Senior Cross-Cutting Researcher
About the role
Summary
GiveWell is seeking a Senior Researcher on our Cross-Cutting team to help us make better funding decisions across our entire portfolio. The Cross-Cutting team works on methodological questions, research quality, and big-picture problems that don't sit naturally inside any single program area.
As a Senior Cross-Cutting Researcher, you'll shape ambitious research agendas that cut across GiveWell's portfolios and answer complex questions that inform grantmaking decisions across the organization. The researchers on our team combine rigorous evidence review, cost-effectiveness modeling, and thoughtful judgment.
The role
You will be joining a small team focused on the methodological and cross-portfolio questions that shape how GiveWell does research. You'll sift through the countless questions we could try to answer, hone in on those that matter most, and partner with grantmaking teams to pressure-test and extend their work. You'll also communicate externally about your work and mentor and advise other researchers on the team.
You will shape a research agenda that brings rigor and creativity to the thorniest questions GiveWell faces across its grantmaking. Your work will combine empirical evidence review and critical synthesis, cost-effectiveness modeling, discussions with subject matter experts, understanding of the broader context, and your own judgment. In the course of your work, you might approach questions like:
- Are our grants actually achieving what we predicted? How do we know, and how can we improve our decisions over time?
- How do we systematically incorporate field insights, monitoring data, and external feedback into our work?
- How do we design M&E systems that tell us whether grants are working, not just whether grantees are reporting what we asked for?
- How can we use AI tools to speed up or increase the quality of our work?
- How should we model spillover effects? Do health programs affect income, and vice versa? Are we consistent in how we handle this across program areas?
- How should we set our cost-effectiveness bar over time when funding and spending vary unpredictably year to year?
- How should we value averting a death versus improving health outcomes versus increasing income?
- Where are the systematic risks in our research?
Team structure
Our research department has over 60 people, and is currently organized into eight teams.