Open Philanthropy donations made to Center for Security and Emerging Technology

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 July 2024. 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)
Org Watch pagehttps://orgwatch.issarice.com/?organization=Open+Philanthropy

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

Full donor page for donor Open Philanthropy

Basic donee information

We do not have any donee information for the donee Center for Security and Emerging Technology in our system.

Full donee page for donee Center for Security and Emerging Technology

Donor–donee relationship

Item Value

Donor–donee donation statistics

Cause areaCountMedianMeanMinimum10th percentile 20th percentile 30th percentile 40th percentile 50th percentile 60th percentile 70th percentile 80th percentile 90th percentile Maximum
Overall 4 8,000,000 26,312,500 3,330,000 3,330,000 3,330,000 8,000,000 8,000,000 8,000,000 38,920,000 38,920,000 55,000,000 55,000,000 55,000,000
Biosecurity and pandemic preparedness 1 3,330,000 3,330,000 3,330,000 3,330,000 3,330,000 3,330,000 3,330,000 3,330,000 3,330,000 3,330,000 3,330,000 3,330,000 3,330,000
AI safety 2 8,000,000 23,460,000 8,000,000 8,000,000 8,000,000 8,000,000 8,000,000 8,000,000 38,920,000 38,920,000 38,920,000 38,920,000 38,920,000
Security 1 55,000,000 55,000,000 55,000,000 55,000,000 55,000,000 55,000,000 55,000,000 55,000,000 55,000,000 55,000,000 55,000,000 55,000,000 55,000,000

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 Total 2021 2019
Security (filter this donor) 1 55,000,000.00 0.00 55,000,000.00
AI safety (filter this donor) 2 46,920,000.00 46,920,000.00 0.00
Biosecurity and pandemic preparedness (filter this donor) 1 3,330,000.00 3,330,000.00 0.00
Total 4 105,250,000.00 50,250,000.00 55,000,000.00

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

Full list of documents in reverse chronological order (4 documents)

Title (URL linked)Publication dateAuthorPublisherAffected donorsAffected doneesAffected influencersDocument scopeCause areaNotes
2020 AI Alignment Literature Review and Charity Comparison (GW, IR)2020-12-21Larks Effective Altruism ForumLarks Effective Altruism Funds: Long-Term Future Fund Open Philanthropy Survival and Flourishing Fund Future of Humanity Institute Center for Human-Compatible AI Machine Intelligence Research Institute Global Catastrophic Risk Institute Centre for the Study of Existential Risk OpenAI Berkeley Existential Risk Initiative Ought Global Priorities Institute Center on Long-Term Risk Center for Security and Emerging Technology AI Impacts Leverhulme Centre for the Future of Intelligence AI Safety Camp Future of Life Institute Convergence Analysis Median Group AI Pulse 80,000 Hours Survival and Flourishing Fund Review of current state of cause areaAI safetyCross-posted to LessWrong at https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/pTYDdcag9pTzFQ7vw/2020-ai-alignment-literature-review-and-charity-comparison (GW, IR) This is the fifth post in a tradition of annual blog posts on the state of AI safety and the work of various organizations in the space over the course of the year; the previous year's post is at https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/dpBB24QsnsRnkq5JT/2019-ai-alignment-literature-review-and-charity-comparison (GW, IR) The post is structured very similar to the previous year's post. It has sections on "Research" and "Finance" for a number of organizations working in the AI safety space, many of whom accept donations. A "Capital Allocators" section discusses major players who allocate funds in the space. A lengthy "Methodological Thoughts" section explains how the author approaches some underlying questions that influence his thoughts on all the organizations. To make selective reading of the document easier, the author ends each paragraph with a hashtag, and lists the hashtags at the beginning of the document. See https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/uEo4Xhp7ziTKhR6jq/reflections-on-larks-2020-ai-alignment-literature-review (GW, IR) for discussion of some aspects of the post by Alex Flint.
2019 AI Alignment Literature Review and Charity Comparison (GW, IR)2019-12-19Larks Effective Altruism ForumLarks Effective Altruism Funds: Long-Term Future Fund Open Philanthropy Survival and Flourishing Fund Future of Humanity Institute Center for Human-Compatible AI Machine Intelligence Research Institute Global Catastrophic Risk Institute Centre for the Study of Existential Risk Ought OpenAI AI Safety Camp Future of Life Institute AI Impacts Global Priorities Institute Foundational Research Institute Median Group Center for Security and Emerging Technology Leverhulme Centre for the Future of Intelligence Berkeley Existential Risk Initiative AI Pulse Survival and Flourishing Fund Review of current state of cause areaAI safetyCross-posted to LessWrong at https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/SmDziGM9hBjW9DKmf/2019-ai-alignment-literature-review-and-charity-comparison (GW, IR) This is the fourth post in a tradition of annual blog posts on the state of AI safety and the work of various organizations in the space over the course of the year; the previous year's post is at https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/BznrRBgiDdcTwWWsB/2018-ai-alignment-literature-review-and-charity-comparison (GW, IR) The post has sections on "Research" and "Finance" for a number of organizations working in the AI safety space, many of whom accept donations. A "Capital Allocators" section discusses major players who allocate funds in the space. A lengthy "Methodological Thoughts" section explains how the author approaches some underlying questions that influence his thoughts on all the organizations. To make selective reading of the document easier, the author ends each paragraph with a hashtag, and lists the hashtags at the beginning of the document.
Questions We Ask Ourselves Before Making a Grant2019-08-06Michael Levine Open PhilanthropyOpen Philanthropy Sandler Foundation Center for Security and Emerging Technology University of Washington (Institute for Protein Design) Broad donor strategyMichael Levine describes some guidance that the Open Philanthropy Project has put together for program officers on questions to consider before making a grant. This complements guidance published three years ago about internal grant writeups: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/blog/our-grantmaking-so-far-approach-and-process
Important But Neglected: Why an Effective Altruist Funder Is Giving Millions to AI Security2019-03-20Tate Williams Inside PhilanthropyOpen Philanthropy Center for Security and Emerging Technology Third-party coverage of donor strategyAI safety|Biosecurity and pandemic preparedness|Global catastrophic risks|SecurityThe article focuses on grantmaking by the Open Philanthropy Project in the areas of global catastrophic risks and security, particularly in AI safety and biosecurity and pandemic preparedness. It includes quotes from Luke Muehlhauser, Senior Research Analyst at the Open Philanthropy Project and the investigator for the $55 million grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/giving/grants/georgetown-university-center-security-and-emerging-technology to the Center for Security and Emerging Technology (CSET). Muehlhauser was previously Executive Director at the Machine Intelligence Research Institute. It also includes a quote from Holden Karnofsky, who sees the early interest of effective altruists in AI safety as prescient. The CSET grant is discussed in the context of the Open Philanthropy Project's hits-based giving approach, as well as the interest in the policy space in better understanding of safety and governance issues related to technology and AI.

Full list of donations in reverse chronological order (4 donations)

Graph of all donations (with known year of donation), showing the timeframe of donations

Graph of donations and their timeframes
Amount (current USD)Amount rank (out of 4)Donation dateCause areaURLInfluencerNotes
38,920,000.0022021-08AI safetyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/grants/center-for-security-and-emerging-technology-general-support-august-2021/Luke Muehlhauser Intended use of funds (category): Organizational general support

Intended use of funds: The grant page says: "CSET is a think tank, incubated by our January 2019 support, dedicated to policy analysis at the intersection of national and international security and emerging technologies. This funding is intended to augment our original support for CSET, particularly for its work on security and artificial intelligence."

Other notes: Intended funding timeframe in months: 36.
3,330,000.0042021-08Biosecurity and pandemic preparednesshttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/global-catastrophic-risks/biosecurity/center-security-and-emerging-technology-biosecurity-researchAndrew Snyder-Beattie Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant "to support a project investigating the extent and risks of dual-use research in the biosciences."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: The grant page says: "The hope is that the results of this project will better inform policymakers and other stakeholders of the security implications of such research."

Other notes: Intended funding timeframe in months: 36.
8,000,000.0032021-01AI safetyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/global-catastrophic-risks/potential-risks-advanced-artificial-intelligence/center-security-and-emerging-technology-general-supportLuke Muehlhauser Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: The grant page says "This funding is intended to augment our original support for CSET, particularly for its work on the intersection of security and artificial intelligence."

Donor retrospective of the donation: The followup grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/global-catastrophic-risks/potential-risks-advanced-artificial-intelligence/center-security-and-emerging-technology-general-support-august-2021 for a much larger amount suggests continued satisfaction with the grantee.
55,000,000.0012019-01Security/Biosecurity and pandemic preparedness/Global catastrophic risks/AI safetyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/giving/grants/georgetown-university-center-security-and-emerging-technologyLuke Muehlhauser Intended use of funds (category): Organizational general support

Intended use of funds: Grant via Georgetown University for the Center for Security and Emerging Technology (CSET), a new think tank led by Jason Matheny, formerly of IARPA, dedicated to policy analysis at the intersection of national and international security and emerging technologies. CSET plans to provide nonpartisan technical analysis and advice related to emerging technologies and their security implications to the government, key media outlets, and other stakeholders.

Donor reason for selecting the donee: Open Phil thinks that one of the key factors in whether AI is broadly beneficial for society is whether policymakers are well-informed and well-advised about the nature of AI’s potential benefits, potential risks, and how these relate to potential policy actions. As AI grows more powerful, calls for government to play a more active role are likely to increase, and government funding and regulation could affect the benefits and risks of AI. Thus: "Overall, we feel that ensuring high-quality and well-informed advice to policymakers over the long run is one of the most promising ways to increase the benefits and reduce the risks from advanced AI, and that the team put together by CSET is uniquely well-positioned to provide such advice." Despite risks and uncertainty, the grant is described as worthwhile under Open Phil's hits-based giving framework

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): The large amount over an extended period (5 years) is explained at https://www.openphilanthropy.org/blog/questions-we-ask-ourselves-making-grant "In the case of the new Center for Security and Emerging Technology, we think it will take some time to develop expertise on key questions relevant to policymakers and want to give CSET the commitment necessary to recruit key people, so we provided a five-year grant."

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): Likely determined by the timing that the grantee plans to launch. More timing details are not discussed
Intended funding timeframe in months: 60

Other notes: Donee is entered as Center for Security and Emerging Technology rather than as Georgetown University for consistency with future grants directly to the organization once it is set up. Founding members of CSET include Dewey Murdick from the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, William Hannas from the CIA, and Helen Toner from the Open Philanthropy Project. The grant is discussed in the broader context of giving by the Open Philanthropy Project into global catastrophic risks and AI safety in the Inside Philanthropy article https://www.insidephilanthropy.com/home/2019/3/22/why-this-effective-altruist-funder-is-giving-millions-to-ai-security. Announced: 2019-02-28.