ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUV
1
Guide to interpreting this cost-effectiveness analysis
2
Sheet descriptions
3
4
Main CEA
This sheet contains the primary calculations that result in final cost-effectiveness estimates. This sheet draws on inputs from the "Inputs" sheet and inputs calculated in the other supplemental sheets listed below.
5
Effective coverage
This sheet contains our calculations of how much protection nets distributed in grantee programs provide compared to the protection provided by nets distributed in the trials that inform our treatment effect estimates.
6
Counterfactual malaria
This sheet contains our calculations of how high malaria mortality and prevalence rates would be in the absence of net distributions.
7
Insecticide resistance
This sheet contains our calculations of how much the protective effect of nets is reduced by insecticide resistance among malaria-transmitting mosquitos.
8
Leverage/Funging
This sheet contains our calculations of the impact that crowding in and crowding out funding by other contributors has on the benefits of the program.
9
Inputs
This sheet contains all of the manually entered input values informing the CEA, along with the sources and reasoning supporting them. This sheet also contains inputs sourced from the "GBD estimates" sheet.
10
Net decay model
This sheet contains our models of physical net decay over time, which inform calculations on the "Effective coverage" sheet.
11
GBD estimates
This sheet contains disease burden and population datasets downloaded from the Institute of Health Metrics (IHME)'s Global Burden of Disease (GBD) project.
12
Simple CEA
This sheet contains a simplified version of the CEA that is designed to be comparable to our CEAs of other programs.
13
Sensitivity analysis
This sheet contains the outputs of a sensitivity analysis macro that tests the cost-effectiveness ranges that would result from updating certain inputs to their 25th or 75th percentile values.
14
15
Terminology key
16
17
Terms specific to this CEA
18
ITNInsecticide-treated nets (ITNs) are mosquito nets have have been treated with insecticidal chemicals designed to kill and/or repel mosquitoes. ITNs are an umbrella category of nets that include conventionally treated nets (CTNs), long-lasting insecticide-treated nets (LLINs), and newer types of nets like PBO and chlorfenapyr nets.
19
LLINLong-lasting insecticide-treated nets (LLINs) are mosquito nets that have been treated with insecticides using a method that extends the effectiveness of the insecticide for multiple years without retreatment. Some of the nets (which we sometimes refer to as "standard nets") distributed in programs we consider funding are LLINs.
20
PyrethroidA class of insecticides commonly used to treat LLINs. The pyrethroid compounds most commonly used to treat LLINs are permethrin, alpha-cypermethrin, and deltamethrin.
21
CTNConventionally treated nets (CTNs) are mosquito nets that must be re-treated with insecticide periodically to retain their effectiveness. The nets distributed in the trials informing our treatment effect estimates were CTNs.
22
Dual AI netsDual active ingredient (Dual AI) nets are LLINs that are treated with multiple insecticidal chemicals that have different mechanisms of action. These nets are typically treated with a pyrethroid plus another insecticide and are designed to combat pyrethroid-resistant mosquitoes.
23
PBOPiperonyl butoxide (PBO) is a chemical used alongside pyrethroid insecticides to treat some types of LLINs ("PBO nets") to enhance their effectiveness against insecticide-resistant mosquitos. PBO is not itself an insecticidal chemical but acts as a "synergist" that inhibits the metabolic enzymes that grant mosquitoes immunity to pyrethroids.
24
ChlorfenapyrThe rate of new cases in a given unit of time.
25
Incidence
26
PrevalenceThe proportion of people with a disease or condition at or during a particular time period (regardless of when they first contracted it).
27
Indirect malaria deaths
Deaths in which malaria plays a causal role, but are attributed to another cause. For example, malaria may increase the likelihood of death from malnutrition or other infectious diseases. Malaria control interventions often have a larger effect on all-cause mortality than would be expected exclusively from declines in malaria-specific mortality, which we interpret as evidence that averting malaria may also avert deaths attributed to other causes.
28
Insecticide resistance
Immunity among mosquito populations to the insecticidal chemicals commonly used to treat LLINs. Insecticide resistance can inhibit the protective effect of nets against malaria transmission.
29
BioassayAn insecticide resistance test that involves exposing mosquitos to an insecticidal chemical and measuring the proportion of mosquitos that are killed.
30
Person-year of effective coverageWe use "effective coverage" to refer to a level of protection against malaria equivalent to the protection provided by the nets distributed in the mortality studies we rely on. A "person-year" refers to the equivalent of one person receiving one year of effective coverage. This unit is a simplification. For example, because nets typically remain effective longer than a year, two person-years of coverage could actually reflect one person receiving effective coverage for two years.
31
32
Terms used across GiveWell's CEAs
33
Internal validityDescribes an adjustment we make to the treatment effect of an intervention to account for the possibility that the treatment effects found in studies may not represent the true effect the intervention had on the populations studied.
34
External validityDescribes an adjustment we make to the treatment effect of an intervention to account for differences in the program implementation or populations treated in studies from the program implementation or populations treated by grantee programs.
35
LeverageDescribes a situation where a grantee's spending on a program causes other organizations or governments to contribute more to the program than they otherwise would have. In most cases, accounting for leverage increases cost-effectiveness
36
FungingDescribes a situation where a grantee's spending on a program causes other organizations or governments to contribute less to the program than they otherwise would have. In most cases, accounting for funging decreases cost-effectiveness.
37
In-kind contributionsDescribes non-financial (e.g., staff time, office space) contributions to a program that might otherwise have been used for other activities or programs.
38
CounterfactualIn most cases, describes the state of the world that would exist if we did not provide funding to a grantee for a program. When discussing the "counterfactual value of other actors' spending," we are referring to how much benefit another organization's or government's spending would generate if it were spent on something other than the grantee program.
39
Moral weightsTo compare cost-effectiveness across different programs, we use ‘moral weights’ to quantify the benefits of different program impacts (e.g. increased income vs reduced deaths). We benchmark the value of each benefit to a value of 1, which we define as the value of doubling someone’s consumption for one year.
40
Philanthropic actorsNon-governmental organizations (NGOs) providing funding to philanthropic programs.
41
42
Unit and source key
43
44
Unit labels used in the CEA
45
#Number
46
per 1kRate per 1,000
47
per 100k
Rate per 100,000
48
$U.S. dollars
49
ln($)
The natural logarithm of a monetary value
50
%Percentage
51
ppt
Percentage points
52
UoV
Units of value: an arbitrary unit GiveWell uses to compare the moral value of different types of outcomes, such as saving lives or increasing income
53
xcash
Cost-effectiveness in terms of multiples of GiveDirectly's unconditional cash transfer program
54
55
Source labels used in the CEA
56
57
Input
A value pulled from the "Inputs" sheet
58
Calc
A value calculated using other values in the same sheet
59
Supp
A value pulled from one of the sheets hosting supplemental calculations
60
Main
A value pulled from the "Main CEA" sheet
61
Feed
A value pulled from an earlier section within the same sheet
62
63
GiveWell analyses informing this model
64
65
Analyses specific to this CEA
66
GW's model of LLIN coverage years compared to CTNs
67
GW's insecticide resistance analysis
68
GW's analysis of counterfactual scenarios on pre-existing nets
69
GW's subnational counterfactual mortality calculations
70
Updated GiveWell summary of ITN RCTs
71
GW's analysis of the number of people covered per net
72
GW's analysis of AMF net purchases by net type
73
GW's analysis of Nigerian state-level population estimates
74
GW's analysis of DRC net durability
75
GW's analysis of malaria development effects size
76
77
Analyses referenced across GiveWell's CEAs
78
GW's moral weights and discount rate
79
GW's analysis on estimating multiplier for benefits experienced by other household members
80
GW's supplemental intervention-level adjustments
81
GiveWell's CEA for GiveDirectly's unconditional cash transfers
82
GW's analysis of the counterfactual value of other actors' spending
83
GW's analysis of the counterfactual value of Global Fund spending
84