Zachary Robinson|Alexander Berger money moved

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

Full list of documents in reverse chronological order (11 documents)

Title (URL linked)Publication dateAuthorPublisherAffected donorsAffected doneesDocument scopeNotes
Our Criminal Justice Reform Program Is Now an Independent Organization: Just Impact2021-11-16Zachary Robinson Alexander Berger Open PhilanthropyOpen Philanthropy Just Impact LaunchIn the blog post, Open Philanthropy announces that its criminal justice reform grantmaking is being split out into its own organization called Just Impact, led by Chloe Cockburn and Jesse Rothman, who have been leading Open Philanthropy's criminal justice reform program. Open Philanthropy is providing seed funding of $50 million spread over 3.5 years. Open Philanthropy connects this change with its previous post https://www.openphilanthropy.org/blog/givewells-top-charities-are-increasingly-hard-beat that suggested that it was finding that a lot of its near-termist, human-centric grantmaking was failing to beat GiveWell top charities in cost-effectiveness analyses. Open Philanthropy is now making changes to reduce such grantmaking, and spinning off criminal justice reform grantmaking to its own organization is a step toward that. Other advantages of the spinout are: ability to attract other donors focused on criminal justice reform, independence better positioning the team to implements its vision and strategy, and benefits as an experiment in spinning out programs, possibly toward a long-term vision of Open Philanthropy as focused on cause selection and incubation.
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 listContinuing 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.
GiveWell’s Top Charities Are (Increasingly) Hard to Beat2019-07-09Alexander Berger Open PhilanthropyOpen Philanthropy GiveDirectly Against Malaria Foundation Schistosomiasis Control Initiative Target Malaria JustLeadershipUSA Broad donor strategyIn the blog post, Alexander Berger discusses how, originally, Open Philanthropy Project donations for near-term human well-being (primarily in the areas of criminal justice reform and scientific research) are compared against a cost-effectiveness benchmark of direct cash transfers, which is set as 100x (every $1 donated should yield $100 in benefits). However, since GiveWell has recently made its cost-effectiveness calculations for top charities more thorough, and now estimates that top charities are 5-15x as cost-effective as cash (or 500-1500x, with 1000x as a median), Berger is now comparing all the existing near-term human well-being grants against the 1000x benchmarks. He finds that, using the back-of-the-envelope calculations (BOTECs) done at the time of justifying the grants, many of the criminal justice reform grants do not clear the bar; in total only $32 million of the grants clears the bar, and about half of it is a single grant to Target Malaria. Berger links to https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GsE2_TNWn0x6MWL1PTdkZT2vQNFW8VFBslC5qjk4sgo/edit?ts=5cc10604 for some sample BOTECs.
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 listOpen 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.
Staff Members’ Personal Donations for Giving Season 20172017-12-18Holden Karnofsky Open PhilanthropyHolden Karnofsky Alexander Berger Nick Beckstead Helen Toner Claire Zabel Lewis Bollard Ajeya Cotra Morgan Davis Michael Levine GiveWell top charities GiveWell GiveDirectly EA Giving Group Berkeley Existential Risk Initiative Effective Altruism Funds Sentience Institute Encompass The Humane League The Good Food Institute Mercy For Animals Compassion in World Farming USA Animal Equality Donor lottery Against Malaria Foundation GiveDirectly Periodic donation list documentationOpen Philanthropy Project staff members describe where they are donating this year, and the considerations that went into the donation decision. By policy, amounts are not disclosed. This is the first standalone blog post of this sort by the Open Philanthropy Project; in previous years, the corresponding donations were documented in the GiveWell staff members donation post.
Staff members’ personal donations for giving season 20162016-12-09Natalie Crispin GiveWellElie Hassenfeld Holden Karnofsky Natalie Crispin Alexander Berger Timothy Telleen-Lawton Josh Rosenberg Rebecca Raible Helen Toner Sophie Monahan Laura Muñoz Catherine Hollander Andrew Martin Lewis Bollard Chelsea Tabart Sarah Ward Chris Somerville Ajeya Cotra Chris Smith Isabel Arjmand A political campaign GiveWell top charities International Genetically Engineered Machine Foundation UPMC Center for Health Security Donor lottery EA Giving Group GiveDirectly Center for Applied Rationality Malaria Consortium Animal Charity Evaluators Northwest Health Law Advocates StrongMinds Against Malaria Foundation Schistosomiasis Control Initiative The Humane Society of the United States The Humane League Mercy For Animals Humane Society International Compassion in World Farming USA The Good Food Institute Citizens for Farm Animal Protection END Fund Causa Justa Planned Parenthood International Refugee Assistance Project Periodic donation list documentationGiveWell and Open Philanthropy Project staff describe their annual donation plans for 2016. Some of these are tentative and get superseded by further events. Also, not all employees are present in the document (participation is optional). Amounts donated are not included, per a decision by GiveWell
Suggestions for individual donors from Open Philanthropy Project staff2015-12-23Holden Karnofsky Open PhilanthropyChloe Cockburn Lewis Bollard Alexander Berger Nick Beckstead Howie Lempel Alliance for Safety and Justice Bronx Freedom Fund The Humane League The Humane Society of the United States Center for Global Development Center for Popular Democracy Ploughshares Fund Donation suggestion listOpen Philanthropy Project staff describe suggestions for best donation opportunities for individual donors in their specific areas. The post was originally published to the GiveWell blog.
Staff members’ personal donations for giving season 20152015-12-09Elie Hassenfeld GiveWellElie Hassenfeld Holden Karnofsky Natalie Crispin Alexander Berger Timothy Telleen-Lawton Sean Conley Josh Rosenberg Jake Marcus Rebecca Raible Milan Griffes Helen Toner Sophie Monahan Laura Muñoz Catherine Hollander Andrew Martin Claire Zabel Nicole Ross Lewis Bollard GiveWell top charities Against Malaria Foundation GiveWell GiveDirectly Wikimedia Foundation Center for Global Development Martha’s Table Country Dance and Song Society Northwest Health Law Advocates Mercy For Animals The Humane League Animal Charity Evaluators Raising for Effective Giving Humane Society of te United States Periodic donation list documentationGiveWell and Open Philanthropy Project staff describe their annual donation plans for 2015. Some of these are tentative and get superseded by further events. Also, not all employees are present in the document (participation is optional). Amounts donated are not included, per a decision by GiveWell
Staff members’ personal donations – giving season 20142014-12-17Holden Karnofsky GiveWellElie Hassenfeld Holden Karnofsky Natalie Crispin Alexander Berger Eliza Scheffler Timothy Telleen-Lawton Josh Rosenberg Ben Rachbach Jake Marcus Rebecca Raible Milan Griffes Tyler Heishman GiveWell top charities Against Malaria Foundation Schistosomiasis Control Initiative Deworm the World Initiative GiveWell standout charities Periodic donation list documentationGiveWell staff describe their annual donation plans for 2014. Some of these are tentative and get superseded by further events. Also, not all employees are present in the document (participation is optional). Amounts donated are not included, per a decision by GiveWell
Potential Global Catastrophic Risk Focus Areas2014-06-26Alexander Berger Open PhilanthropyOpen Philanthropy Broad donor strategyIn this blog post originally published at https://blog.givewell.org/2014/06/26/potential-global-catastrophic-risk-focus-areas/ Alexander Berger goes over a list of seven types of global catastrophic risks (GCRs) that the Open Philanthropy Project has considered. He details three promising areas that the Open Philanthropy Project is exploring more and may make grants in: (1) Biosecurity and pandemic preparedness, (2) Geoengineering research and governance, (3) AI safety. For the AI safety section, there is a note from Executive Director Holden Karnofsky saying that he sees AI safety as a more promising area than Berger does.
Staff members’ personal donations2013-12-12Holden Karnofsky GiveWellHolden Karnofsky Elie Hassenfeld Alexander Berger Natalie Crispin Eliza Scheffler Timothy Telleen-Lawton Sean Conley Josh Rosenberg Ben Rachbach Howie Lempel Jake Marcus GiveDirectly Mercy For Animals Schistosomiasis Control Initiative Against Malaria Foundation Deworm the World Initiative The Humane Society of the United States Periodic donation list documentationGiveWell staff describe their annual donation plans for 2013. Some of these are tentative and get superseded by further events. Also, not all employees are present in the document (participation is optional). Amounts donated are not included, per a decision by GiveWell

Full list of donations in reverse chronological order (73 donations)

DonorDoneeAmount (current USD)Donation dateCause areaURLNotes
Open PhilanthropyJust Impact50,000,000.002021-11Criminal justice reformhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/criminal-justice-reform/just-impact-safely-reducing-incarceration Donation process: The money is seed funding for an organization being spun out of Open Philanthropy. The decision to provide seed funding is tied with the whole process of spinning out. https://www.openphilanthropy.org/blog/our-criminal-justice-reform-program-now-independent-organization-just-impact has more details.

Intended use of funds (category): Regranting

Intended use of funds: Grant "to launch Just Impact. Just Impact describes itself as “a criminal justice reform advisory group and fund that is focused on building the power and influence of highly strategic, directly-impacted leaders and their allies to create transformative change from the ground up.”" Given its role as a successor to Open Phil's grantmaking, it is expected that most of these funds will be regranted to other criminal justice reform organizations.

Donor reason for selecting the donee: The post https://www.openphilanthropy.org/blog/our-criminal-justice-reform-program-now-independent-organization-just-impact goes into details on the reasons for spinning Just Impact out of Open Philanthropy, including: reduced interest in Open Philanthropy continuing to fund criminal justice reform, ability of a separate organization to attract other donors, ability of a separate organizations to implement more vision and strategy, and value as an experiment in spinning out organizations. The seed funding is provided to "make this transition in a way that positions the CJR work to maintain its successes, navigate the transitional period smoothly, and hopefully raise enough from other funders to have even more impact in the future."

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): The amount per unit time is a little lower than Open Philanthropy's criminal justice reform grantmaking so far ($130 million over 6 years), but likely enough for Open Philanthropy's goal to "make this transition in a way that positions the CJR work to maintain its successes, navigate the transitional period smoothly, and hopefully raise enough from other funders to have even more impact in the future."

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The timing of the grant is determined by the timing of the decision to spin out the organization. It comes two years after the post https://www.openphilanthropy.org/blog/givewells-top-charities-are-increasingly-hard-beat that has the background thinking that led to Open Philanthropy deprioritizing criminal justice reform philanthropy. It also comes a few months after https://www.openphilanthropy.org/blog/open-philanthropy-s-new-co-ceo where the near-termist portion of grantmaking got its own name "Global Health and Wellbeing" and a co-CEO, Alexander Berger, to lead it.
Intended funding timeframe in months: 42

Donor thoughts on making further donations to the donee: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/blog/our-criminal-justice-reform-program-now-independent-organization-just-impact says: "We will continue to follow progress and continually revisit the right level of support in light of both Just Impact’s impact and our understanding of our alternative giving opportunities, and may continue our support beyond this initial seed grant."

Other notes: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/blog/our-criminal-justice-reform-program-now-independent-organization-just-impact has more details on the spinout. It is also cross-posted to the EA Forum at https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/5jTiPa2MJ3umhzT3S/our-criminal-justice-reform-program-is-now-an-independent (GW, IR) by an unaffiliated individual. Affected countries: United States; announced: 2021-11-16.
Open PhilanthropyCalifornians Against Pandemics5,000,000.002021-10Biosecurity and pandemic preparednesshttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/global-catastrophic-risks/biosecurity/californians-against-pandemics-ballot-initiative Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant "to support work on the California Pandemic Early Detection and Prevention Act ballot initiative. If passed by voters, the California Pandemic Early Detection and Prevention Act will create a grantmaking institute that will fund research on and development of pathogen genomics in order to reduce biosecurity risks posed by novel pathogens."

Other notes: Intended funding timeframe in months: 24; affected countries: United States; affected states: California.
Open PhilanthropyFederation of American Scientists600,000.002021-07Migration policy/high-skilled migraationhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/us-policy/immigration-policy/federation-of-american-scientists-high-skilled-immigration-policy 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.
Open PhilanthropyEmploy America1,000,000.002021-05Macroeconomic stabilization policyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/employ-america-general-support-2021 Donation process: This is a total across two grants.

Intended use of funds (category): Organizational general support

Intended use of funds: The grant page says: "Employ America makes the public and intellectual case for policies that support full employment and seeks to build a broad set of allies to further that goal. It produces research and analysis on the state of the labor market and current and potential macroeconomic policies and policymakers. Employ America was founded by Sam Bell, who has consulted for us and our grantee Fed Up."

Other notes: Affected countries: United States.
Open PhilanthropyAbundant Housing Massachusetts600,000.002021-03Land use reformhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/land-use-reform/abundant-housing-massachusetts Intended use of funds (category): Organizational general support

Intended use of funds: Grant "for general support. Abundant Housing Massachusetts is a new statewide organization that advocates for more housing across Massachusetts and within the Greater Boston Area."

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The grant page calls the grantee a "new statewide organization" so this is likely an initial/founding grant and the timing is explained accordingly.
Intended funding timeframe in months: 24

Other notes: Affected countries: United States; affected states: Massachusetts; affected cities: Boston.
Open PhilanthropyPositive Money Europe73,368.002021-01Macroeconomic stabilization policyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/positive-money-europe Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant "to support research and advocacy on macroeconomic policy in the Eurozone."

Other notes: Currency info: donation given as 60,000.00 EUR; affected countries: Europe.
Open PhilanthropyDezernat Zukunft202,079.002020-11Macroeconomic stabilization policyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/dezernat-zukunft-monetary-and-fiscal-policy-2020 Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant to support "work on monetary and fiscal policy in Europe. Dezernat Zukunft is a nonpartisan German think tank that seeks to gear European monetary and fiscal policies toward encouraging employment gains and sharing prosperity more widely. Dezernat Zukunft plans to use these funds to hire staff to encourage fiscal expansion in Germany."

Donor retrospective of the donation: The followup grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/dezernat-zukunft-general-support-and-regranting (2021-07) suggests continued satisfaction with the grantee.

Other notes: Currency info: donation given as 170,000.00 EUR (conversion done via donor calculation); affected countries: Germany.
Open PhilanthropyUrban Institute50,000.002020-11Macroeconomic stabilization policyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/urban-institute-counter-cyclical-state-funding-mechanisms Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant "to support a report on implementing countercyclical state funding mechanisms as a means to support states and localities in managing the effects of economic shocks like the COVID-19 pandemic and recession."

Other notes: Affected countries: United States.
Open PhilanthropyInternational Refugee Assistance Project1,000,000.002020-11Migration policy/refugee migrationhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/international-refugee-assistance-project-general-support-2020 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
Open PhilanthropyYIMBY Law500,000.002020-10Land use reformhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/land-use-reform/yimby-law-general-support-october-2020 Intended use of funds (category): Organizational general support

Intended use of funds: Grant "for general support. YIMBY Law is a new organization that advocates for more available and affordable housing in California and pursues litigation to ensure compliance with state housing laws."

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The grant is made about nine months after the first grant to the grantee, which was a founding grant. The timeframe of the original grant was not specified, but the amount ($100,000) suggests a timeframe of under a year, so the timing of this new grant is likely determined by the previous grant running out.
Intended funding timeframe in months: 24

Other notes: Affected countries: United States; affected states: California.
Open PhilanthropyEconomic Policy Institute550,000.002020-08Macroeconomic stabilization policyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/economic-policy-institute-macroeconomic-policy-research-2020 Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: The grant page says: "EPI plans to use these funds to continue to produce policy-relevant research on the ways in which macroeconomic policy can boost living standards for working Americans, including work on different aspects of the relationships between unemployment, wage growth, inflation, and productivity."

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): No explicit reasons are given for the amount; it is a little less than the amount ($700,000) of the previous two-year grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/economic-policy-institute-macroeconomic-policy-research-2018 (2018-07).

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/macroeconomic-policy/economic-policy-institute-macroeconomic-policy-research-2018 (2018-07).
Intended funding timeframe in months: 24

Other notes: Affected countries: United States.
Open PhilanthropyLabor Mobility Partnerships500,000.002020-08Migration policy/labor mobilityhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/labor-mobility-partnerships-international-labor-mobility 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.
Open PhilanthropyEmploy America1,250,000.002020-07Macroeconomic stabilization policyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/employ-america-general-support-2020 Donation process: This is a total across two grants.

Intended use of funds (category): Organizational general support

Intended use of funds: The grant page says: "Employ America makes the public and intellectual case for policies that support full employment and seeks to build a broad set of allies to further that goal. It produces research and analysis on the state of the labor market and current and potential macroeconomic policies and policymakers. Employ America is led by Sam Bell, who has consulted for us and our grantee Fed Up."

Donor retrospective of the donation: The followup grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/employ-america-general-support-2021 (2021-05) suggests continued satisfaction with the grantee.

Other notes: Affected countries: United States.
Open PhilanthropyCenter for Popular Democracy465,000.002020-06Macroeconomic stabilization policyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-up-campaign-2020 Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant "to support the “Fed Up” campaign. The campaign aims to encourage more accommodative monetary policies and greater transparency and public engagement in the governance of the Federal Reserve. Fed Up plans to use this funding to build up grassroots support for policies that prioritize full employment during and following the current economic crisis."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: The grant page does not discuss reasons, but a reasonable inference based on the information on the page as well as the previous grant page https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-up-campaign-2019 is that the recession caused by the COVID-19 pandemic motivated the grant. A goal of the Fed Up campaign is to make the Fed care more about unemployment, and the COVID-19-induced recession is a time when this concern becomes particularly salient.

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): This is not a renewal grant; the time period for the preceding two-year grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-up-campaign-2019 (2019-11) is still ongoing. Based on the grant description, the timing of this grant seems to be due to the COVID-19-induced economic recession; the grant is made about three months after the COVID-19-induced decline in economic activity.

Other notes: Affected countries: United States.
Open PhilanthropyMercy Corps1,000,000.002020-04Migration policy/labor mobility/seasonal migrationhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/mercy-corps-seasonal-migration-pilot-project-and-rct 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.
Open PhilanthropyCenter for Global Development1,000,000.002020-03Migration policy/labor mobilityhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/center-global-development-migration-program-2020 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.
Open PhilanthropyYIMBY Law100,000.002020-01Land use reformhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/land-use-reform/yimby-law-general-support Intended use of funds (category): Organizational general support

Intended use of funds: Grant "for general support. YIMBY Law is a new organization that advocates for more available and affordable housing in California and pursues litigation to ensure compliance with state housing laws."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: The grant page says: "[grantee's] founder, Sonja Trauss, pursued a similar strategy as part of her previous work at the California Renters Legal Advocacy and Education Fund [CaRLA]." Open Philanthropy had previously made grants to CaRLA, the latest being https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/land-use-reform/california-renters-legal-advocacy-and-education-fund-general-support-2019 (2019-02), so this grant was likely for similar reasons and based on the outcomes of that grant.

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The grant page calls the grantee a "new organization" and its founder appears to have recently left California Renters Legal Advocacy and Education Fund, another organization previously funded by Open Phil. The timing is likely explained by it being an initial/founding grant.

Donor retrospective of the donation: The followup two-year $500,000 grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/land-use-reform/yimby-law-general-support-october-2020 (2020-10) suggests continued satisfaction with the grantee.

Other notes: Affected countries: United States; affected states: California.
Open PhilanthropyThe Center on Poverty and Inequality50,000.002020-01Macroeconomic stabilization policy/automatic fiscal stabilizershttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/georgetown-university-center-on-poverty-and-inequality Donation process: The grant is via Georgetown University, where the Center on Poverty ad Inequality is housed.

Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant "to support the Center on Poverty and Inequality’s work on enhancing automatic fiscal stabilizers. Automatic fiscal stabilizers are taxes and government programs that respond automatically to changing economic conditions, and do not require additional Congressional action."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: The grant page says, of the research topic: "We believe [automatic fiscal stabilizers] are important for mitigating the effects of economic downturns."

Other notes: Affected countries: United States.
Open PhilanthropyNiskanen Center200,000.002020-01Migration policy/politicshttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/niskanen-center-research-on-immigration-policy-2020 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.
Open PhilanthropySightline Institute600,000.002019-12Land use reformhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/land-use-reform/sightline-institute-housing-and-urban-development-december-2019 Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant "to support [grantee's] work on housing and urban development." Grantee "plans to use these funds to build coalitions in support of allowing more housing in Washington and Oregon."

Other notes: Intended funding timeframe in months: 24; affected countries: United States; affected states: Washington|Oregon.
Open PhilanthropyDezernat Zukunft100,000.002019-12Macroeconomic stabilization policyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/dezernat-zukunft-macroeconomic-stabilization Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant to support "work on monetary and fiscal policy in Europe. Currently run by volunteers, Dezernat Zukunft is a nonpartisan German think tank that seeks to gear European monetary and fiscal policies towards encouraging employment gains and sharing prosperity more widely. Dezernat Zukunft plans to use these funds to increase its organizational capacity, specifically by hiring a full-time staff person, and to support its ability to disseminate innovative macroeconomic policy proposals among policymakers, the press, and the general public."

Donor retrospective of the donation: Followup grants https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/dezernat-zukunft-monetary-and-fiscal-policy-2020 (2020-11) and https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/dezernat-zukunft-general-support-and-regranting (2021-07) suggest continued satisfaction with the grantee.

Other notes: Currency info: donation given as 91,000.00 EUR (conversion done via donor calculation); affected countries: Europe.
Open PhilanthropyCenter for Popular Democracy600,000.002019-11Macroeconomic stabilization policyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-up-campaign-2019 Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant "to support the “Fed Up” campaign. The campaign aims to encourage more accommodative monetary policies and greater transparency and public engagement in the governance of the Federal Reserve."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: The grant page says: "As labor market conditions have improved, we’ve become less confident about the appropriate short term stance of monetary policy, but we continue to believe it to be worthwhile to support the campaign through the next recession, when its advocacy might be especially useful and when we could better evaluate its impact."

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): The amount, this time for two years, is significantly less than the amounts of previous one-year grants in 2016, 2017, and 2018 (over $1 million each).

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The grant is made after the end of the 2018 grant, but not immediately afterward; it is made in late 2019. The reasons for the gap in timing are unclear.
Intended funding timeframe in months: 24

Donor thoughts on making further donations to the donee: The grant page notes that the next recession would be an occasion to better evaluate the impact of the Fed Up campaign.

Donor retrospective of the donation: The followup grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-up-campaign-2020 (2020-06) is made in light of the recession induced by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Other notes: Unlike the two preceding grants to CPD, this grant is not accompanied by any (publicly announced) grant to CPD Action. Affected countries: United States.
Open PhilanthropyWashington Center for Equitable Growth750,000.002019-11Macroeconomic stabilization policyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/washington-center-for-equitable-growth-macroeconomic-policy-research Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant "to hire a director of macroeconomic policy and research staff. The Washington Center for Equitable Growth conducts and funds research on the effect of economic inequality on economic growth and stability in the United States. It recently partnered with the Hamilton Project to publish the book Recession Ready: Fiscal Policies to Stabilize the American Economy, which proposes policies for preparing for and mitigating the long-term effects of the next economic recession."

Other notes: Intended funding timeframe in months: 24; affected countries: United States.
Open PhilanthropyEmploy America1,000,000.002019-10Macroeconomic stabilization policyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/employ-america-general-support-october-2019 Donation process: This is a total across two grants.

Intended use of funds (category): Organizational general support

Intended use of funds: The grant page says: "Employ America makes the public and intellectual case for policies that support full employment and seeks to build a broad set of allies to further that goal. It produces research and analysis on the state of the labor market and current and potential macroeconomic policies and policymakers. Employ America is led by Sam Bell, who has consulted for us and our grantee Fed Up."

Donor retrospective of the donation: Followup grants such as https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/employ-america-general-support-2020 (2020-07) suggest continued satisfaction with the grantee.

Other notes: Affected countries: United States.
Open PhilanthropyGreater Greater Washington300,000.002019-08Land use reformhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/land-use-reform/greater-greater-washington-housing-and-land-use-reform-2019 Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant "to support its work on housing affordability and land use reform. Greater Greater Washington is a news and advocacy organization that focuses on housing, transportation, and other local policy issues in the greater Washington, D.C. metro area."

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): No explicit reason is given for the amount, but it is similar to the previous amount of $250,000; the difference in the amount is approximately proportional to the difference in timeframe (2 years versus 2.5 years).

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The grant is made around the end of the timeframe of the previous two-year grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/land-use-reform/greater-greater-washington-housing-and-land-use-reform-2017 (2017-06).
Intended funding timeframe in months: 30

Other notes: Affected countries: United States; affected cities: Washington, D.C..
Open PhilanthropyCenter for Global Development3,000,000.002019-06Global health and developmenthttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/global-health-and-development/miscellaneous/center-global-development-general-support-2019 Donation process: This is a grant renewal of another grant of the same size three years ago. The grant page says: "Our renewal decision at this stage was based largely on our previous decision and the view that three years was too short a window on which to update for a mature but hits-based organization like CGD."

Intended use of funds (category): Organizational general support

Intended use of funds: Grantee "is a think tank that conducts research on and promotes improvements to rich-world policies that affect the global poor." For the previous grant: "CGD says it used to conduct research on aid effectiveness, U.S. development policy, universal basic income in India, and taxes on tobacco, alcohol, and sugar."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: The grant renews a previous grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/global-health-and-development/miscellaneous/center-global-development-general-support-2016 and the reasons remain the same as specified in that grant write-up. The grant page says: "Our renewal decision at this stage was based largely on our previous decision and the view that three years was too short a window on which to update for a mature but hits-based organization like CGD."

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): The grant amount as well as structure of the grant exactly match the February 2016 grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/global-health-and-development/miscellaneous/center-global-development-general-support-2016 namely $3 million over 3 years

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): Timing determined by the end of the previous three-year grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/global-health-and-development/miscellaneous/center-global-development-general-support-2016 made in Februay 2016 (the renewal, in June 2019, is four months ago)
Intended funding timeframe in months: 36

Donor thoughts on making further donations to the donee: According to the grant page: "We expect to undertake a more thorough evaluation of CGD’s performance approximately two years into this grant, which would be five years into our overall support."

Other notes: Announced: 2019-09-05.
Open PhilanthropySightline Institute50,000.002019-06Land use reformhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/land-use-reform/sightline-institute-YIMBYtown-2019 Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant "to support a national “Yes In My Back Yard” conference, which will take place in Portland, Oregon."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: The grant page says: "We previously supported the first three national YIMBY conferences to bring those housing advocates together in 2016 in Boulder, Colorado, in 2017 in Oakland, California, and in 2018 in Boston, Massachusetts." The first grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/land-use-reform/better-boulder-yimby-2016 (with grantee Better Boulder) has a more detailed explanation of the reasons.

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): The amount of the grant is pretty similar to the amount of previous grants: $37,000 (2016), $40,000 (2017), and $40,000 (2018).

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The timing of the grant is likely determined by the timing of the conference.
Intended funding timeframe in months: 1

Other notes: Affected countries: United States.
Open PhilanthropyInternational Refugee Assistance Project75,000.002019-05Migration policy/refugee migration/family reunificationhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/international-refugee-assistance-project-family-reunification 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."
Open PhilanthropyEmploy America300,000.002019-04Macroeconomic stabilization policyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/employ-america-start-up Donation process: This is a total across two grants, one of which is being made by the Open Philanthropy Action Fund.

Intended use of funds (category): Organizational general support

Intended use of funds: Grant "to help launch Employ America and cover a six-month pilot period." The grant page says: "Employ America will focus on making the public and intellectual case for policies that support full employment and building a broader set of allies to further that goal, especially with an eye to the next economic downturn. In order to do so, it will produce research and analysis on the state of the labor market and current and potential macroeconomic policies and policymakers. It will be led by Sam Bell, who has previously consulted for us and our grantee Fed Up."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: The grant page says: "As labor market conditions have improved over the last few years, we’ve become less confident about the appropriate short term stance of monetary policy, but we continue to believe it is worthwhile to support research and advocacy like this, at least through the next recession."

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): The amount is likely determined based on how much is needed for an initial 6-month startup.

Donor retrospective of the donation: Several followup grants starting with https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/employ-america-general-support-october-2019 (2019-10) suggest continued satisfaction with the grantee.

Other notes: Intended funding timeframe in months: 6; affected countries: United States; announced: 2019-05-29.
Open PhilanthropyLabor Mobility Partnerships709,888.002019-03Migration policy/labor mobilityhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/center-global-development-labor-mobility-partnerships 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.
Open PhilanthropyCalifornia Renters Legal Advocacy and Education Fund340,000.002019-02Land use reformhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/land-use-reform/california-renters-legal-advocacy-and-education-fund-general-support-2019 Intended use of funds (category): Organizational general support

Intended use of funds: Grantee intends to continue pursuing litigation, advocating against regulatory barriers to building housing in the San Francisco Bay Area, and developing educational resources.

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): The original grant amount was $400,000, but the grantee returned $60,000 of unused funds.

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The grant timing is a little after the end of the timeframe of the previous two-grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/land-use-reform/california-renters-legal-advocacy-and-education-fund-general-support (2016-06).
Intended funding timeframe in months: 24

Donor retrospective of the donation: The later grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/land-use-reform/yimby-law-general-support to YIMBY Law, based on its founder's work at California Renters Legal Advocacy and Education Fund, can be thought of as a continued vote of confidence in the work funded by the grant.

Other notes: Affected countries: United States; affected states: California; announced: 2019-05-18.
Open PhilanthropySightline Institute150,000.002019-02Land use reformhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/land-use-reform/sightline-institute-housing-and-urban-development-2019 Donation process: Discretionary grant. Grant made by the Open Philanthropy Action Fund because the funds are to be used for lobbying

Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant "to support work on housing and land use." Grantee "plans to use these funds to support priority housing legislation in Washington and Oregon."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: No explicit reasons given, but reasons likely similar to those for the October 2017 grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/land-use-reform/sightline-institute-housing-and-urban-development-2017 and the October 2015 grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/land-use-reform/sightline-institute-housing-and-urban-development (which has the most detailed write-up).

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): The amount of this grant ($100,000) is less than the amount for previous two-year grants ($400,000 and $350,000) so it is more a supplement than a renewal.

Other notes: Affected countries: United States; affected states: Washington|Oregon; announced: 2019-06-07.
Open PhilanthropyPeterson Institute for International Economics400,000.002019-01Macroeconomic stabilization policyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/peterson-institute-international-economics-macroeconomic-projects Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: The grant funds two projects by nonresident fellows: (1) "Karen Dynan, a PIIE nonresident senior fellow, Harvard professor, and former chief economist at the Treasury Department, will study the optimal design of automatic stabilizer programs — taxes and government programs that respond automatically to changing economic conditions." (2) "Jason Furman, a PIIE nonresident senior fellow and formerly chair of President Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers, will study the costs and benefits of allowing employment to exceed some estimates of full employment."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: The grant page says: "We see these both as crucially important questions in macroeconomic stabilization policy and believe Dynan and Furman are especially well-placed to address them in an influential and informative fashion."

Other notes: Intended funding timeframe in months: 24; affected countries: United States; announced: 2019-05-17.
Open PhilanthropyInternational Refugee Assistance Project1,000,000.002019-01Migration policy/refugee migrationhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/international-refugee-assistance-project-general-support-2019 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.
Open PhilanthropyUniversity of Southern California2,250,000.002019-01Scientific research/tools and techniqueshttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/scientific-research/Social-Science-Genetic-Association-Consortium-general-support Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant to support the Social Science Genetic Association Consortium (SSGAC). Approximately 20% of this grant is intended to support work on bioethics and the public discussion of these topics.

Donor reason for selecting the donee: The grant page says: "Our understanding is that SSGAC has received substantially less funding to date than comparable consortia (such as in psychiatric genetics), but still produces high-quality, replicable research and serves as a model of careful public communication, most notably through their discussions of frequently asked questions."

Other notes: Announced: 2019-05-18.
Open PhilanthropyCenter for Global Development333,550.002019-01Scientific research/human health and wellbeinghttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/scientific-research/miscellaneous/center-for-global-development-gene-drive-research Discretionary grant to support research on the assessment and regulation of gene drive technology. CGD plans to use this grant to identify key political and social considerations that may inform global decisions on the development and deployment of gene drive technology, particularly with respect to malaria. CGD will conduct interviews and site visits to develop a better understanding of regulatory, social, and political considerations at play in different contexts. The research will be led by Gyude Moore, CGD visiting fellow and former Minister of Public Works in Liberia. Announced: 2019-02-15.
Open PhilanthropyWashington Center for Equitable Growth100,000.002018-10Macroeconomic stabilization policy/automatic fiscal stabilizershttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/washington-center-for-equitable-growth-automatic-stabilizers-conference Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant "to host a conference, in partnership with the Hamilton Project, on a framework for thinking about optimal design of automatic stabilizer programs as well as specific suggestions for reforms. Automatic fiscal stabilizers are taxes and government programs that respond automatically to changing economic conditions, and do not require additional Congressional action. [...] The conference will bring together macroeconomists who are interested in automatic stabilizers as a way to fight recession and academics and advocates who focus on the mechanics of various programs, such as the unemployment insurance system."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: On the subject (automatic fiscal stabilizers) that this grant is funding a conference for, the grant page says: "We believe [automatic fiscal stabilizers] are important for mitigating the effects of economic downturns. [...] will hopefully complement work in this area (by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities." https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-budget-and-policy-priorities-automatic-stabilizers is the linked grant to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

Other notes: Intended funding timeframe in months: 1; affected countries: United States; announced: 2018-11-26.
Open PhilanthropyEconomic Policy Institute700,000.002018-07Macroeconomic stabilization policyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/economic-policy-institute-macroeconomic-policy-research-2018 Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: The grant page says: "EPI plans to use these funds primarily to continue producing policy-relevant research on the ways in which macroeconomic policy can boost living standards for working Americans, including work on different aspects of the relationships between unemployment, wage growth, inflation, and productivity."

Donor retrospective of the donation: The followup grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/economic-policy-institute-macroeconomic-policy-research-2020 (2020-08) suggests continued satisfaction with the grantee.

Other notes: Intended funding timeframe in months: 24; affected countries: United States; announced: 2018-08-15.
Open PhilanthropyCenter on Budget and Policy Priorities250,000.002018-07Macroeconomic stabilization policyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-budget-and-policy-priorities-full-employment-project-2018 Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant "to support the Full Employment Project."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: This is an exit grant; the grant page says: "We continue to think the Project’s work is important but do not have a clear sense of how much of a difference marginal funding makes in driving that work forward. This grant will bring us to five years of supporting the Full Employment Project, and at this point we want to take the opportunity to step back and see if other funders may be interested in supporting the Project."

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): The amount is likely determined to be enough to provide about a year of support, as is typical for exit grants.

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The timing is likely determined by the previous grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-budget-and-policy-priorities-full-employment-project-2016 (2016-07) running out.
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 for the Full Employment Project. Open Philanthropy also made a grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-budget-and-policy-priorities-automatic-stabilizers (2018-05) to CBPP for automatic fiscal stabilizers, so it doesn't look like Open Philanthropy is exiting all grantmaking to CBPP.

Other notes: Affected countries: United States; announced: 2018-08-02.
Open PhilanthropyCenter on Budget and Policy Priorities100,000.002018-05Macroeconomic stabilization policy/automatic fiscal stabilizershttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-budget-and-policy-priorities-automatic-stabilizers Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant "to support work on enhancing automatic fiscal stabilizers. Automatic fiscal stabilizers are taxes and government programs that respond automatically to changing economic conditions, and do not require additional Congressional action."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: The grant page says: "[Automatic fiscal stabilizers] are important for mitigating the effects of economic downturns. We believe CBPP, which has done work in this area before, is a strong candidate to advance these policies given its combination of relevant relationships and deep knowledge of these issues."

Other notes: Affected countries: United States; announced: 2018-06-21.
Open PhilanthropyHarborlight Community Partners40,000.002018-03Land use reformhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/land-use-reform/harborlight-community-partners-YIMBYtown-2018 Discretionary grant to support the 2018 national "Yes In My Back Yard" conference, scheduled to take place in Boston, Masschusetts, in September. Open Phi has supported the conference for two previous years: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/land-use-reform/better-boulder-yimby-2016 (2016, grant to Better Boulder, organizing the conference in Boulder, Colorado), and https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/land-use-reform/east-bay-forward-yimbytown-2017-conference (2017, to East Bay Forward, organizing the conference in Oakland, California). Affected countries: United States; announced: 2018-04-12.
Open PhilanthropyCenter for Popular Democracy Action Fund100,000.002018-02Macroeconomic stabilization policyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-action-fund-fed-campaign-2018 Donation process: Grant made via the Open Philanthropy Action Fund; this complements the grant made by Open Philanthropy directly to the Center for Popular Democracy (the associated 501(c)(3)) at https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-action-fund-fed-campaign-2018 (2018-02).

Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant "to support the “Fed Up” campaign. The campaign aims to encourage more accommodative monetary policies and greater transparency and public engagement in the governance of the Federal Reserve. [...] CPD Action expects to use this funding primarily for lobbying activities associated with the campaign."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: The grant page says: "As labor market conditions have improved, we’ve become less confident about the appropriate short term stance of monetary policy, but we continue to believe it to be worthwhile to support the campaign through the next recession, when its advocacy might be especially useful and when we could better evaluate its impact." It also links to the corresponding CPD grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-action-fund-fed-campaign-2018 for more context.

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): No explicit reasons are given for the amount; it is 1/12 of the amount for the corresponding CPD grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-action-fund-fed-campaign-2018 (2018-02) of about $1.2 million.

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The timing is coordinated with the corresponding CPD grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-campaign-2017 whose timing in turn is based on an annual cadence of granting.
Intended funding timeframe in months: 12

Donor retrospective of the donation: As of November 2021, Open Philanthropy has made no further grants to the CPD Action Fund, though it has made two further grants to CPD. The reasons for ending the practice of complementary graants to the Action Fund are not clear.

Other notes: Affected countries: United States; announced: 2018-03-23.
Open PhilanthropyCenter for Popular Democracy1,200,000.002018-02Macroeconomic stabilization policyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-campaign-2018 Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant "to support the “Fed Up” campaign. The campaign aims to encourage more accommodative monetary policies and greater transparency and public engagement in the governance of the Federal Reserve."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: The grant page says: "As labor market conditions have improved, we’ve become less confident about the appropriate short term stance of monetary policy, but we continue to believe it to be worthwhile to support the campaign through the next recession, when its advocacy might be especially useful and when we could better evaluate its impact."

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): No specific reasons are given for the amount, but it roughly matches the amounts of the previous years: $1,100,000 for 2017 and $1,429,000 for 2016.

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The previous grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-campaign-2017 was for the 2017 year, so with the end of the year, funds are needed for 2017's Fed Up campaign.
Intended funding timeframe in months: 12

Donor thoughts on making further donations to the donee: The grant page notes that the next recession would be an occasion to better evaluate the impact of the Fed Up campaign.

Donor retrospective of the donation: Followup grants include https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-up-campaign-2019 (2019-11) and https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-up-campaign-2020 (2020-06). The latter grant is made in light of the recession induced by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Other notes: An associated grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-action-fund-fed-campaign-2018 is made to the CPD Action Fund by the Open Philanthropy Action Fund. Affected countries: United States; announced: 2018-03-23.
Open PhilanthropyNiskanen Center400,000.002018-01Migration policy/politicshttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/niskanen-immigration-2018 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.
Open PhilanthropyUrban Institute165,833.002017-12History of philanthropyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/research/history-of-philanthropy/urban-institute-history-of-philanthropy-project Grant to support a series of literature reviews and case studies on the history of philanthropy. The work will be led primarily by Benjamin Soskis, a research associate at the Urban Institute, who has previously produced case studies for our history of philanthropy project. Announced: 2018-02-22.
Open PhilanthropyEast Bay Forward40,000.002017-04Land use reformhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/land-use-reform/east-bay-forward-yimbytown-2017-conference Money to support a YIMBYtown 2017 conference planned for July 2017. Grant via the California Renters Legal Advocacy and Education Fund (CaRLA). Follows up on grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/land-use-reform/better-boulder-yimby-2016 to Better Boulder supporting the YIMBY 2016 conference. Affected countries: United States; announced: 2017-07-07.
Open PhilanthropyCenter for Global Development1,800,000.002017-03Migration policy/labor mobilityhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/center-global-development-migration-program 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.
Open PhilanthropyCenter for Popular Democracy Action Fund305,000.002017-02Macroeconomic stabilization policyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-action-fund-fed-campaign-2017 Donation process: Grant made via the Open Philanthropy Action Fund; this complements the grant made by Open Philanthropy directly to the Center for Popular Democracy (the associated 501(c)(3)) at https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-campaign-2017 (2017-02).

Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant "to support the “Fed Up” campaign. The campaign aims to encourage more accommodative monetary policies and greater transparency and public engagement in the governance of the Federal Reserve, and specifically in the selection of regional Federal Reserve Bank presidents and leaders. [...] CPD Action expects to use this funding primarily for lobbying activities associated with the campaign."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: The grant page links to the corresponding CPD grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-campaign-2017 that says: "We decided to renew our support based primarily on CPD’s continued success drawing attention for its agenda from the press, Congress, and the Fed; ongoing opportunities to potentially influence the appointment or priorities of new Federal Reserve governors and regional Fed presidents; and our intention to provide the campaign with enough sustainable funding to last through the next recession, when CPD’s advocacy might be especially useful and when we could better evaluate its performance."

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): No explicit reasons are given for the amount; it is about 27% of the amount ($1,100,000) for the corresponding CPD grant, and likely reflects the expected amount of lobbying costs to support the campaign's other costs.

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The timing is coordinated with the corresponding CPD grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-campaign-2017 whose timing in turn is based on an annual cadence of granting.
Intended funding timeframe in months: 12

Donor retrospective of the donation: The followup grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-action-fund-fed-campaign-2018 (2018-02, $100,000) suggests continued satisfaction with the grantee, though the size of the followup grant (both absolute and in proportion to the CPD grant) is substantially smaller.

Other notes: As explained at https://groups.google.com/a/openphilanthropy.org/forum/#!topic/newly.published/F-AE_gVn6Zg the grant announcement was delayed till Open Philanthropy was completely separate from GiveWell. Affected countries: United States; announced: 2017-12-28.
Open PhilanthropyCenter for Popular Democracy1,100,000.002017-02Macroeconomic stabilization policyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-campaign-2017 Donation process: This renewal grant for CPD's Fed Up campaign is based on a review of the campaign's performance so far as well as changes to the political and economic environment.

Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant "to support the “Fed Up” campaign. The campaign aims to encourage more accommodative monetary policies and greater transparency and public engagement in the governance of the Federal Reserve, and specifically in the selection of regional Federal Reserve Bank presidents and leaders. [...] CPD expects to use this funding toward campaign expenses such as salaries, travel, sub-grants, and overhead."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: The grant page says: "We decided to renew our support based primarily on CPD’s continued success drawing attention for its agenda from the press, Congress, and the Fed; ongoing opportunities to potentially influence the appointment or priorities of new Federal Reserve governors and regional Fed presidents; and our intention to provide the campaign with enough sustainable funding to last through the next recession, when CPD’s advocacy might be especially useful and when we could better evaluate its performance. [...] However, our primary reason for continuing to support the campaign is that we believe it may be able to potentially prevent extraordinary harm during the next recession, when we think it will be more likely to have a meaningful short-term influence (as compared to the current gradual tightening cycle)."

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): No specific reasons are given for the amount; it is less than the $1,429,000 given the previous year.

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The previous grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-campaign-2016 was for the 2016 year, so with the end of the year, funds are needed for 2017's Fed Up campaign.
Intended funding timeframe in months: 12

Donor retrospective of the donation: A followup grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-campaign-2018 suggests continued satisfaction with the grantee, though it notes: "As labor market conditions have improved, we’ve become less confident about the appropriate short term stance of monetary policy." There are further followup grants in 2019 and 2020.

Other notes: The grant page says: "Since our last grant, one new area of uncertainty introduced for the campaign is the degree to which the Trump administration and a unified Republican Congress might support policies that reduce the need for expansionary monetary policy. Additionally, as unemployment rates have declined, we have become less confident in the appropriate short-term stance of monetary policy, and could imagine disagreeing with the Fed Up campaign about the appropriate direction for interest rates to move." An associated grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-action-fund-fed-campaign-2017 is made to the CPD Action Fund by the Open Philanthropy Action Fund. Affected countries: United States; announced: 2017-12-28.
Open PhilanthropyCenter for Popular Democracy Action Fund31,500.002016-10Macroeconomic stabilization policyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-action-fund-fed-campaign-october-2016 Donation process: Discretionary grant made via the Open Philanthropy Action Fund; this complements grants made by Open Philanthropy directly to the Center for Popular Democracy (the associated 501(c)(3)) such as https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-campaign-2016 (2015-12).

Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant "to support the “Fed Up” campaign. The campaign aims to encourage more accommodative monetary policies and greater transparency and public engagement in the governance of the Federal Reserve, and specifically in the selection of regional Federal Reserve Bank presidents and leaders. [...] CPD Action expects to use this funding primarily for lobbying activities associated with the campaign."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: The grant page says: "We have written in more detail about our rationale for supporting this campaign on our 2014, 2015, and 2016 grant pages to the Center for Popular Democracy, a 501(c)(3) affiliated with CPD Action." The rationale for the most recent grant to CPD as of that time is provided at https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-campaign-2016#Case_for_this_grant and includes details on why Open Phil thinks the Fed is too focused on the risk of inflation and not enough on unemployment, and that the campaign being funded can help shift the balance.

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): No specific reasons are given for the amount; for context, it is only about 2% of the corresponding grant to CPD ($1,429,000) and likely reflects the expected costs of lobbying activities to properly complement the campaign. Note that since the grant is made late in te year compared to the CPD grant, it likely only covers 4 months of the year, so after normalizing for time it is about 6% of the CPD grant.

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The timing is likely partly determined by the timing of the Fed Up campaign, but the campaign is ongoing so this doesn't really help narrow down the timing much.
Intended funding timeframe in months: 4

Donor retrospective of the donation: Larger followup grants https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-action-fund-fed-campaign-2017 (2017-02) and https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-action-fund-fed-campaign-2018 (2018-02) suggest continued satisfaction with the grantee.

Other notes: As explained at https://groups.google.com/a/openphilanthropy.org/forum/#!topic/newly.published/FrHyHKPNy-M the grant announcement was delayed till Open Philanthropy was completely separate from GiveWell. Affected countries: United States; announced: 2018-01-19.
Open PhilanthropyProtect the People50,000.002016-10Migration policy/labor mobility/seasonal migrationhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/protect-people-exit-grant 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.
Open PhilanthropyCenter on Budget and Policy Priorities425,000.002016-07Macroeconomic stabilization policyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-budget-and-policy-priorities-full-employment-project-2016 Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant to support the Full Employment Project. It renews the original grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-budget-and-policy-priorities-full-employment-project made in 2014. Open Philanthropy describes two main areas supported by these grants: (1) "Preparing for the next U.S. recession, which we would guess is likely to occur before interest rates return to “normal” levels." (2) "Making the case for the importance of continued focus on reducing unemployment and against premature monetary tightening today." The grant page also says: "Our understanding is that our marginal funding will support CBPP to undertake a project commissioning outside macroeconomists to develop their own estimates of potential output of the U.S. economy, based on the possibility that the Congressional Budget Office’s estimate may be too low."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: The grant page says: "It is also one in a series of grants attempting to build up the capacity of progressive think tanks on macroeconomic policy issues we see as important. [...] Our key uncertainty for this grant, along with our other grants to think tanks for work on macroeconomic policy, is whether work by think tanks on these issues is likely to sway decisionmakers at the Fed or in Congress. We would guess that the work we support is relatively unlikely to affect policy, but that if it did our support would be justified many times over, and we see that as a bet worth taking."

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): No explicit reasons for timing are given, but it looks like CBPP has found opportunities to expand the scope of the Full Employment Project around the end of its original 28-month duration.
Intended funding timeframe in months: 24

Donor retrospective of the donation: The followup grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-budget-and-policy-priorities-full-employment-project-2018 (2018-07) is an exit grant, where Open Philanthropy writes: "We continue to think the Project’s work is important but do not have a clear sense of how much of a difference marginal funding makes in driving that work forward."

Other notes: Affected countries: United States; announced: 2016-10-25.
Open PhilanthropyCalifornia Renters Legal Advocacy and Education Fund300,000.002016-06Land use reformhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/land-use-reform/california-renters-legal-advocacy-and-education-fund-general-support Donation process: According to https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/land-use-reform/california-renters-legal-advocacy-and-education-fund-general-support#Our_process "Alexander Berger, who leads our work on land use reform, heard from Trauss that she was planning to start a new organization focused on land use reform in the Bay Area."

Intended use of funds (category): Organizational general support

Intended use of funds: Grantee is a nascent advocacy organization that intends to litigate and advocate against regulatory barriers to building housing in the San Francisco Bay Area. More at https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/land-use-reform/california-renters-legal-advocacy-and-education-fund-general-support#Proposed_activities

Donor reason for selecting the donee: According to https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/land-use-reform/california-renters-legal-advocacy-and-education-fund-general-support#Case_for_the_grant (1) The San Francisco Bay Area is a key region for land use reform, (2) The founder, Sonja Trauss, has been able to attract some public interest to the issue in San Francisco through the SF Bay Area Renters’ Federation (SFBARF), which she also founded.

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): There is background at https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/land-use-reform/california-renters-legal-advocacy-and-education-fund-general-support#Budget_and_room_for_more_funding saying the organization has received $100,000 from another donor, and may be able to raise more funding if it attempts

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): This is (sort of) a founding grant to a nascent advocacy organization
Intended funding timeframe in months: 24

Donor retrospective of the donation: The followup grant ttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/land-use-reform/california-renters-legal-advocacy-and-education-fund-general-support-2019 (2019-02) suggests continued satisfaction with the grantee.

Other notes: Affected countries: United States; affected states: California; affected cities: San Francisco; announced: 2016-06-28.
Open PhilanthropyEconomic Policy Institute500,000.002016-06Macroeconomic stabilization policyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/economic-policy-institute-macroeconomic-policy-research Donation process: The grantee submitted a proposal available at https://www.openphilanthropy.org/files/Grants/EPI/EPI_Open_Phil.pdf that includes proposed research investigations and activities.

Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: The grant page describes two main areas supported by the grant: (1) "Preparing for the next U.S. recession, which we would guess is likely to occur before interest rates return to “normal” levels." (2) "Making the case for the importance of continued focus on reducing unemployment and against premature monetary tightening today." https://www.openphilanthropy.org/files/Grants/EPI/EPI_Open_Phil.pdf has more details on proposed activities.

Donor retrospective of the donation: Followup grants https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/economic-policy-institute-macroeconomic-policy-research-2018 (2018-07) and https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/economic-policy-institute-macroeconomic-policy-research-2020 (2020-08) suggest continued satisfaction with the grantee.

Other notes: Affected countries: United States; announced: 2016-10-25.
Open PhilanthropyRoosevelt Institute200,000.002016-06Macroeconomic stabilization policyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/roosevelt-institute-macroeconomic-policy-research Donation process: Roosevelt Institute submitted a concept paper https://www.openphilanthropy.org/files/Grants/Roosevelt_Institute/Roosevelt_Concept_Paper_Mar_2016-final.pdf for the grant in March 2016.

Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: The grant page identifies two main areas supported by the grants: (1) "Preparing for the next U.S. recession, which we would guess is likely to occur before interest rates return to “normal” levels." (2) "Making the case for the importance of continued focus on reducing unemployment and against premature monetary tightening today." It continues: "Our funding will allow existing Roosevelt staff to focus on these issues, as well as supporting the hiring of an additional staff economist and part-time research assistant. These researchers plan to undertake two projects on the topics listed above: one to build out the monetary policy toolkit available to the Fed (“Monetary Policy Toolkit”), and one to investigate the potential for continued recovery from the Great Recession (“Anti-Hysteresis”). More about these projects is laid out in Roosevelt’s concept paper https://www.openphilanthropy.org/files/Grants/Roosevelt_Institute/Roosevelt_Concept_Paper_Mar_2016-final.pdf for this grant."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: The grant page says: "This is one in a series of grants attempting to build up the capacity of progressive think tanks on macroeconomic policy issues we see as important. [...] Our key uncertainty for this grant, along with our other grants to think tanks for work on macroeconomic policy, is whether work by think tanks on these issues is likely to sway decisionmakers at the Fed or in Congress. We would guess that the work we support is relatively unlikely to affect policy, but that if it did our support would be justified many times over, and we see that as a bet worth taking."

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The timing may have been determined by the timing of the submission of the Roosevelt Institute's concept paper https://www.openphilanthropy.org/files/Grants/Roosevelt_Institute/Roosevelt_Concept_Paper_Mar_2016-final.pdf (March 2016).

Donor retrospective of the donation: As of late 2021, Open Philanthropy has not made any further grants to Roosevelt Institute in the cause area.

Other notes: Affected countries: United States; announced: 2016-10-25.
Open PhilanthropyInternational Refugee Assistance Project700,000.002016-05Migration policy/refugee migrationhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/international-refugee-assistance-project-general-support 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.
Open PhilanthropyFree Migration Project24,000.002016-05Migration policy/humanitarian migration/free migrationhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/free-migration-project-planning-grant 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.
Open PhilanthropyPeterson Institute for International Economics250,000.002016-04Macroeconomic stabilization policyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/peterson-institute-international-economics-macroeconomic-stabilization Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant to support work on macroeconomic stabilization

Donor reason for selecting the donee: The grant page says: "We are considering making a larger grant to support PIIE to do substantially more work in this area (which is a focus area of ours), and are thinking of the present funding as an opportunity to try working with the organization while we (and they) think more about potential future engagement."

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): The grant is a relatively small one and is intended to kickstart a relationship with the donee, to decide on whether to make a bigger grant later.

Donor thoughts on making further donations to the donee: The grant page says: "We are considering making a larger grant to support PIIE to do substantially more work in this area (which is a focus area of ours), and are thinking of the present funding as an opportunity to try working with the organization while we (and they) think more about potential future engagement."

Donor retrospective of the donation: A later grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/peterson-institute-international-economics-macroeconomic-projects (2019-01) for $400,000 suggests continued satisfaction with the grantee.

Other notes: Affected countries: United States; announced: 2016-04-29.
Open PhilanthropyCenter for American Progress500,000.002016-03Macroeconomic stabilization policyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-american-progress-macroeconomic-stabilization Donation process: The grant page's "Our Process" section says: "Mike Konczal of the Roosevelt Institute had mentioned CAP to us in 2014 as an organization to consider supporting for macroeconomic policy work, but we had not prioritized a conversation because of CAP’s limited work in the area to date. However, when we first spoke with Marc Jarsulic in 2015, he expressed interest in hiring someone to work on macroeconomic stabilization and told us that lack of resources had been the main barrier to prioritizing work in the area. After several subsequent conversations, we decided to recommend a grant of $500,000 over two years." Linked sources include https://www.openphilanthropy.org/files/Grants/CAP/OPP_Monetary_Policy_Plan.pdf (CAP's monetary policy plan) and https://files.givewell.org/files/conversations/Konczal%201-23-14%20(public).pdf (2014-01-23 conversation with Mike Konczal).

Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: CAP's plans include: "(1) Hold convenings to better understand the field (2) Produce research reports documenting important factors in macroeconomic stabilization (e.g. the impact of the Taylor rule on income distribution) (3) Produce policy proposals (4) Use its network and outreach capacity to share its research and proposals with the media, Congress, presidential administration, and Federal Reserve."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: The grant page says: "CAP provided us with a list of proposed research topics, all of which struck us as potentially worthwhile. Our primary goal for this grant is to increase progressive capacity and attention around macroeconomic policy and business cycle issues. Our impression is that, while there are many labor economists working at progressive think tanks, significantly less attention has been devoted to monetary policy and other macroeconomic stability issues, and that CAP plays a particularly prominent role in setting, and reflecting, the progressive agenda."

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The timing seems to be determined by the evolution of conversatioons between Open Phil and CAP. The grant page's "Our Process" section says: "Mike Konczal of the Roosevelt Institute had mentioned CAP to us in 2014 as an organization to consider supporting for macroeconomic policy work, but we had not prioritized a conversation because of CAP’s limited work in the area to date. However, when we first spoke with Marc Jarsulic in 2015, he expressed interest in hiring someone to work on macroeconomic stabilization and told us that lack of resources had been the main barrier to prioritizing work in the area. After several subsequent conversations, we decided to recommend a grant of $500,000 over two years."
Intended funding timeframe in months: 24

Donor thoughts on making further donations to the donee: Further grants are not explicitly discussed; the grant page says: "To follow up on this grant, we expect to have a conversation with CAP staff every 6-12 months for the next two years, with public notes if the conversation warrants it. Towards the end of the grant, we plan to attempt a written update about how we see the grant overall."

Donor retrospective of the donation: As of late 2021, there are no further grants from Open Phil to the grantee in this area.

Other notes: The grant page lists three main reservations: (1) "Our basic theory of the case could be wrong for any number of reasons [...]" (2) "CAP could be the wrong partner. [...] macroeconomic stabilization policy could turn out to be a bad fit for the organization." (3) "As always within this area, we could be mistaken about which sorts of policy changes would be beneficial.". Affected countries: United States; announced: 2016-04-19.
Open PhilanthropyCenter for Global Development3,000,000.002016-02Global health and developmenthttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/miscellaneous/center-global-development-general-support-2016 Donation process: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/global-health-and-development/miscellaneous/center-global-development-general-support-2016#Our_process says: "In mid-2014 [...] we told CGD that we were interested in funding more policy outreach work. In October 2014, CGD sent us a proposal for a $2.3 million grant to create a “Do Fund”, which would support policy outreach work for three years. In follow-up conversations, CGD told us that it would prefer unrestricted funding, and we shifted to considering that. [...] CGD sent us an outline of some hypothetical activities that it might undertake with different levels of additional unrestricted funding [...]. Before reaching a decision, we investigated the case studies summarized above to improve our understanding of CGD’s track record."

Intended use of funds (category): Organizational general support

Intended use of funds: The funding is unrestricted, but as part of the grant proposal, the grantee, CGD, shared a list of activities it may use the funds for: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/global-health-and-development/miscellaneous/center-global-development-general-support-2016#Grant_timeline_and_proposed_activities The activities include various forms of additional research, hiring people (consultants, associates, researchers) and expanding a fellowship exchange program

Donor reason for selecting the donee: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/global-health-and-development/miscellaneous/center-global-development-general-support-2016#Considerations_in_favor_of_and_against_the_grant says: "We see our unrestricted grant to CGD as a way to support an organization with values closely aligned with ours. We think it is likely that CGD has produced a great deal more value for the global poor than it has spent as an organization, and the potential future activities that CGD has shared to date generally strike us as promising, so we see further unrestricted funding as an attractive grant opportunity. As is fairly typical of our policy grants, our modal guess is that this grant will have limited, if any, humanitarian impact, but that there is a sufficient probability of a very large positive impact to justify the grant." Earlier sections in the grant page discuss proposed activities and track record

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): Amount of $3 million (which is to be distributed in three annual installments of $1 million each) determined based on what CGD requested (initially, $2.3 million), as well as what Open Phil considers an appropriate level of fundings

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): Timing determined partly by the completion of the timeframe for the previous grant, and also by the time it took Open Phil and CGD to work out the case for the grant
Intended funding timeframe in months: 36

Donor retrospective of the donation: Followup conversation with Todd Moss and Kathy Smith of grantee organization at https://www.openphilanthropy.org/sites/default/files/Todd_Moss_Kathy_Smith_06-21-16_%28public%29.pdf on 2016-06-21. The grant would be renewed at https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/global-health-and-development/miscellaneous/center-global-development-general-support-2019 in June 2019 for the same amount ($3 million over 3 years) for the same reasons. This suggests that Open Phil would continue to endorse the reasoning behind the grant

Other notes: Announced: 2016-02-24.
Open PhilanthropyProtect the People550,000.002016-02Migration policy/labor mobility/seasonal migrationhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/protect-people-seasonal-migration-haiti 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.
Open PhilanthropyCenter for Popular Democracy1,429,000.002015-12Macroeconomic stabilization policyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-campaign-2016 Donation process: The grant page says: "We monitored the campaign throughout 2015 and had conversations with Ady Barkan of CPD about the campaign’s plans and progress. We followed the media surrounding Fed Up and its interactions with policymakers. Karl Smith, who worked with us in 2015 as a consultant, attended the Jackson Hole Symposium and reviewed some of the campaign’s 2015 activities with us." Elsewhere, it says: "The initial 2016 budget given to us by Fed Up was for $4 million, but we also requested budgets for $2 million and $3 million"

Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant supports about half the cost of the Fed Up campaign for 2016. https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-campaign-2016#Budget_and_proposed_activities says: "We expect Fed Up would spend a $3 million budget approximately as follows: $1.5 million regranted to local partners, $650,000 for national staff, $250,000 to national partners, $600,000 for other costs, including events, polling, lobbying, and overhead."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-campaign-2016#Case_for_this_grant describes reasons for the grant, centered mostly around the Federal Reserve's heavy focus on reducing inflation in the inflation-unemployment tradeoff, and the desire to shift to having it care more about unemployment. It also talks about the benefits of increasing transparency and accountability in the regional Federal Reserve Banks, one of the other areas the Fed Up campaign focuses on.

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): The amount is about half of the planned $3 million budget for the campaign in 2016. https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-campaign-2016#Budget_and_proposed_activities says: "The initial 2016 budget given to us by Fed Up was for $4 million, but we also requested budgets for $2 million and $3 million. Each of these budgets would be a substantial increase from 2015. [...] After discussion with CPD, we don’t believe the support from these funders is likely to dramatically increase in the near future."

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The previous grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-campaign-2015 was for the 2015 year, so with the end of the year, funds are needed for 2016's Fed Up campaign.
Intended funding timeframe in months: 12

Donor thoughts on making further donations to the donee: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-campaign-2016#Plans_for_learning_and_follow-up lists follow-up questions, and says: "When the next recession occurs, we plan to attempt a more holistic and detailed evaluation of the grant’s performance. We may check the transcripts of 2016 FOMC meetings after they are released in 2022 to see whether any of the FOMC members discuss meetings with workers that inform their perspectives on policy."

Donor retrospective of the donation: Followup conversations with Ady Barkan and Shawn Sebastian of grantee organization at https://www.openphilanthropy.org/sites/default/files/Fed_Up_07-14-16_and_08_31_16_and_09_02_16_%28public%29.pdf on 2016-07-14, 2016-08-31, and 2016-09-02. A followup grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-campaign-2017 (2017) and further grants in later years suggest continued satisfaction with the grantee, though these followup grant writeups reflect more reservations as a result of further improvements in labor market conditions.

Other notes: Conversation with Ady Barkman of grantee organization around the time of the grant allocation at https://www.openphilanthropy.org/sites/default/files/Ady_Barkan_12-8-15_%28public%29.pdf on 2015-12-08. Affected countries: United States; announced: 2016-04-06.
Open PhilanthropyImmigrationWorks Foundation150,000.002015-12Migration policy/low-skilled migration promotionhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/immigrationworks-general-support-2016 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.
Open PhilanthropyNiskanen Center360,000.002015-10Migration policy/politicshttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/niskanen-immigration 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.
Open PhilanthropyMoveOn.org Civic Action375,000.002015-10Migration policy/refugee migrationhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/moveon-civic-action-syrian-refugee-advocacy 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.
Open PhilanthropyNew York University30,000.002015-08Migration policy/labor mobility/RCThttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/new-york-university-support-labor-mobility-rct 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.
Open PhilanthropyCenter for Popular Democracy750,000.002015-01Macroeconomic stabilization policyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-campaign-2015 Donation process: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-campaign-2015#Our_process refers to the previous grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/giving/grants/center-popular-democracy-federal-reserve-campaign that helped the Fed Up campaign get started. It says: "Prior to deciding about this grant, we had a number of further conversations with Ady Barkan of CPD about the campaign’s plans, followed the initial progress of the campaign in drawing press attention, and looked more deeply into research on monetary policy." https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-campaign-2015#Process_for_forming_and_vetting_views_on_monetary_policy includes some of the influences in Open Phil's formation of views on monetary policy.

Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant for the "campaign (“Fed Up”) that aims to prevent premature tightening of monetary policy and encourage greater transparency and public engagement in the governance of the Federal Reserve." It supports 75% of the campaign's 1-year $1 million budget.

Donor reason for selecting the donee: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-campaign-2015#Case_for_this_grant gives three parts to the case for the grant: (1) "A slim probability of moving monetary policy in a marginally more dovish (i.e., lower unemployment, higher inflation) direction." (2) "A reasonable chance of achieving some of the campaign’s procedural goals, including raising the level of transparency around how regional Fed presidents and board member are selected." (3) "Enabling CPD to experiment with an advocacy campaign in this area, potentially laying the groundwork for future advocacy efforts in the area, and testing our hypothesis that advocacy around macroeconomic policy is a promising and relatively neglected philanthropic area." The first consideration dominates the decision to make the grant.

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): The grant page says: "We anticipate that this grant will make up roughly 75% of the campaign’s overall funding for the year." https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-campaign-2015#Room_for_more_funding_and_fungibility says: "The initial budget we saw projected expenses of around $1.5 million, and we decided to contribute roughly half that amount. [...] We take the fact that the budget was revised downward [to $1 million] after our commitment to support the notion that CPD wouldn’t be able to find the amount of funding that we’ve contributed from other sources, and that accordingly our contribution is largely non-fungible.

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The timing seems largely determined by the initial seed funding grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/giving/grants/center-popular-democracy-federal-reserve-campaign running out and the need to finance the continuation of the campaign.
Intended funding timeframe in months: 12

Donor thoughts on making further donations to the donee: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-campaign-2015#Plans_for_learning_and_follow-up lists follow-up questions and says: "Towards the end of the duration of the grant, we plan to attempt a more holistic and detailed evaluation of the grant’s performance, aiming to answer the questions above. As mentioned above, we may check the transcripts of 2015 FOMC meetings after they are released in 2021 to see whether any of the FOMC members discuss meetings with workers that inform their perspectives on policy."

Donor retrospective of the donation: Continued funding by Open Phil of the Fed Up campaign in the later years, starting with https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-campaign-2016 (2015-12) suggests continued satisfaction with the grantee.

Other notes: The grant page says: "Unlike much of our other output, the complexity of the debates in this area has made it impractical for other GiveWell staff to construct and check a complete trail of evidence and counterarguments for each claim in this review." It also lists https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-campaign-2015#Process_for_forming_and_vetting_views_on_monetary_policy lists the following economists whose blogs influenced Open Phil's initial impressions on the issue: Paul Krugman, Brad DeLong, Tim Duy, Scott Sumner, and Tyler Cowen. Affected countries: United States; announced: 2015-02-27.
Open PhilanthropyCenter on Budget and Policy Priorities335,000.002014-09Macroeconomic stabilization policyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-budget-and-policy-priorities-full-employment-project Donation process: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-budget-and-policy-priorities-full-employment-project#Our_review_process says: "CBPP approached us for support for the project after we had a general conversation about their history and track record and expressed interest in potentially funding advocacy around macroeconomic policy. We shared a draft version of this page with CBPP staff prior to the grant being finalized." https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-budget-and-policy-priorities-full-employment-project#Grant_documents lists a bunch of grant documents submitted.

Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant is for the Full Employment Project, with a total budget of $1,0005,000. https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-budget-and-policy-priorities-full-employment-project#Grant_documents lists goals of the project, including: getting to full employment, setting a policy agenda for the next recession, and repairing ongoing damage from the Great Recession. Several anticipated activities include commissioning papers, developing options for strengthening automatic stabilizers, assessing and developing policy proposals, and making the case for "full employment" as a day-to-day goal. https://files.givewell.org/files/labs/macroeconomic-policy/CBPP%20Full%20Employment%20Project%20Proposal.pdf has more details.

Donor reason for selecting the donee: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-budget-and-policy-priorities-full-employment-project#Case_for_this_grant lists reasons: (1) "CBPP’s proposed projects comport well with our provisional take on important topics for research and advocacy in macroeconomic policy." (2) "Because of the above point, we are comfortable with the potential fungibility of this grant." (3) "Beyond direct impact, there are notable benefits to making some early grants in a cause we are exploring (as is the case with macroeconomic policy)."

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): The amount recommended for the grant, $335,000, is one-third of the total budget of $1,005,000 for the funded project (the Full Employment Project). The grant page says this is "[b]ased in part on the fact that CBPP was planning to approach three funders for this project".

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The timing seems determined by the timing of CBPP approaching Open Philanthropy with the idea of the grant, and also by Open Philanthropy starting to explore grantmaking in the area.
Intended funding timeframe in months: 28

Donor thoughts on making further donations to the donee: Since this fully funds one-third of the cost of the Full Employment Project, that is for a limited duration, it doesn't look like Open Philanthropy plans to provide follow-up funding for the project. https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-budget-and-policy-priorities-full-employment-project#Plans_for_learning_and_follow-up lists some questions and plans for follow-up.

Donor retrospective of the donation: Followup conversation with Jared Bernstein and Ben Spielberg of grantee organization at https://www.openphilanthropy.org/sites/default/files/Jared_Bernstein_and_Ben_Spielberg_10-21-15_%28public%29.pdf on 2015-10-21. A followup grant https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-budget-and-policy-priorities-full-employment-project-2016 for the Full Employment Project suggests continued satisfaction with the project.

Other notes: Grant in two tranches. The grant page says: "Since we see support for this project as largely fungible with CBPP general support, we expect to make the grant formally unrestricted.". Affected countries: United States; announced: 2014-09-19.
Open PhilanthropyCenter for Popular Democracy100,000.002014-08Macroeconomic stabilization policyhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-federal-reserve-campaign Donation process: Grantee submitted a proposal at https://files.givewell.org/files/labs/macroeconomic-policy/CPD%20Federal%20Reserve%20Campaign%20Paper%20v2.pdf for the Fed Up Campaign, and Open Philanthropy reviewed it and ultimately decided to provide funds to help kickstart the campaign.

Intended use of funds (category): Direct project expenses

Intended use of funds: Grant "to launch a campaign to educate the public about monetary policy and encourage the Federal Reserve to give more attention to the full employment portion of its mandate." The campaign would later become known as the Fed Up campaign. The stated rimary goals of the campaign are: (1) Ensure that monetary policy contributes to sustained growth and prosperity. (2) Engage Fed officials in a discussion of the meaning of its “dual mandate.” (3) Ensure that the American public is properly represented on the Boards of Directors of the regional Feds.

Donor reason for selecting the donee: The grant page gives reasons for supporting a shift toward focus on unemployment, also called a "dovish" stance compared to the "hawkish" stance of caring primarily about inflation. It gives two reasons: (a) this stance is better suited to the state of the economy, and (b) current advocacy influencing the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) is significantly hawkish since it comes mostly from corporations and the financial industry. The grant page also is more in favor of the third primary goal of more representation of the American public: "there seems to be a strong procedural presumption in favor of a more credible, transparent selection process for regional Federal Reserve Bank board members and, in turn, presidents." The grant is also viewed as a learning grant for Open Philanthropy's exploration of macroeconomic stabilization policy.

Donor reason for donating that amount (rather than a bigger or smaller amount): The grant amount seems to have been chosen on the low end ($100,000) and the grant page says "We’re unusually uncertain about this grant" suggesting that this uncertainty was a reason for not making a larger upfront commitment to the campaign.

Donor reason for donating at this time (rather than earlier or later): The timing seems to have been determined by a mix of the grantee shopping the grant proposal around and Open Phil becoming interested in grantmaking in the macroeconomic stabilization policy space.

Donor thoughts on making further donations to the donee: The grant page says: "we’re planning to investigate the considerations above in more depth in the coming months (conditional on retaining macroeconomic policy as a high-priority cause) to reach a decision about whether to contribute a more significant portion of the campaign’s overall budget."

Donor retrospective of the donation: A followup conversation https://files.givewell.org/files/conversations/Brian%20Kettenring%2010-16-14%20(public).pdf is published with Brian Kettenring of the grantee organization. Open Phil ultimately decides to fund the Fed Up Campaign at a much larger level starting 2015 with https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-campaign-2015 (2015-01, $750,000) and writes at https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/macroeconomic-policy/center-popular-democracy-fed-campaign-2015#Campaign_progress_to_date about the campaign progress. Open Phil continues with this funding for several years.

Other notes: The grant was made and the grant page published before the launch of the Open Philanthropy website, and was originally written on the GiveWell website. It includes extensive discussion of the grant and links to several sources that informed the thinking behind the grant. Affected countries: United States; announced: 2014-09-25.
Open PhilanthropyU.S. Association for International Migration1,310,483.002014-07Migration policy/labor mobility/seasonal migrationhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/usaim-seasonal-migration-haiti 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.
Open PhilanthropyImmigrationWorks Foundation285,000.002014-07Migration policy/low-skilled migration promotionhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/immigrationworks-foundation-general-support 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.
Open PhilanthropyCenter for Global Development1,184,720.002014-03Migration policy/labor mobilityhttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/immigration-policy/center-global-development-labor-mobility-research 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).
Open PhilanthropyCenter for Global Development300,000.002013-07Global health and developmenthttps://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/global-health-and-development/miscellaneous/center-global-development-general-support Donation process: This grant was made by Good Ventures with input from GiveWell, before the Open Philanthropy Project was a clear and distinct entity.

Intended use of funds (category): Organizational general support

Intended use of funds: The grant page says the grant is "to the Center for Global Development (CGD) in July 2013 for general operating support. The grant will support CGD’s research on topics related to global poverty and inequality."

Donor reason for selecting the donee: The grant page says: "We’ve found CGD to be a valuable resource as we explore potential future focus areas for Good Ventures. Learn more about our rationale for awarding this grant and how CGD is informing our work. This award is a “learning grant,” meaning that it’s designed to help us learn more about an organization or cause we find promising. This grant is unrestricted so that the organization can decide for itself how best to translate the funds into impact." The linked blog post with the rationale is https://www.openphilanthropy.org/blog/grant-center-global-development-cgd

Donor retrospective of the donation: Followup conversation with Todd Moss and Kathy Smith of grantee organization at https://www.openphilanthropy.org/sites/default/files/Todd_Moss_and_Kathy_Smith_12-15-2015_%28public%29.pdf on 2015-12-15. Followup grants https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/us-policy/miscellaneous/center-global-development-general-support-2016 and https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/global-health-and-development/miscellaneous/center-global-development-general-support-2019 suggest that the grant would be considered a success and Open Phil would continue to endorse its reasoning

Other notes: Intended funding timeframe in months: 36.

Donation amounts by donee and year

Donee Donors influenced Cause area Metadata Total 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013
Just Impact Open Philanthropy (filter this donor) 50,000,000.00 50,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Center for Global Development Open Philanthropy (filter this donor) FB Tw WP Site 10,618,270.00 0.00 1,000,000.00 3,333,550.00 0.00 1,800,000.00 3,000,000.00 0.00 1,184,720.00 300,000.00
Center for Popular Democracy Open Philanthropy (filter this donor) WP 5,644,000.00 0.00 465,000.00 600,000.00 1,200,000.00 1,100,000.00 0.00 2,179,000.00 100,000.00 0.00
Californians Against Pandemics Open Philanthropy (filter this donor) 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Employ America Open Philanthropy (filter this donor) 3,550,000.00 1,000,000.00 1,250,000.00 1,300,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
International Refugee Assistance Project Open Philanthropy (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 0.00
University of Southern California Open Philanthropy (filter this donor) FB Tw WP Site 2,250,000.00 0.00 0.00 2,250,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Economic Policy Institute Open Philanthropy (filter this donor) FB Tw WP Site 1,750,000.00 0.00 550,000.00 0.00 700,000.00 0.00 500,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
U.S. Association for International Migration Open Philanthropy (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 0.00
Labor Mobility Partnerships Open Philanthropy (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 0.00
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities Open Philanthropy (filter this donor) FB Tw WP Site 1,110,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 350,000.00 0.00 425,000.00 0.00 335,000.00 0.00
Mercy Corps Open Philanthropy (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 0.00
Niskanen Center Open Philanthropy (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 0.00
Washington Center for Equitable Growth Open Philanthropy (filter this donor) 850,000.00 0.00 0.00 750,000.00 100,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sightline Institute Open Philanthropy (filter this donor) 800,000.00 0.00 0.00 800,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Peterson Institute for International Economics Open Philanthropy (filter this donor) FB Tw WP Site 650,000.00 0.00 0.00 400,000.00 0.00 0.00 250,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
California Renters Legal Advocacy and Education Fund Open Philanthropy (filter this donor) 640,000.00 0.00 0.00 340,000.00 0.00 0.00 300,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Protect the People Open Philanthropy (filter this donor) 600,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 600,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Abundant Housing Massachusetts Open Philanthropy (filter this donor) 600,000.00 600,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Federation of American Scientists Open Philanthropy (filter this donor) 600,000.00 600,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
YIMBY Law Open Philanthropy (filter this donor) 600,000.00 0.00 600,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Center for American Progress Open Philanthropy (filter this donor) FB Tw WP Site 500,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 500,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Center for Popular Democracy Action Fund Open Philanthropy (filter this donor) 436,500.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100,000.00 305,000.00 31,500.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ImmigrationWorks Foundation Open Philanthropy (filter this donor) 435,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 150,000.00 285,000.00 0.00
MoveOn.org Civic Action Open Philanthropy (filter this donor) 375,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 375,000.00 0.00 0.00
Dezernat Zukunft Open Philanthropy (filter this donor) 302,079.00 0.00 202,079.00 100,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Greater Greater Washington Open Philanthropy (filter this donor) 300,000.00 0.00 0.00 300,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Urban Institute Open Philanthropy (filter this donor) FB Tw WP Site 215,833.00 0.00 50,000.00 0.00 0.00 165,833.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Roosevelt Institute Open Philanthropy (filter this donor) FB Tw WP Site 200,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 200,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Positive Money Europe Open Philanthropy (filter this donor) 73,368.00 73,368.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
The Center on Poverty and Inequality Open Philanthropy (filter this donor) 50,000.00 0.00 50,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Harborlight Community Partners Open Philanthropy (filter this donor) 40,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 40,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
East Bay Forward Open Philanthropy (filter this donor) 40,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 40,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
New York University Open Philanthropy (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 0.00
Free Migration Project Open Philanthropy (filter this donor) 24,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 24,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total ---- -- 95,539,421.00 57,273,368.00 6,867,079.00 11,958,438.00 2,890,000.00 3,410,833.00 6,530,500.00 3,094,000.00 3,215,203.00 300,000.00

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 donor and year for influencer Zachary Robinson|Alexander Berger

Donor Donees Total 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013
Open Philanthropy (filter this donee) Abundant Housing Massachusetts (filter this donee), California Renters Legal Advocacy and Education Fund (filter this donee), Californians Against Pandemics (filter this donee), Center for American Progress (filter this donee), Center for Global Development (filter this donee), Center for Popular Democracy (filter this donee), Center for Popular Democracy Action Fund (filter this donee), Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (filter this donee), Dezernat Zukunft (filter this donee), East Bay Forward (filter this donee), Economic Policy Institute (filter this donee), Employ America (filter this donee), Federation of American Scientists (filter this donee), Free Migration Project (filter this donee), Greater Greater Washington (filter this donee), Harborlight Community Partners (filter this donee), ImmigrationWorks Foundation (filter this donee), International Refugee Assistance Project (filter this donee), Just Impact (filter this donee), Labor Mobility Partnerships (filter this donee), Mercy Corps (filter this donee), MoveOn.org Civic Action (filter this donee), New York University (filter this donee), Niskanen Center (filter this donee), Peterson Institute for International Economics (filter this donee), Positive Money Europe (filter this donee), Protect the People (filter this donee), Roosevelt Institute (filter this donee), Sightline Institute (filter this donee), The Center on Poverty and Inequality (filter this donee), U.S. Association for International Migration (filter this donee), University of Southern California (filter this donee), Urban Institute (filter this donee), Washington Center for Equitable Growth (filter this donee), YIMBY Law (filter this donee) 95,539,421.00 57,273,368.00 6,867,079.00 11,958,438.00 2,890,000.00 3,410,833.00 6,530,500.00 3,094,000.00 3,215,203.00 300,000.00
Total -- 95,539,421.00 57,273,368.00 6,867,079.00 11,958,438.00 2,890,000.00 3,410,833.00 6,530,500.00 3,094,000.00 3,215,203.00 300,000.00

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