Take our impact survey now
and Help Us improve our work:


About Our Impact Measurement

To make sure we're doing the best we can and to constantly improve it, we want to understand the impact of our work as well as possible. Here's how we plan to decide on projects, track their effects, and assess outcomes. The procedure itself is, of course, subject to revisions.



The EA movement has developed the so-called “importance, tractability, neglect” (ITN) framework for broader cause selection. To account for our unique local situation, we use “comparative advantage” as a fourth criterion informing our focus. Once we have collected first datasets, we plan to run cost-effectiveness analyses to better compare interventions.


To survey our inputs, we collect data on working time, financial expenses, and contributor satisfaction monthly. To capture our impact, we send out our impact survey twice a year to everyone who interacted with us and include it in personal follow-ups.


We will perform annual reviews and publish all data along with our thoughts annually, too.

Our Key Performance Indicator

This main metric is supposed to capture the diverse effects of our work:

Impact Adjusted Significant Perception Changes (IASPCs)

Definition: “Someone tells us that EA Geneva caused them to change the way they view and think about the world, in a way that increases their understanding and/or expected impact.“

We score each IASPC with a value of 0.1, 1, or 10 to better understand the relative value of our overall impact. The score is meant to represent how much extra, counterfactual impact will result from a change.

This is left vague on purpose. The way to use this metric is by developing the baseline and effect size classes for every project, as well as an estimated adjustment factor to class the importance of a project in the overall scheme. The adjustment factor can be corrected ex post to account for any learnings during the project. See here for examples of IASPCs.

Our next Milestones

July 2018: reach 80000 Hours cost-effectiveness (150 IASPCs in 2017-2018)

  • Publication of our annual review with first impact data

July 2019: funded by local sources by min. 60%