SoGive three-question method for systemic change

We define here systemic change as a change which is, for all intents and purposes, permanent. (i.e. lasting longer than one person’s lifetime) 

Charitable work which is more systemic tends to not involve direct interactions with beneficiaries, but rather other types of work like campaigning for policy change or research.

For these charities we employ the SoGive three-question method (which is really a variant of the SoGive two-question method). The three questions are:

1. how much does it cost for the charity to perform the project
2. how much positive impact is achieved per year as a result of this change
3. how much sooner does the change occur as a result of this charity's work

The SoGive three-question method has similarities to the two-question method. The first questions of both methods essentially coincide, and the second questions are similar, except that in the three-question method we are asking about the impact per year. 

Note that the modelling of the second question may involve considering a number of complex sequences of outcomes before we finally reach an outcome that has intrinsic value (such as suffering averted or lives saved). Understanding this is valuable in providing insight about the charity and its work.

Question three helps us to get a handle on how to quantify an outcome which at first glance appears infinite. For example if we cure cancer then all of the suffering that would be caused by cancer in every year from now onwards will apparently no longer occur. At first glance this appears to be an infinite impact, because it lasts forever. Question 3 asks us to consider the counterfactual: without this charity's work would a cancer cure have (at some point) been found anyway? The answer is almost certainly yes.

By assessing question 3 we are essentially getting a handle on two relevant considerations.

• 3a: If the time were ripe for a change to happen anyway then a charity's work may only be bringing the impact forward by a relatively short amount of time, such as one year. Conversely if the charity's work enabled an outcome which seemed otherwise impossible then it may be pulling forward the outcome by several decades.
• 3b: Systemic changes such as those achieved by research or lobbying are typically not achieved by one organisation alone. To attribute the outcome between different organisations working in that area, our method is to ask the different organisations involved how much of the outcome is attributable to the organisation under consideration. For example an organisation which played a lead role in driving forward a change may be considered by its peers to be responsible for, say, 60% of the change. Whereas an organisation which had a helping role may be judged to have only contributed 1% or 5% of the impact.

Combining the results of questions 3a and 3b allows us to build a cost-effectiveness model for charities performing systemic change work.

Note that this approach involves significant judgement calls. While such judgement calls can be made based on evidence, it will typically not be possible to assert that certain inputs are the single correct answer. Instead these models are intended to be useful, rather than pretending to be the sole source of truth.

Our use of the language “SoGive 3-question method” is meant to indicate that we at SoGive do employ this method, not that we are the only people using approaches similar to this. Other organisations may have used approaches akin to the SoGive 3-question method prior to SoGive employing it. We are aware of Founders Pledge having performed similar analysis.