Methodology
How we pick, and what we don't do.
Ripple Good is a translation layer, not a research institute. Everything below is meant to let you check us, or skip us entirely and go straight to the people whose work this rests on.
How a pick gets made
Start from the cause, not the charity
Most effective-giving sites ask you to reorder your values, then hand you a global health charity. We don't. You already care about something. The question we answer is which organization inside that cause has the strongest evidence behind it.
Defer to the specialist evaluator
For each cause we identify the organization doing the most rigorous public cost-effectiveness research in that domain, and we take their current recommendation. We do not run our own charity evaluations, and we would be worse at it than they are.
Name one, not a shortlist
A list of twelve options is a way of avoiding the decision. We publish a single pick per cause, with the evaluator's name attached, so the recommendation can be argued with. If we're wrong, we're wrong specifically.
Translate the number into an outcome
We take the evaluator's published cost figures and phrase them as what actually happens: nets hung, seasons covered, hens out of cages. The dollar amount stays on the page, in smaller type, next to the source it came from.
The "100x the median" claim
It's the biggest claim on this site, so it gets a source like every other one. The best evidence comes from global health, where cost-effectiveness has been measured across hundreds of interventions: in the Disease Control Priorities data, the spread between the least and most effective interventions covered roughly four orders of magnitude, and the best interventions were on the order of 100x more cost-effective than the median. Toby Ord's essay "The Moral Imperative toward Cost-Effectiveness in Global Health" is the classic treatment of that data, and it's where our framing comes from.
Two limits. First, that spread is measured across interventions, not charity ratings. We use it as evidence about how wide the distribution is, and rely on the evaluators to find the organizations at its top end. Second, the measurement is sharpest in global health; for a cause like animal welfare, "the best is roughly 100x the typical" is an extrapolation from thinner data, not a replicated result. We think the direction and rough scale hold, and that is why this site exists. But the number is an order-of-magnitude claim, not a constant of nature.
Who we rely on
These organizations do the work. We aggregate it, credit it, and link straight to it. If you only take one thing from this site, take their names.
The most rigorous cost-effectiveness research in philanthropy. GiveWell publishes its full spreadsheets and its mistakes, and moves hundreds of millions of dollars a year on the strength of them.
Visit GiveWellACE reviews animal advocacy organizations on programmatic effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and organizational health, and publishes an annual set of recommended charities.
Visit Animal Charity EvaluatorsWhat our dollar figures mean
That's why the language on this site is careful in a specific way. We write "provides", "funds", and "delivers". We never write "buys this exact pill" or "your $6 sent this net to this child," because no accounting can trace one donation to one item. Charities that talk that way are describing a feeling, not a transaction.
Cost-effectiveness estimates are also ranges with error bars, not settled facts. Where an evaluator publishes a range, we show the range. Where a figure is the charity's own estimate rather than an independent one, as with Taimaka's cost-per-life-saved range, we say so on the page.
How often we re-check
Every figure on this site carries the date it was last checked against its source, shown inside each cause's "How we know" panel. Our commitment:
- Quarterly: we re-check every cost figure and every recommendation against the evaluator's current published research.
- Within 30 days: if an evaluator drops or replaces a recommendation, we change the pick or take the cause down.
- Immediately: if a figure turns out to be wrong, we correct it and note that we did, rather than quietly editing the page.
Figures across the site last reviewed September 2, 2026.
What we don't do
- We never handle your money. No payment is processed on this site. Every donate button is an outbound link, either to the charity's own donation page or to Every.org, a nonprofit that receives the donation and grants it on to the charity. Every cause page offers both routes, and says which is which. We take no cut from either, and we never see the transaction.
- We don't originate research. Every claim here traces to a published evaluation by someone else, linked on the page.
- We don't take money from the charities we list. A recommendation cannot be bought here.
- We don't pretend the hard comparisons are easy. Weighing a hen against a child, or a policy campaign against a bed net, requires value judgments that no spreadsheet settles. We show our reasoning and let you disagree with it.
Common questions
Is my donation tax-deductible?
Often, but it depends on the charity and on where you pay tax. Several of these organizations are registered charities in multiple countries, with different entities for different donors. The charity's own donation page is the authoritative answer. If you give on the charity's own site, nothing about using Ripple Good changes your tax situation in either direction. Through Every.org the receipt comes from Every.org instead, which is a US 501(c)(3). That is worth checking if you file outside the US, or if your employer's matching scheme excludes intermediaries.
Can I give monthly?
Yes. Every cause page has a monthly toggle. On the Every.org route both the amount and the cadence are carried across. On the charity's own page it depends on their donation platform: several now arrive with the amount already filled in, and the rest start from an empty form. The page says which before you click, rather than promising something we haven't checked. Steady monthly funding is worth more to these organizations than the same total in one-off spikes: it's what lets them sign contracts for next year's distributions.
Why isn't my favorite charity here?
One of two reasons: either no rigorous public evaluation of it exists, or its evaluator's numbers put another organization ahead within the same cause. Neither means your charity does no good. This site ranks by measured cost-effectiveness, which is a narrower question than whether an organization is worthwhile. If you think we've missed an evaluation that should change a pick, tell us below.
Do you earn anything when I give?
No. No referral fees, no affiliate links, no payments from the charities, no cut of any donation. The donate buttons are plain links. Nobody can pay to be listed here, and nobody pays us when you give.
What is Every.org, and why is it an option?
Every.org is a US nonprofit that processes donations for other nonprofits free of charge. Sending you there lets us carry the amount you picked across, so you don't have to retype it, and it accepts bank transfer, PayPal, Apple Pay and donor-advised funds as well as cards.
The trade-offs, plainly: the money goes to Every.org first and is granted on to the charity, your tax receipt comes from Every.org rather than the charity, and at checkout Every.org suggests an optional contribution to itself on top of your gift, which you can set to zero. Some employer matching schemes also decline gifts made through an intermediary. That's why every cause page keeps the charity's own donation page as an equally visible second option, and why two causes skip Every.org altogether. On safe water and syphilis in pregnancy, Every.org lists Evidence Action as a whole, and only the charity's own form can send your gift to the particular program the page is about.
Think we got one wrong?
Good. Tell us. The point of naming a single pick and showing the arithmetic is that both can be challenged. Email ian.sorensen@ripple-good.org with the cause and what you think we've missed.