CEA's 2019 annual review (appendix)

Contents

• Introduction
• Program-level progress in 2019
• Major events of our year

  • Leadership search
  • Progress since leadership decision
  • Office changes
• Project updates from 2019

  • • How we use Net Promoter Scores
  • Community Health

    • Summary
    • Community support
    • Improving online discussion
    • Advising on media coverage of EA
  • Activities
  • Impact

    • Diversity and Inclusion
  • Groups

    • Summary
    • Activities
  • Community Building Grants (CBGs)

    • Summary
    • Activities

      • Assessing applications
      • Updates to the process
      • Events
    • Challenges and mistakes
  • EA Global

    • Summary
    • Objective #1: Encourage connections, goodwill, and coordination among EAs

      • Data
      • Activities
      • Areas for improvement
    • Objective #2: Improve EA community culture (and improve problems such as a lack of diversity)

      • Welcomingness
      • Humility & Open-mindedness
      • Diversity

Introduction

Program-level progress in 2019

Major events of our year

Leadership search

Progress since leadership decision

Office changes

Project updates from 2019

Community Health

• Handling inappropriate behavior in local groups
• Supporting community members or org staff members struggling with mental health problems
• Advising about organizational health (conflicts of interest, or concerns about fair treatment of staff, at EA projects or orgs)
• Improving diversity and welcomingness in local groups

Activities

• Dedicated more staff time to handling media situations well
• Julia and Sky received professional training on how to evaluate and prepare for media engagements
• Consulted with PR advisors for feedback on our advice for responding to journalists, and significantly revised it based on their advice
• Created a crisis communications plan for identifying, mitigating, or responding to major negative press
• Designated Sky as a “contact person for media inquires in EA”
• Wrote a Forum post publicizing the updated resource, emphasizing media awareness and risks, and informing the community of Sky’s role

Impact

• During 2019, we were involved with 15 actual or possible media stories or other PR situations. For example, we worked with a journalist from a major publication to connect them with knowledgeable EA community members as they were working on a piece about EA. We educated local organizers about best practices around having journalists at events, such as being sure that attendees realize they are speaking to a journalist rather than speaking informally and only realizing later that they may be quoted.
• We’ve coached community members on conveying their message clearly in interviews, for example before this piece in The Guardian.

• We published our statement on diversity and inclusion.
• At EAGx Australia, Julia presented Building a diverse, welcoming, and healthy community.
• In order to evaluate any future efforts on diversity and inclusion, we needed to first collect baseline data. We began to consistently provide the option across our programs and events for survey respondents to provide more demographic data (such as age, ethnicity, nationality, etc).
• We piloted a Guides program at EA Global that matched first-time attendees with returning attendees. This program provides support to first-time attendees from many backgrounds, including those from backgrounds underrepresented in EA.

Groups

• The Groups team had mentoring conversations with more than 50 different group organizers, responded to hundreds of requests for help and advice, and funded 80 projects run by groups (such as group retreats and food at events)
• The Groups team hosted a January retreat for the leaders of US groups. The team also hosted a summer residency program in which group organizers spent time at the CEA office in Oxford.

• Worked with the Local Effective Altruism Network (LEAN) to hand over group support to CEA (see this post for more info)

• Published an update on the EA Forum to clarify areas of responsibility within the Groups team
• Curation of the EA Groups Newsletter; moderation of a Slack channel (eagroups.slack.com) and Facebook group for Group organizers.
• You can sign up to the EA Groups Newsletter here, and contact the Groups team at groups@effectivealtruism.org.

• Collaborated with LEAN on the EA Groups Survey, in order to create an up-to-date list of all groups globally
• We believe that this survey gathered useful data. We’ve identified opportunities for additional questions that would be helpful in the future across our teams (such as diversity data, information about PR inquiries, and questions related to which materials are highest priority for group leaders)
• Conducted 21 interviews with group organizers & 8 interviews with national groups

• Katie and Alex had ~250 conversations with group organizers by call and in person.
• We provided $93,000 in funding across 80 groups that applied for assistance. 53% of the money went to groups in the US, 21% to groups in Europe, 20% to groups in Asia, and 6% to groups in Australia and New Zealand.
• We responded to ~500 incoming messages.
• Alex attended the Oxford and Cambridge group retreats and gave a remote presentation at the German EA group organizers' retreat.
• We hosted a summer residency for 16 group organizers (9 with Community Building Grants, 7 without) to spend one week in the CEA Oxford office over the summer; the residency received a Net Promoter Score (NPS) of 63%.
• The January US group leaders’ retreat for 30 people had an NPS of 46%. 91% of respondents reported the retreat led to changes to their group plans. It also contributed to two successful Community Building Grant applications.

• Lack of Groups Strategy: Due to spending much of the year with an interim executive, we didn’t have the mandate to set a clear groups strategy for 2019, meaning that the strategic advice we could provide to group organizers was limited.
• Now that CEA has a confirmed executive director, we plan to develop a Groups team strategy based on our organization-wide priorities.
• In 2019, we had one staff member (Alex) working on groups support plus events like retreats for organizers, meaning that the amount of hands-on support we could provide to all groups was limited. This left some organizers feeling frustrated and neglected.
• In 2020, we intend to work with a contractor to add capacity on groups support as Alex has left, and to hire an additional staff member.
• We didn’t reply promptly to some of the enquiries sent to groups@effectivealtruism.org. We’re planning to improve this in 2020 by assigning the contractor mentioned above to manage this inbox.
• According to LEAN’s March 2019 groups survey, only around half of groups know about CEA’s available resources for groups. We’ve now increased the visibility of these resources in the group organizers’ newsletter and Facebook group.

Community Building Grants (CBGs)

• $229,270 in new grants for 11 groups or projects to which we have not provided Community Building Grant funding in previous years.
• $625,067 in renewed grants for 10 groups or projects to which we have provided Community Building Grant funding in previous years.
• $20,625 in exit grants to 5 groups or projects for which we discontinued our prior funding.

• New applicants for funding complete a written application or submit a project proposal.
• Applicants for renewed funding complete an evaluation process which includes surveying their group members, submitting case studies, submitting a membership overview, and writing a general report.

• We have a call with all applicants for funding.
• We often contact external advisers or other community members for input on the application
• We sometimes request applicants to submit additional written information (for example, more detail on the project proposal).
• We assess the suitability of the application for funding, particularly focusing on the quality of the group, the fit of the applicants, and the potential of the group's location.
• The evaluations are conducted by Harri Besceli (Community Building Grants Specialist), and the evaluation is reviewed by at least one other member of CEA before a decision is confirmed. The evaluation process takes around 5-15 hours per application.

• We moved to accepting applications on a rolling basis, and to using a more tailored process in evaluating funding applications.
• We created an expression of interest form applicants could use to receive early-stage input into their plans.
• The threshold for successful grant applications increased, due to reasons such as wanting to increase the focus on the best grantmaking opportunities and ensuring the programme is sufficiently flexible to leave room for future strategic changes.

• The retreat was focused on increasing connections between CBG recipients and encouraging them to share advice/knowledge. It seemed to succeed at this, with over 80% of attendees rating it as ‘good’ or ‘excellent’ at achieving these goals.
• Almost all (22/23 who filled out the survey) of the organizers who attended reported planning to make some kind of change to how they run their group, such as building a database of group members, holding more one-on-one meetings with members, or changing their organizational structure.
• In terms of connections built, attendees reported (on average) having 10 new people they would be comfortable ask for favors/advice, and 2/3rds reported that they expected to contact other groups more often.
• EA organization employees said it was valuable to attend, with all rating the retreat at as-good-or-better than the counterfactual use of their time.
• We are conducting a follow-up survey to assess longer-term impacts, but this is not yet completed.

• We haven’t shared a public impact evaluation for CBGs (we previously said in a forum comment that we would do this by August). In November, we posted a notice that we wouldn’t be meeting this commitment.
• We said in a December 2018 post that we would hold an open CBG round in summer 2019, but we reopened applications in October 2019.

EA Global

1. Encourage connections, goodwill, and coordination among EAs
2. Improve EA community culture, and deal with problems such as lack of diversity
3. Attract resources, including money, talent, and influence, to the EA movement

• EA Global San Francisco, with ~500 attendees
• EA Global London, with ~560 attendees

• Improved network density: EA Global attendees reported having around eight new people that they could reach out to ask for a favor, on average.
• ~90% of attendees said they felt welcome, ~70% said they felt attendees were humble, and ~70% said they felt attendees were open to exploring new ideas.
• Of our speakers, a significantly higher portion were women or people of color than are represented in the overall EA population.
• More than 2000 in-person meetings happened at the conferences.^fn-1
• ~350 attendees reported a minor plan change, and ~50 reported a major plan change (these are self-reports, and should be viewed skeptically).
• Net Promoter Score (NPS) was roughly in line with previous years (slightly decreased in SF, slightly increased in London - which had the highest NPS of any EA Global yet).

• This year, we experimented with two different event apps to encourage one-on-one meetings between participants. ~510 meetings were scheduled via the Grip app in SF, and ~370 meetings and 46 unofficial meetups were scheduled via the Whova app in London.

• The Fellowship program was an updated version of the Meet-ers program which took place in EAG London 2018.

  • This 2018 Meet-ers program served 400 “meet-ees” with 100 Meet-ers. The Meet-ers had a low NPS of -21% due to poor preparation and to the main coordinator falling ill. We thought the program had potential to be a lot better.
• The Fellowship Program paired people who have similar interests so they could meet at EA Global.

  • We recruited ambassadors who had long experience in effective altruism and/or who worked at EA organizations.
  • Each ambassador met with a small number of fellows (attendees with whom they shared a professional interest, such as biosecurity or operations work).
• At EA Global San Francisco, we had 10 Ambassadors and 35 Fellows, with an NPS for participating in the program of 43 for Ambassadors and 46 for Fellows. In London, we doubled the size of the program to 23 Ambassadors and 83 Fellows, with an NPS for participating in the program of -8 for Ambassadors and 33 for Fellows. (After getting this low NPS score from Ambassadors, we changed the matching process to give them more input on selecting the Fellows they met with.) We also let some Fellows have meetings with more than one Ambassador, resulting in 111 meetings.

• Attendees found the space for the career fair in London too loud. This made some conversations challenging or unpleasant.

  • We plan to work with the venue to reduce reverberation, and we may rent additional space for the Friday reception in order to allow attendees to spread out more.
• In London, we allowed people to host unofficial meetups. This seems good from the perspective of having more targeted content and opportunities for 1-1s, but it made quality control more difficult. If we allow people to do this in the future, we need to improve our expectation-setting for the hosts and the participants and better differentiate between official and unofficial meetups.

• 87% of attendees felt welcome at EA Global San Francisco; 92% of attendees said they felt welcome at EA Global London^fn-2

• This year, we launched a program to help first-time attendees feel more welcome by matching them with returning participants who could serve as a friendly face and help orient them.
• In San Francisco, we had 20 first-timers and 16 guides; in London (our second test of the program), we had 13 first-timers and 18 guides matched in advance, with additional onsite matches. NPS was 33 for participants in the program at San Francisco, and NPS was 0 for first-timers and 10 for guides in London. Based on this feedback we’ve concluded that the experiment we tried with matching people on-site in London did not work well.

• 69% of EA Global London attendees (261 people) felt that other attendees were humble. (This question wasn’t asked at EA Global San Francisco.)^fn-3
• 77% of attendees (292 people) felt that other attendees were open to exploring new ideas, as did 69% of attendees at EA Global San Francisco (198 people).^fn-4

• We expanded the advisory board for EA Global speakers, who advise us on topics and speakers in different cause areas for the conference series.

• One attendee said “All the discussions I had around the posters had people being appropriately calibrated and exploring beliefs.”
• Another said “I may have gotten lucky, but people seemed to express beliefs more clearly and with better calibration than at other EA events.”
• Someone else said: “Nearly all conversations beyond a certain length (5 minutes) involve weighing the benefits and risks of one's ideas and approaches.”

• EA org staff member: “I'm trying to remember instances where I witnessed people actually change their mind and am drawing a blank.”
• Participant: “I thought that some higher-ups in the community had profiles that were quite lacklustre, illustrating their unreachability. Not so humble if you ask me.”
• Some individuals thought the cost of the food and venue did not reflect EA’s values:

  • EA Global London participant: “Personally, a more humble menu and venue would match our commitment to others (especially to others who are suffering horribly) better. Though I see that the nice menu and venue create a really good atmosphere — which is also helpful.”

• Amy Labenz will continue conducting speaker calls that encourage them to use reasoning transparency in their talks, and to engage with ideas using epistemic humility.
• We plan to discontinue having sparkling wine at the main event; while the price is similar to that of other beverages, we think it is not worth the risk of signalling the wrong values.

• 51% of speakers at EA Global London were women and 36% of speakers at EA Global San Francisco were women (compared to 29% of respondents to the 2018 EA Survey who identified as women).
• 28% of speakers in London and 25% of speakers in San Francisco were people of color (compared to 22% of EA Survey 2018 respondents who did not identify as white).
• EAG London was the first event for which we broke down NPS by demographic group. For people who reported demographic information, we were encouraged to see that NPS was as high or higher for attendees from underrepresented groups compared to groups that are overrepresented in EA:

• We added new meetups for people from underrepresented groups (e.g. people of color in EA, mid- and late-career professionals in EA, LGBTQ people in EA) in addition to supporting meetups we’ve run historically (e.g. people of faith in EA, women and nonbinary people in EA)
• Demographic diversity is taken into account as one of many factors in admissions & when selecting meetup hosts.

• Some attendees mentioned positive experiences with diversity.
• “Before I felt cautious about involvement with the EA community. But now I want to get more involved […] I loved that there were so many female speakers. I am female. I was worried the conference would be hostile to me because I had the impression EA might be a community that valued men over women, and that all the speakers might be men. I actually wrote in to the organizers about this before the conference and never heard back, but then they took down the initial speakers page and didn’t put it up again until some women had been added. So I gave the conference a chance. And I’m really glad I did. People were very accepting of me and there were several female speakers.” - Senior staff person at EA-aligned charity [EA Global San Francisco 2019]

• Some attendees mentioned that lack of demographic diversity contributed to a negative experience for them.

  • “As a woman of color, it was really difficult to continually walk into rooms as the only one. Further, it was super disheartening to see lack of diversity at the career fair; the amount of minorities working at this event vs. attending was so disappointing.“ - Participant [EA Global San Francisco 2019]
• We did not collect demographic data on the EA Global post-event survey until EA Global London 2019, so this is the first time we've evaluated people’s experience at EA Global based on demographic data.