a tweak in enacted legislation, and believe that the grant is likely to be very worthwhile in such a case. Our impression is that the Niskanen Center is plausibly well-positioned to execute this strategy successfully [...]."

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): The amount is as requested in the immigration policy counsel proposal https://files.givewell.org/files/shallow/international-migration/grants/Niskanen-Immigration-Policy-Counsel-Proposal.pdf that also includes a breakdown.

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/niskanen-immigration#Our_review_process gives a hint about the timing by giving the start of investigation and the process: "We approached Niskanen in June 2015 to discuss funding opportunities [...] We solicited background feedback about the Center from a few other sources prior to making a decision about funding it."
Intended funding timeframe in months: 24

Donor thoughts on making further donations to the donee: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/niskanen-immigration#Plans_for_learning_and_follow-up includes goals for learning and follow-up, key folllow-up questions, and follow-up expectations. It ends with: "We expect to provide an update on this grant after one year either by publishing public notes or by producing a brief writeup. After the grant is spent down, we plan to attempt a more holistic and detailed evaluation of the grant’s performance. However, we may abandon either or both of these follow-up expectations or perform more follow-up than planned if the circumstances call for it."

Donor retrospective of the donation: Followup conversations with the grantee include: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/sites/default/files/David_Bier_12-14-2015_%28public%29.pdf (David Bier, 2015-12-14), https://www.openphilanthropy.org/sites/default/files/Niskanen_Center_07-22-16_%28public%29.pdf (many people, 2016-07-22), https://www.openphilanthropy.org/files/Conversations/Niskanen_Center_02-14-17_(public).pdf (many people, 2017-02-14), and https://www.openphilanthropy.org/sites/default/files/Niskanen_Center_06-22-17_%28public%29.pdf (Kristie De Peña and Matthew La Corte, 2017-06-22). Followup grants would be made: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/niskanen-immigration-2018 (2018-01) and https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/niskanen-center-research-on-immigration-policy-2020 (2020-01) with the latter being an exit grant.

Other notes: Affected countries: United States; announced: 2015-10-29.
MoveOn.org Civic Action375,000.00142015-10Migration policy/refugee migrationhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/moveon-civic-action-syrian-refugee-advocacyAlexander Berger Donation process: Grant recommended to be made personally by Cari Tuna. The grantee is a 501(c)(4) organization focused on nonpartisan education and advocacy.

Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: The grant page says the grantee "used these funds to advocate to Congress against reductions in the number of Syrian refugees resettled in the U.S."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: The grant page says: "In the past, our immigration policy work has not focused much on refugee resettlement, which we had assumed would be more crowded than other aspects of immigration policy with funders aimed at supporting increased opportunities for people to move to the U.S. for humanitarian reasons. While we continue to believe that is directionally correct, our increased interest in supporting advocacy around refugee resettlement is partially based on learning more about the fairly limited foundation funding for advocacy around refugee resettlement." The grant page was published three years after the grant, and this text is similar to that for the grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/international-refugee-assistance-project-general-support-2019 (2019-01).

Other notes: Affected countries: United States|Syria; announced: 2018-06-09.
New York University (Earmark: Yaw Nyarko|Suresh Naidu|Shing-Yi Wang)30,000.00212015-08Migration policy/labor mobility/RCThttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/new-york-university-support-labor-mobility-rctAlexander Berger Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant "to support the collection of baseline data for the study, “Estimating the Comprehensive Returns to Indian Migration to the United Arab Emirates.” [...] The project is currently in the participant recruitment and baseline survey phase. [...] The study now has a time-sensitive need for an additional $30,000 to conduct baseline data collection for the second half of the study population, which will be recruited beginning in August 2015. Without additional funding, the authors expect that they would be able to finish recruiting participants for the study, but that they would be unable to collect baseline data for the full sample."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: The grant page says: "We believe that this grant fills a time-sensitive need for funds and may lead us to a better understanding of the effects of international labor migration. The grant allows Nyarko, Naidu, and Wang to complete the recruitment and baseline survey of their study population, without which the power of the study would be seriously reduced. As far as we are aware, this is the first large-scale RCT measuring outcomes of temporary international labor migration on well-being." The grant page also references https://www.openphilanthropy.org/research/cause-reports/policy/labor-mobility (Open Philanthropy's labor mobility cause report).

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): The amount is based on what te researchers need to complete the collection of the second half of baseline data, and matches the collection cost of the first half. The grant page says: "The study now has a time-sensitive need for an additional $30,000 to conduct baseline data collection for the second half of the study population, which will be recruited beginning in August 2015."

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The timing is determined by the immediate need for funds to begin the second phase of recruitment and baseline data collection.

Donor thoughts on making further donations to the donee: Open Philanthropy does not plan to fund the remainder of the study; the grantee is submitting a proposal https://files.givewell.org/files/shallow/international-migration/IGC_Project_Proposal.pdf to the International Growth Centre for 100,000 GBP to fund extensive follow-up data collection. Open Philanthropy does plan to continue monitoring: "We plan to follow the progress of the study in the coming years to see whether it is preregistered, whether it raises sufficient funds to collect follow-up data, and to observe its results."

Other notes: The paper https://www.yawnyarko.com/assets/publications/01.01_MonopsonyPower.pdf (see https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.725.7184&rep=rep1&type=pdf for a draft version from August 2015) titled "Monopsony Power in Migrant Labor Markets: Evidence from the United Arab Emirates" seems to be related to this research, but the timeline and paper contents suggest that it's not the output of the data collection funded by Open Philanthropy, but of earlier work. The paper that should have been produced from this research could not be found in a search in October 2021. Affected countries: India|United Arab Emirates; announced: 2015-09-23.
U.S. Association for International Migration1,310,483.0022014-07Migration policy/labor mobility/seasonal migrationhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/usaim-seasonal-migration-haitiAlexander Berger Donation process: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/usaim-seasonal-migration-haiti#Our_process says: "We approached Michael Clemens of CGD looking for funding opportunities in labor mobility in November 2013. He suggested we speak with IOM Haiti staff about a migration facilitation mechanism and we began to do so starting in December 2013. After a few more conversations with IOM staff and feedback on an earlier draft, a final proposal was submitted in June 2014. We shared a draft version of this page with IOM and CGD staff, and incorporated some of their suggestions, prior to the grant being finalized."

Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/usaim-seasonal-migration-haiti#Proposal_summary links to a project proposal http://www.givewell.org/files/shallow/international-migration/grants/USAIM.IOM%20Haiti_H2A%20Visa%20Project%20_Narrative.pdf and a budget http://givewell.org/files/shallow/international-migration/grants/USAIM.IOM%20Haiti_H2A%20Visa%20Project_Budget.xls (Excel). The goal is to increase the use of U.S. H-2A visas by Haitians; Haiti recently became eligible for H-2A. The proposed work is a collaboration between five groups: the grantee, the International Organization for Migration, the Center for Global Development, Protect the People, and Haiti's National Office for Migration.

Donor reason for selecting the donee: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/usaim-seasonal-migration-haiti#Case_for_this_grant talks about high gains per Haitian who uses the program, with an estimate of $1 million in gains in one year if the project succeeds. It also discusses upside from creating a sustainabe flow of Haitians if usage can be expanded and overstaying and abuse can be limited, with a BOTEC of $50 million in income gains over a period of ten years.

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): http://givewell.org/files/shallow/international-migration/grants/USAIM.IOM%20Haiti_H2A%20Visa%20Project_Budget.xls (Excel) has the budget. https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/usaim-seasonal-migration-haiti#Proposal_summary gives the two main pieces: $450,655 to cover the preparation phase of work, estimated to take 4 months and $1,039,849 for the seasonal migration and follow up work, estimated to take 10 months.

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/usaim-seasonal-migration-haiti#Our_process hints at timing by providing the back story: "We approached Michael Clemens of CGD looking for funding opportunities in labor mobility in November 2013. He suggested we speak with IOM Haiti staff about a migration facilitation mechanism and we began to do so starting in December 2013. After a few more conversations with IOM staff and feedback on an earlier draft, a final proposal was submitted in June 2014."
Intended funding timeframe in months: 14

Donor thoughts on making further donations to the donee: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/usaim-seasonal-migration-haiti#Plans_for_learning_and_follow-up includes follow-up questions and expectations. The second tranche of funding is conditional to success of the first tranche. Further grants are not explicitly discussed.

Donor retrospective of the donation: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/usaim-seasonal-migration-haiti#Updates links to several updates including https://www.openphilanthropy.org/giving/grants/usaim-seasonal-migration-haiti/december-2014-update-iom-haiti-grant (2014-12) and http://givewell.org/files/shallow/international-migration/grants/IOM%20Haiti%20-%20LM0257%20-%20H2A%20Visa%20Program%20-%201st%20Interim%20Report%20Redacted.doc (2015-03). The later grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/protect-people-seasonal-migration-haiti (2016-02) to Protect the People expresses the view that this grant did not deliver the expected magnitude of results.

Other notes: The grant page says: "On November 1, 2018, the grant amount on the website was reduced from the original of $1,490,505 to an updated value $1,310,483, with a note: (May 2016 note: $180,022 in unspent funds were returned to us.)". Affected countries: United States|Haiti.
ImmigrationWorks Foundation285,000.00162014-07Migration policy/low-skilled migration promotionhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/immigrationworks-foundation-general-supportAlexander Berger Donation process: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/immigrationworks-foundation-general-support#Our_process says: "GiveWell approached IW in March 2014 to discuss funding opportunities relating to advocacy for lower-skill immigration and learned that IW was seeking philanthropic funding. A series of conversations about IW’s work culminated in a request for funding. We shared a draft version of this page with IW staff prior to the grant being finalized."

Intended use of funds (category): Organizational general support

Intended use of funds: Grantee prepared funding options at https://files.givewell.org/files/shallow/international-migration/grants/IW%20menu%20of%20funding%20options.pdf and https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/immigrationworks-foundation-general-support#Proposed_activities provides a summary: $55,000 funding gap for 2014 (funded), $40,000 for a grassroots coordinator in Washington (funded), $180,000 for campaigns in the states (not funded), $150,000 for public opinion research (funded), and $40,000 for building consensus around policy (funded). The funding is unrestricted even though the intended use funds specific programs.

Donor reason for selecting the donee: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/immigrationworks-foundation-general-support#Case_for_the_grant links to https://www.openphilanthropy.org/research/cause-reports/policy/labor-mobility#What_is_the_problem for the importance of funding low-skilled immigration, the focus of ImmigrationWorks and not a focus of most organizations. Also: "One positive feature of the public opinion research may be that it is less time-sensitive than the advocacy work: messages that are found to work today may continue to be helpful if immigration reform appears on the national agenda again in a few years." A learning goal is also cited: "In addition to the potential for impact, we also see this grant as a good way to learn more about advocacy opportunities around immigration reform in the U.S."

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): The amount is the total of activities that Open Philanthropy chose to fund oof https://files.givewell.org/files/shallow/international-migration/grants/IW%20menu%20of%20funding%20options.pdf at https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/immigrationworks-foundation-general-support#Proposed_activities namely $55,000 funding gap for 2014, $40,000 for a grassroots coordinator in Washington, $150,000 for public opinion research, and $40,000 for building consensus around policy.

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The timing seems to be a result of when Open Philanthropy started the process and how long the due diligence took. https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/immigrationworks-foundation-general-support#Our_process says: "says: "GiveWell approached IW in March 2014 to discuss funding opportunities [...] A series of conversations about IW’s work culminated in a request for funding."
Intended funding timeframe in months: 12

Donor thoughts on making further donations to the donee: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/immigrationworks-foundation-general-support#Plans_for_learning_and_follow-up has details on questions that Open Philanthropy will continue investigating, and plans for continued conversations with Tamar Jacoby every 2-3 months over the course of the year-long grant.

Donor retrospective of the donation: The renewal grant write-up https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/immigrationworks-general-support-2016#Previous_grant has a detailed evaluation of the outcome of the grant. The grant was mostly to maintain existing expenses rather than expand significantly; one form of impact is described: "Jacoby has considered shifting focus away from immigration policy to prioritize her work with Opportunity America, and we believe there is a reasonable probability that Open Philanthropy’s grant played a role in keeping Jacoby active in the area of immigration."

Other notes: The grant page https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/immigrationworks-foundation-general-support#Plans_for_learning_and_follow-up is fairly detailed; in particular, it includes details on ImmigrationWorks' past track record and has a section on risks to the success of the grant. Affected countries: United States.
Center for Global Development (Earmark: Michael Clemens)1,184,720.0032014-03Migration policy/labor mobilityhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/center-global-development-labor-mobility-researchAlexander Berger Donation process: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/center-global-development-labor-mobility-research#Our_process says: "The Center for Global Development submitted a proposal for this grant to Good Ventures in January 2014, following several conversations between GiveWell and Good Ventures staff and CGD Senior Fellow Michael Clemens about philanthropic opportunities related to labor mobility. We shared a draft version of this page with Center for Global Development staff prior to the grant being finalized."

Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/center-global-development-labor-mobility-research#Grant_documents links to various grant documents: https://www.givewell.org/files/shallow/international-migration/grants/CGD%20Proposal%20to%20Good%20Ventures_General%20Support%20and%20Migration%20Policy%20Research_2.6.14.pdf (concept note), https://www.givewell.org/files/shallow/international-migration/grants/CGD%20Migration%20Budget_Good%20Ventures%20Proposal%20Final.xlsx (budget proposal), and https://www.givewell.org/files/shallow/international-migration/grants/CGD%20Projected%20Statement%20of%20Expenditures%20and%20Good%20Ventures%20for%202014.xlsx (overall CGD budget).

Donor reason for selecting the donee: Listed reasons include: (1) priority for the cause cf. https://www.openphilanthropy.org/research/cause-reports/policy/labor-mobility and its selection for learning grants https://www.openphilanthropy.org/blog/givewell-labs-update (2) being impressed with the past work of Michael Clemens, (3) room for more funding -- the past work was funded by the MacArthur Foundation and there is no ongoing support for the full portfolio of work Clemens plans to do.

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): The amount is based on the budget proposal https://www.givewell.org/files/shallow/international-migration/grants/CGD%20Migration%20Budget_Good%20Ventures%20Proposal%20Final.xlsx submitted by Michael Clemens.

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/center-global-development-labor-mobility-research#Our_process indicates that the timing was based on the timing of the grant proposal and the due diligence that followed: "The Center for Global Development submitted a proposal for this grant to Good Ventures in January 2014, following several conversations between GiveWell and Good Ventures staff and CGD Senior Fellow Michael Clemens about philanthropic opportunities related to labor mobility."
Intended funding timeframe in months: 36

Donor thoughts on making further donations to the donee: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/center-global-development-labor-mobility-research#Plans_for_learning_and_follow-up lists key follow-up questions and expectations. It says: "Towards the end of the duration of the grant (i.e. in the third year), we plan to attempt a more holistic and detailed evaluation of the grant’s performance, aiming to answer the questions above. We may abandon either or both of these follow-up expectations if labor mobility ceases to be a focus area, or perform more follow-up than planned if this work becomes a key part of our priorities."

Donor retrospective of the donation: There are three published followup conversations between this grant and the next. The writeup for the followup grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/center-global-development-migration-program (2017-03) includes a positive assessment of the outcome of the grant, saying "the team has taken on some promising research projects" and "Our expectation is that this type of work may take a fairly long time to have noticeable effects, so even without concrete evidence of impact at this stage, extending our support seems to us like a worthwhile bet, and the immediate projects that Dr. Clemens’ team has proposed seem reasonable and potentially promising to us, though it is difficult for us to assess the value of the projects individually."

Other notes: The grant page https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/center-global-development-labor-mobility-research#Plans_for_learning_and_follow-up has several more details including an extensive discussion of room for more funding and fungibility, and a section on risks. Followup grants: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/dr-michael-clemens-senior-fellow-center-global-development-cgd-and-cynthia-rathinasamy-program (2015-12-15), https://www.openphilanthropy.org/sites/default/files/Michael_Clemens_Cynthia_Rathinasamy_06-21-16_%28public%29.pdf (2016-06-21), and https://www.openphilanthropy.org/sites/default/files/Center_for_Global_Development_11-22-16_%28public%29.pdf (2016-11-22).

Similarity to other donors

Sorry, we couldn't find any similar donors.