Back of the envelope break-even analysis for MGNREGS case study

	A	B	C	E	F	K	L	M	N	O	P	Q	R	S	T	U	V	W	X	Y
1		Unit		Notes	Source
2	Costs
3	Total GPI costs	USDm	2.59	Total IGI spending up to December 2017 including operational costs and project awards.	IGI historic financials 2015-17 (unpublished)
4
5	Value of marginal funding to our top charities
6	Value of marginal funding to Malaria Consortium	Multiples of GiveDirectly	8.8	Our cost-effectiveness estimate of marginal dollars to Malaria Consortium based on the work we did to allocate Good Ventures funding in December 2018	GiveWell 2018 allocations spreadsheet
7	GiveDirectly cost-effectiveness	Cost per equivalent under 5 life saved	$12,155	Our cost-effectiveness estimate of GiveDirectly expressed in cost per outcome as good as preventing the death of a child under the age of 5	GiveWell cost-effectiveness analysis - December 2018
8	Cost-effectiveness of marginal funding to Malaria Consortium	Cost per equivalent under 5 life saved	$1,381		Calc
9
10	Moral weights					Amar	Andrew	Caitlin	Chris	Dan	Elie	Holden	Isabel	James	Josh	Natalie	Nicole	Olivia	Sophie	Stephan
11	Cost-effectiveness of government spending on social security spending	Cost per equivalent under 5 life saved	16,774	We use the median of our best guesses of the value of marginal government funds spent on social security. Note the large differences in staff inputs are largely driven by different valuations of preventing an under 5 death, rather than empirical disagreement. Our median guess is that government social security spending is ~70% as cost-effective as funding for GiveDirectly. For more context on why we make these estimates, see this blog post: https://blog.givewell.org/2018/02/13/revisiting-leverage/	GiveWell cost-effectiveness analysis - December 2018. Leverage and funging sheet (row 38	14,425	10,064	26,838	33,548	13,419	21,879	14,815	16,774	24,698	13,419	16,774	23,963	22,896	2,636	6,710
12
13	Counterfactual impact of GPI
14	Probability that scale up would have happened without GPI	%	80%	This is an arbitrary figure to inform a break-even analysis. We do not feel confident ascribing a percentage figure to IGI's contribution to the reform.
15
16	Required benefits for GPI to be as cost-effective as marginal funding to our top charities
17	Number of years benefit realized for	Years	3	This is an arbitrary figure to inform a break-even analysis. We do not feel confident in the number of years IGI accelerated the reform for
18
19	Required annual savings to the government of India for GPI to be equally cost-effective to marginal funding to our top charities if the MGNREGS case study was only impact	USDm	52
20
21
22
23
24