Records · Evidence review

Impact review: Child hunger pages (Do, Practice, Learn)

The working record behind the pages, published as written. Source file source/impact/child-hunger-2026-11-05.md. All records.

Review date: 2026-11-05. Pages reviewed: content/child-hunger-do.html, content/child-hunger-practice.html, content/child-hunger-learn.html (all checked: 5 Nov 2026), against source/research/child-hunger.md.

Question: for each action the pages recommend, what is the evidence that it reduces child hunger, child deaths, or helps the affected people; what would the evidence rank higher; how do the actions land for the people affected and for people doing them together; and are the organisations we link to sound.

Decision this feeds: whether to keep, drop or re-rank actions on the Do and Practice pages. Who decides: Isaac. This document grades evidence; it does not edit pages.

0. Method, limits, grades

Every figure below comes from a source opened on 2026-11-05 unless marked otherwise. Source numbers [S#] point to section 7, which gives the URL, how it was read, and its grade.

Grades used for sources: primary (the journal article, government/UN document, the organisation's own filing or page); research (systematic review, meta-analysis, working paper); charity's own figures; evaluator (GiveWell, Charity Navigator, BBB Wise Giving Alliance); news; industry (fundraising-sector or company reports); advocacy (coalition pages); tertiary (Wikipedia, used only to locate dated events and the outlets that reported them); unread (seen in a search snippet or by title only, page not opened today).

Grades used for the evidence behind an action: strong (randomised or cluster-randomised trials, or high-certainty systematic review, plus an evaluator's cost-effectiveness estimate); moderate (trials for parts of the chain, observational or modelled for the part that matters most); weak (surveys, self-report, correlational); none-but-plausible; contradicted (good sources point the other way).

Limits today, stated so the gaps are visible:

• The session's shared web-search budget was exhausted before this review began (noted in source/research/child-hunger.md). Everything here came from direct fetches of known URLs, NCBI E-utilities, Crossref, OpenAlex, Semantic Scholar and Europe PMC APIs, and two sub-agents that had a few searches left (they list which searches ran). "None found" in section 5 is bounded by that.
• Blocked for automated reading today: cochranelibrary.com, pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov and pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov (browser checks; abstracts were taken through E-utilities instead), Wiley, Elsevier/Lancet, Springer, SAGE, Taylor & Francis, savethechildren.net, unicefusa.org (main site; the gift shop loaded), malariaconsortium.org, charitywatch.org, crsreports.congress.gov status table, appropriations.senate.gov, cbo.gov topic page, cbpp.org, politico.com, apnews.com, axios.com, federalregister.gov. Where a page was blocked the review says so and uses the abstract, an API copy, or labels the item unread.
• Two of seven planned sub-agents launched (the organisation checks). The evidence sections were done by hand. A full-text read of the Cochrane reviews, the Lancet Psychiatry institutionalisation review, Richterman 2023 (cash transfers and mortality), Bergan & Cole 2015 (constituent calls) and the Save the Children August 2025 release was not possible today; each is marked.

A vocabulary point first, because it is load-bearing (CLAUDE.md §1). The pages use "child hunger" for two different populations: children dying with severe acute malnutrition abroad (the Do page's title and cost figures), and US children in food-insecure households (the "Closer to home" section). The evidence, the units and the best actions differ for each. The ranking in section 2 keeps them apart and says where a dollar or an hour does more.

1. Evidence behind each action on the pages (question A)

1.1 Summary table

1.2 Notes per action

A1. GiveWell funds. GiveWell's top-charities page (last updated October 2026) lists Malaria Consortium's seasonal malaria chemoprevention at "$4,000 per life saved" (about $7 per child), Against Malaria Foundation nets at "$5,500" (about $6 per net), Helen Keller Intl vitamin A at "$3,500" (about $2 per child per year) and New Incentives vaccine incentives at "$4,500" (about $146 per infant), all "estimated average" figures for funding directed in 2022–2024 [S39]. The trial base: insecticide-treated nets cut child all-cause mortality 17% (rate ratio 0.83, 95% CI 0.77–0.89; 5 trials, 200,833 participants; high certainty; trials ran 1987–2001, before pyrethroid resistance spread) [S48]; vitamin A supplementation cut all-cause mortality 12% (RR 0.88, 0.83–0.93; 19 trials, 1,202,382 children; high certainty) [S46], but the largest single trial, DEVTA (1 million children, north India) found RR 0.96 (0.89–1.03) and "contradicts the expectation ... of 20–30%"; its authors' meta-analysis including DEVTA gives 11% (5–16%) [S47]; seasonal chemoprevention prevents about three-quarters of clinical and severe malaria episodes (rate ratio 0.26 and 0.27; 7 trials, 12,589 children; high certainty) with an underpowered mortality estimate (RR 0.66, 0.31–1.39) [S49], and at scale across seven countries showed 88.2% protective effectiveness and 42–57% fewer in-hospital malaria deaths in the two countries with usable data, at US$3.63 per child per season [S50]; New Incentives' RCT (IDinsight, Aug 2017–Feb 2020) raised vaccination 14–21 percentage points [S43]. GiveWell's own per-charity pages give wider ranges than the headline: vitamin A $1,000–$8,500 by country, with an assumed mortality reduction of only 4–12% and a note that "some studies unexpectedly find small or no effects" [S40]; SMC $2,000–$7,000 [S41]; nets $3,000–$8,000 [S42]; New Incentives $1,500–$6,000 [S43]. Adverse signals GiveWell published itself: March 2026 entries on its "Our Mistakes" page say the vitamin A estimate may be about 20% too high (overlap with azithromycin), counterfactual access to nets and vaccines was underestimated, and DRC net-campaign cost-effectiveness may be overstated 15–30% [S45]. GiveWell's criteria page: "Estimates are often based on limited information and are therefore extremely rough" [S44]. Donations to the funds pass through with no GiveWell cut after card fees [S125]. Of $427M directed in GiveWell's 2025 metrics year, 29% went to the four top charities and 71% to other programs; the All Grants Fund took $153.6M and the Top Charities Fund $126.2M of $616M raised; GiveWell estimates its 2025 grants "will save about 86,000 lives" (its own model) [S18].

A2. Taimaka. GiveWell's grant page (published June 2025): $4,787,985 recommended November 2024 for three years, plus $483,054 for monitoring (March 2025); cost per child treated $105; "approximately nine times as cost-effective as unconditional cash transfers" (8.8× in the model) against a 10× bar; the model assumes treatment cuts all-cause mortality by about 59% (range 15–70%), resting on "historical observational studies" from the 1980s–90s with a 20% validity discount, because untreated children cannot ethically be studied; 92.9% recovery in 2024; 4,996 SAM cases admitted October 2023–October 2024; the page gives 1,128 deaths averted for the grant, which is about $4,245 per death averted (my arithmetic, not GiveWell's) [S17]. Taimaka's own pages say $132 per child treated and "$1,500 – $4,500 to save a life" (home, impact) and "Every $94 in our program treats a child" (donate) — three figures on three pages; "30,000+" cases treated; "817 – 1,517 lives saved"; no recovery, death, default or relapse rate is published on the pages read, though a live dashboard is linked [S24–S27]. An April 2026 Nigeria Health Watch piece says "over 12,000 children" treated to date — kept alongside the 30,000+ [S28]. The donate page offers card (Every.org), PayPal and bank transfer; no monthly option is shown; the Every.org checkout could not be loaded (HTTP 429) [S25]. Governance: Form 990 for 2024 shows revenue $682,142 and expenses $574,784 (small relative to the GiveWell grant, which may flow to the Nigerian entity); Charity Navigator rates it Three-Star, 82, with "Financial Statements: No", "Records Retention Policy: No", "Tax Form Disclosed on Website: No"; ProPublica flags Schedule L related-party transactions in 2023 and 2024 [S122, S123]. GiveWell's renewal decision was expected in 2026; no 2026 Taimaka page exists in GiveWell's sitemap [S17]. The Do page's line "the clearest line from your dollar to a child" is fair on program design and dashboard; it should not stand without the governance caveats.

A3. ALIMA. Trial record: OptiMA-DRC (896 children, open-label non-inferiority RCT): 72% vs 63% favourable outcome at 6 months (difference −9.0%, 95% CI −15.9 to −2.0) — the simplified, dose-tapering protocol was superior [S13]; a three-arm Niger trial comparing OptiMA, ComPAS and the standard protocol is registered with ALIMA investigators [S14]. GiveWell grants (agent-fetched pages): $1.0M incubation (Dec 2020/Jan 2021, Niger); $7,968,073 (May 2021, Chad; later re-estimated 9–18× cash); $13,455,542 (Nov 2022, Niger and Nigeria; 11–18×); $2M exit grant (Feb 2024, Chad) after Ngouri was re-estimated at 5× "after a calculation error", below the 10× bar, which GiveWell calls a mistake; $1.9M (June 2025, Far North Cameroon) after "ALIMA's previous USAID funding was cancelled", 7–11×, best guess 8×, "near our funding threshold", about $29 per person treated; and $4,711,130 (October 2025, Niger and Chad) in the metrics report [S32, S18]. GiveWell's standing reservation on every ALIMA page: "We do not have any direct evidence of the effect that malnutrition treatment has on mortality." Finances: 2025 statutory accounts audited (In Extenso, 29 May 2026): operating income €74.78M, deficit −€174,321, equity €3.34M, with €8.5M receivable from US government awards at year-end; 2025 annual report: 92% social missions, 230,818 malnourished children treated, 14 countries [S33, S34]. ALIMA USA (EIN 26-0397519): 2024 revenue $10.38M; Charity Navigator Three-Star, 85, 2 of 4 beacons [S122, S123]. The donate page offers "One-time or recurring monthly donation" with the US 501(c)(3) note; restriction is not stated [S35].

A4. IRC. ComPAS cluster-RCT (24 clusters, 4,110 children, Kenya and South Sudan): recovery 76.3% vs 73.5% (risk difference 0.03, 95% CI −0.05 to 0.10), mortality 1.8% in both arms, 122 vs 193 RUTF sachets per recovered SAM child, US$918 vs US$1,041 per child recovered [S11]. IRC's July 2023 research summary: Mali observational cohort of 27,500+ children, 92% recovered; community health workers achieved 94%; a 420-child prospective cohort found 26% relapsed to MUAC <125 mm within six months [S15]. GiveWell's January 2024 grant ($7,485,323, five countries): $215 per child reached, $5,487 per under-five death averted in the Burkina Faso example, 7.6–8× cash against a 10× bar; mortality assumption (40% MAM, 70% SAM) from 1980s–90s observational data, "This estimation method has major limitations" [S16]. Further GiveWell grants: $7,992,256 (April 2025) and $8,833,269 (January 2026) for DRC, Niger and Chad [S18]. The monthly page states plainly: "Monthly donations are not restricted to a particular IRC program" [S36]. Organisation: FY2025 revenue $1.31bn, 86% program services (IRC's own split); Charity Navigator Four-Star, 96, all four beacons; BBB accredited (February 2026); CEO compensation $1,123,092 plus $65,700 (FY2025). Controversy within 24 months: thousands furloughed or laid off after the February 2025 US aid freeze (42% of budget was US government), 56 US resettlement layoffs in 2026, and headcount down from 18,000 to 12,000 over 18 months (Semafor, September 2026) [S126]. Older: a $6,934,500 False Claims Act settlement (March 2021) over a Turkey-based bid-rigging and kickback scheme on USAID-funded Syria aid 2012–15 [S127]; IRC's own ethics unit reported 774 new matters and 169 substantiated allegations in FY2023 [S128].

A5. Action Against Hunger USA. GiveWell lists a grant "to locally procure and distribute 20,000 cartons of ready-to-use therapeutic food" in northern Nigeria among its 2025 aid-cut responses ($1.39M on the funding-cuts page; $1,281,869 in the metrics report — both kept) [S20, S18]. The MANGO trial (801 children, Burkina Faso, individually randomised) was implemented by ACF: a reduced RUTF dose after two weeks was non-inferior on weight gain (3.4 vs 3.4 g/kg/day) but linear growth slowed, especially under 12 months [S12]. The "Lifeline" monthly page offers $50–$1,000 a month, "first three monthly gifts are matched 2X" (undated), and shows no outcome figures; whether gifts are restricted is not stated [S37]. The 2025 audited statements: revenue $130.4M (down from $160.8M), program services 82.0% of expenses (86.8% if "Program Support" is counted), US government grants down from $40.8M to $8.7M, and a pending agreement to absorb the Micronutrient Forum; the "$0.90 of every dollar" claim matches FY2024 (90.4%) not FY2025 [S38]. Charity Navigator Four-Star, 90, four beacons; BBB accredited (July 2025); CEO total $471,152 (2024). ACF closed "more than 50 projects in 20 different countries" after the US terminations (its own release, 28 February 2025) [S130].

A6. UNICEF USA $47 gift. The nutrition catalogue lists "150 Ready-to-Use Therapeutic Food Packets (RUTF)" at $47.00 [S29]. The product page: "Your gift provides one child with a two month's supply of Ready-to-Use Therapeutic Food (RUTF)" and "Inspired Gifts represent lifesaving aid. Your donation is unrestricted, allowing UNICEF to help children where the need is greatest." [S30]. So the Do page's "sells one carton" and Practice page's "$47 buys one child's course" are the gift's framing, not a purchase; the page should say the gift is unrestricted. On what RUTF does: the Cochrane review (15 studies, 7,976 children) finds standard RUTF versus an alternative diet "probably improves recovery" (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.16–1.54; moderate certainty) and "we do not know the effects on relapse ... and mortality" (RR 1.05, 0.51–2.16; very low certainty) [S8]; the Lenters meta-analysis: RUTF children 51% more likely to recover, no significant mortality difference, only two studies reporting recovery rates (79.7% and about 83%; the second figure was truncated in the text extracted) [S9]. A carton is 150 sachets of 92 g; 2026 UNICEF offshore prices run $37.66 (Edesia) to $48.40 (Tanjaka), Nutriset €40.99, "Last updated 14 August 2026" [S22]; CHAI's new agreement is US$32.50 per box, "30 percent below UNICEF's most recently published global average of US$46.70" (11 August 2026) [S23]. UNICEF USA's FY2025 Form 990: revenue $835.2M, expenses $594.1M; Charity Navigator Four-Star, 97; BBB accredited; the main site could not be read by any automated tool today [S122–S124].

A7. The call to Congress. Status as of 13 October 2026 (CRS R48956, version 7, the latest on congress.gov today): P.L. 119-103, signed 2 September 2026, funds the government "largely at FY2026 levels, through December 11, 2026"; Global Health Programs Nutrition: $165.00M FY2025, $165.00M FY2026, no subaccount in the FY2027 request (GHP total cut 45.6% to $5,123M), $165.00M in the House-passed H.R. 8595; Food for Peace Title II: $1,687.58M FY2025, $1,200.00M FY2026, request $0 (−100%), House $900.00M (H.R. 8646); McGovern-Dole $240M → $240M → $0 → $240M [S62]. The Senate column is blank: "The Senate never produced bills before they left for the election," and "I'm already hearing a lot of conversation about they're just going to extend that CR into the new Congress" (Bloomberg Government's Loren Duggan, Federal News Network, 26 October 2026) [S63]. Roll Call headlines on 4 November 2026: "Mike Johnson won't seek top GOP spot as House flips" and "Thune to run for minority leader"; Federal News Network's November headline reads "Hegseth vows to defend Pentagon policies as Democrats flip Congress" — headlines only, not an official count; if they hold, control of both chambers changes on 3 January 2027 [S64, S63]. So the December decision is more likely a CR level than a conference report; a call still lands on the people who set the CR and its anomalies, and the page's "before December 11" framing holds, but "the Senate hasn't acted" understates it. Does calling work? Field experiments: Bergan 2009 randomly assigned state legislators to a grassroots e-mail campaign and found "a substantial influence on legislative voting behavior" (magnitude not in the abstract) [S59]; Butler & Nickerson 2011 surveyed 10,690 New Mexicans and gave district results to a random half of the legislature, who were "much more likely to vote in line with constituent opinion" [S60]; Bergan & Cole 2015 ran a field experiment on constituent phone calls (title and journal confirmed via Crossref; abstract not retrievable today — unread) [S61]. The Congressional Management Foundation's 2017 report presents its 2015 staff survey (n = 190–192): in-person constituent visits 94%, individualized emails 92%, individualized letters 88%, phone calls 84%, lobbyist visits 83%, form emails 56% rated "some" or "a lot" of positive influence on an undecided member; a specific request (79%), district impact (78%) and a bill number (66%) matter in a message [S58]. These are staff opinions, not measured behaviour; the page's "84% of congressional staff" is correctly sourced but the survey year is 2015.

Does the money do what the page says? For the Nutrition line, the chain is modelled: Bhutta et al. (Lancet 2013) estimate ten nutrition interventions at 90% coverage would cut under-5 deaths 15% at Int$9.6bn a year [S5]; Keats et al. (2021) report the evidence "continues to support ... community-based approaches ... to manage children with acute malnutrition" [S7]; Cavalcanti et al. (Lancet 2025; 133 countries, fixed-effects panel plus microsimulation) associate USAID funding with a 32% lower under-5 mortality rate (RR 0.68, 0.57–0.80), 30.4M child deaths averted 2001–21, and project 4.54M (3.12–5.91M) additional under-5 deaths by 2030 if cuts continue — an observational model, not a count [S6]. For Food for Peace Title II (in-kind US commodities), the efficiency evidence points the other way: GAO found cargo-preference requirements raised food-aid shipping costs "by an average of 23 percent", about $107M, April 2011–FY2014 [S67]; Lentz, Passarelli and Barrett (2013) found local and regional procurement "results in a time savings of nearly 14 weeks, a 62 percent gain", with grains "over 50 percent" cheaper but processed commodities "not always cost-effective" [S68]; GAO-11-636 found more than $300M of FY2010 Title II funds went to buying and shipping commodities for monetization [S66]. Harm: Nunn & Qian (AER 2014) find "an increase in U.S. food aid increases the incidence and duration of civil conflicts", with no robust effect on onset [S69]; Christian & Barrett (Economic Journal 2023) show the panel-IV design behind such results can produce spurious correlations and "revisit recent studies of the causal origins of conflict" [S70]. Contest kept: in-kind aid still feeds people, the live alternative this December is a lower number rather than a smarter program, and the Edesia and MANA pages (US RUTF makers) name the State Department and USAID as buyers but neither mentions Food for Peace [S71, S72]; the page's claim that Food for Peace "pays for the food that keeps severely malnourished children alive" is not verified today. Not checked today: whether FY2026 Nutrition and Title II funds were actually obligated (apportionment holds), which would weaken a "protect the line" ask.

A8. Local food bank. The problem in US units: in 2024, 13.7% of households (18.3M) were food insecure; 7.3M children lived in households where children were food insecure; 751,000 children (1.0%) lived in households with very low food security among children (ERS, updated 30 March 2026; no notice about the report's future appears on the page) [S73]. What reduces it: SNAP receipt cuts the likelihood of food insecurity by roughly 30% and of very low food security by 20% (instrumental variables) [S74]; six months of SNAP participation (9,811 households, 30 states) was associated with 4.6–10.6 point lower household food insecurity and 8.6–10.1 point lower food insecurity among children, and a 2.0-point drop in very low food security among children in the cross-sectional sample (3.9% → 1.9%; not significant longitudinally), with the authors' own warning that the estimates "should not be considered indicative of the causal effects" [S75]; childhood access to food stamps raised adult human capital 6% of a standard deviation, economic self-sufficiency 3%, neighbourhood quality 8%, longevity 0.4 points, and cut incarceration 0.5 points, "a marginal value of public funds of approximately 56" (43M Americans, county rollout 1961–75) [S77], and reduced metabolic syndrome [S76]; a $60-per-child monthly summer benefit, randomised across households, "decreased the prevalence of the most severe food insecurity among children by one-third" (9.1% → 6.1%) and food insecurity among children from 43.0% to 34.7% (pooled n = 48,431 surveys, 2011–13) [S79]; universal free school meals through CEP cut households classified as food insecure by "almost 5 percent" [S84], and a 47-study review finds most studies positive on diet quality, food security and academic performance [S85]. Food pantries themselves: a systematic review of 14 articles (12 interventions, 5 RCTs) found pantry-based programs improved diet-related outcomes including food security, but "interventions were modest in scale and usually short in follow-up" [S89]. Feeding America: "$1 = 10 meals" is calculated by dividing pounds of donated food by Feeding America's operating costs and 1.2 lb per meal — a leverage ratio, not a purchase price [S90]; the FY2025 "5.9 billion meals" figure "includes SNAP meals Feeding America enabled through our SNAP application assistance programs" (312,000 applications assisted) [S92]; donated goods were $4.71bn of $5.33bn FY2026 revenue, 98.36% of expenses were program services, and the national organisation's food procurement was 94.6% donated by value (my arithmetic from the audit) [S93]. Scale: SNAP paid $95,759M in benefits to an average 42.1M people in FY2025 [S94]; at Feeding America's own conversion in the same report ($200bn over ten years "or around 6 billion meals lost per year", about $3.30 a meal — my arithmetic), SNAP delivers roughly five times the whole network's meals each year. City Harvest rescued 86.1M lb in FY2025, 97% donated by weight, 74% produce [S98]. Volunteering: no study of what a volunteer hour at a food bank produces was found; food banks' own pages ask for money and virtual drives first (City Harvest: a #GiveHealthy drive is "an alternative to a traditional canned food drive") [S97].

A9. Monthly giving. Fundraising Effectiveness Project, 2026 Q2 (17,000 organisations): overall donor retention 26.4%; first-time donors 11.3%; donors who gave seven or more times last year 90% vs one-time donors 14.4% [S112]. Correlational and industry-grade; it says recurring donors stay, not that recurring gifts do more. Breman (2011) found "mean increases in donations are significantly higher when donors are asked to commit to future donations" (two field experiments; magnitude not in the abstract) [S107].

A10. Reading updates; re-reading GiveWell. Karlan & Wood: adding scientific impact information to a Freedom from Hunger mailing "has no effect on whether someone donates, or how much, in the full sample"; large prior donors gave more, small prior donors less [S110]. Caviola et al. (2020): lay people think the best charities are 1.5× the average; experts say 100×; "participants donated more to the most effective charity ... when informed" [S109]. The yearly GiveWell re-read is the one habit this literature supports.

A11. Sending the page to one person. Shang & Croson: telling a public-radio donor what another donor gave raised contributions 12% ($13) [S102]; Frey & Meier: 2,500 students told that many others contributed were more likely to contribute [S103]; on online fundraising pages, "a £10 increase in the mean of past donations increases giving by £2.50" [S104]; donors asked to share on Facebook, with a small add-on gift as incentive, produced "benefits ... in increased new donations" [S105]; Caviola & Greene (Science Advances 2023): letting donors split between a favourite and an expert-recommended charity "boosting effective donations by 76%", plus 55% more with rising match rates; the platform raised $1.5M in 14 months [S108]. Caution: door-to-door asks lowered households' utility on average and a "Do Not Disturb" option cut giving 30% [S106] — asking is not free for the asked.

A12. News-driven giving. Eisensee & Strömberg (QJE 2007): US relief to about 5,000 disasters (1968–2002) "depends on whether the disaster occurs at the same time as other newsworthy events, such as the Olympic Games, which are obviously unrelated to need" [S120]. The Practice page marks this "unread"; the abstract has now been read (full text not). Update the grade on the page to "research, abstract read".

2. What one person can do that the evidence ranks highest (question B)

Frame: no special position, a few hours a month, a modest budget (the pages use $20 a month). Two outcomes are in play and the ranking says which each action serves: child deaths (global) and child food insecurity (US). Per dollar, nothing on the US side competes on deaths; per hour, the strongest-evidence US action (helping a family enrol in SNAP or WIC) has an RCT behind the enrolment step and quasi-experimental evidence behind the benefit, which the global side's "hour" actions (calls) do not.

2.1 Ranked top five

1. Give monthly to GiveWell's Top Charities Fund (or to Malaria Consortium, Helen Keller Intl, AMF or New Incentives directly). Grade strong. High-certainty Cochrane evidence for nets (17% child mortality reduction) and vitamin A (12%, with DEVTA's null kept beside it), high-certainty morbidity evidence for seasonal chemoprevention, an RCT for vaccine incentives, and an evaluator's cost per life saved of $3,500–$5,500 on average (ranges $1,000–$8,500 by country), with GiveWell's own 2026 downward corrections disclosed [S39–S50, S45]. At $20 a month, $240 a year is 4–7% of one death averted (my arithmetic). Already step 2 on the page: keep as the first option.

1. Give monthly to a GiveWell-vetted malnutrition-treatment program, if treating starving children is the point: ALIMA USA (monthly, 501(c)(3)) or Taimaka (one-time; no monthly option). Grade moderate. Protocols are RCT-tested for recovery (ComPAS non-inferior; OptiMA-DRC superior; MANGO non-inferior), programs report 76–93% recovery, and GiveWell models 5–18× cash across grants — mostly just under its 10× bar — on a mortality effect it says has "no direct evidence" [S11–S17, S32]. This ranks second not because the evidence is stronger than for cash transfers but because of A11: people give more effectively when they can split between the cause they feel and the program with the best numbers [S108], and the site's topic is this cause. State the uncertainty on the page: one death averted per roughly 40 children treated at GiveWell's Taimaka numbers ($4,245 per death at $105 per child — my arithmetic from [S17]).

1. Help one US family get onto SNAP or WIC (volunteer with a benefits-enrolment program or your food bank's SNAP outreach), or give to the organisation that does it. Grade moderate-to-strong per hour. Information plus application help raised SNAP enrolment from 6% to 18% among 30,000 likely-eligible people in a randomised trial [S78]; SNAP participation is associated with 8.6–10.1 point lower food insecurity among children [S75] and a 30% lower likelihood of food insecurity [S74]; WIC reached 51.2% of eligible people in 2021, and child coverage falls from 64% at age one to 25% at age four [S87]; Feeding America's network assisted 312,000 SNAP applications in FY2025 [S92]. Caveat: Finkelstein & Notowidigdo found the people who enrol in response to outreach are less needy than those already enrolled [S78]; Benefits Data Trust, the trial's partner, could not be checked today. This is the best-evidenced US action and it is not on the page.

1. Call (or write individually to) your senators and representative on the specific live decision, with the facts current that week. Grade weak-to-moderate. Two field experiments show constituent contact moves legislators [S59, S60]; staff rank calls below visits and individual emails [S58]. For December 2026 the ask with the best evidence behind the program it protects is the Global Health Programs Nutrition line ($165M) and humanitarian assistance; the Food for Peace ask should change from "keep $1.2B" to "keep food assistance at least flat and let it buy locally or in cash", because the in-kind evidence runs against the page [S65–S70]. Add the domestic parallel where it applies: a resident of one of the 12 states not running Summer EBT (Alaska, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah; New York participates) can ask the governor and state legislators to opt in, backed by a randomised evaluation showing a one-third cut in very low food security among children [S79–S81]. An individualized email ranks higher than a call in the staff survey (92% vs 84%) and costs the same five minutes [S58].

1. Make the giving social and sticky: set it to recur, tell one person what you give and why, and if your workplace matches, use the match. Grade moderate for the mechanisms, none-but-plausible for outcomes. Social information and peer gifts raise giving (12%; £2.50 per £10) [S102, S104]; a match raises response and revenue, with no extra from 2:1 or 3:1 [S99]; bundling lifts effective giving 76% [S108]; recurring donors are retained at 90% vs 14% [S112]. Cautions kept: matching can crowd out later giving once it stops [S100]; a lead gift announcement may do as much as a match [S101]; social pressure costs the asked [S106].

Not in the top five, and why: cash transfers to the extreme poor (GiveDirectly) now have a large RCT showing 48% fewer infant deaths and 45% fewer under-5 deaths in 653 Kenyan villages, but at USD PPP 299,418 per death averted untargeted (about $39,000 nominal if targeted to third-trimester pregnancies; about $14,000 for below-median households — the authors' own back-of-envelope figures) against GiveWell's $4,304 for malaria medicine that the same paper cites [S54]; a multi-country study finds cash programs "associated with significant reductions in mortality among children under five years of age and women" (magnitudes in the full text, not retrievable today) [S55]. Cash is the benchmark the malnutrition programs are measured against, and the honest line is that it is very well evidenced for consumption and now for survival, at a higher cost per death. Volunteering at a food bank (sorting, packing) has no evidence of reducing child food insecurity per hour beyond the pantry literature's modest short-term effects [S89]; the organisations themselves ask for money first.

2.2 Drop, keep, re-rank

2.3 Global vs domestic, per dollar and per hour

• Per dollar on deaths: global wins outright. $3,500–$5,500 per life saved (evaluator estimate) versus no US action with a measured mortality price. The US long-run SNAP evidence (MVPF ~56) is about public spending, not about a donor's dollar [S77].
• Per dollar on hunger: a donor's dollar to a US food bank moves mostly donated food (94.6% of Feeding America's procurement by value is donated) and buys little; a dollar to SNAP outreach that lands one enrolment unlocks federal benefits averaging $189.36 per person per month [S94] — the leverage is in enrolment, not in food.
• Per hour: the US enrolment route has the best measured chain (RCT × quasi-experiment). The global per-hour action is advocacy, whose evidence is two field experiments and a staff survey, with a very large sum at stake ($165M Nutrition; $1.2bn Title II) — high ceiling, low certainty.
• The pages already say "do both; one doesn't replace the other." The evidence supports that, with the two words kept apart.

3. Communal impact (question C)

3.1 Who benefits, how much, and known harms, per kept action

• GiveWell top charities. Children under five in high-burden countries: SMC in the Sahel (7.55M children targeted in 2016 in seven countries; $3.63 per child per season) [S50]; vitamin A campaigns in countries where GiveWell funds Helen Keller (effect assumed 4–12%; monitoring adjustment −17% for unrepresentative coverage surveys) [S40]; nets (self-reported usage fell from about 83% to 60% over the survey period; insecticide resistance unresolved) [S42]; vaccine incentives in northern Nigeria (GiveWell notes a higher fraud risk than other programs and "some opposition ... within the Nigerian federal government") [S43]. Harm evidence: none of the four has a documented harm to recipients in the sources read; the known costs are displacement (other funders stepping back) and monitoring gaps, which GiveWell lists.
• Malnutrition treatment. Children 6–59 months with acute malnutrition and their caregivers: Gombe State (Taimaka), Niger, Chad, Cameroon (ALIMA), Burkina Faso, Chad, DRC, Niger, Somalia (IRC). What recipients get: 6–10 weekly visits, RUTF, a recovery rate of 76–93% depending on setting and protocol, and a 26% chance of relapse within six months in the one IRC cohort that measured it [S11, S15, S17]. Trade-offs inside the programs: reduced-dose protocols save RUTF but slowed linear growth in MANGO [S12]; GiveWell flags that hiring health workers "could otherwise work in government systems" and that lower-qualified staff triage [S17]. Relapse and post-discharge mortality are the weak link and the field has no standard relapse definition (0–37% across 26 reports) [S10].
• The Congress call. Beneficiaries are the recipients of US-funded nutrition and humanitarian programs; the harm evidence is on the delivery vehicle: in-kind commodity aid costs more and arrives later than local purchase [S67, S68], part of each dollar pays US shippers under cargo preference [S67], and one contested study links US food aid to longer civil conflicts [S69, S70]. A call that asks for flexibility as well as money serves the affected people better than one that asks for the in-kind line alone.
• US food banks and federal programs. Pantry clients get food and, in the better programs, nutrition education and client choice [S89]. The November 2025 shutdown showed the dependence: USDA announced on 27 October 2025 that no November SNAP benefits would issue, two dozen states sued, a federal judge ordered payment on 31 October, the Supreme Court stayed a full-payment order on 7 November, and the law signed 12 November funded SNAP through September 2026 (Wikipedia, citing USA Today, NYT, NBC and ABC reports that were not opened today) [S96]; Feeding America's annual report describes "the lapse in SNAP benefits impacting over 40 million individuals" [S92]. The 2025 reconciliation law "reduces federal nutrition funding by $186 billion between 2025 and 2034", extends work requirements to age 64, makes states with error rates above 6% pay up to 15% of benefits, and raises the state administrative share from 50% to 75% (Wikipedia, citing Axios 3 July 2025 and Newsweek 30 June 2025, not opened today) [S95]. Food drives: no fetched source quantifies cash versus cans; what the sources show is that food banks move donated food at $1.87–$1.92 a pound in fair value with cash covering sorting, storage and transport [S93, S98], and that City Harvest steers donors to virtual drives [S97]. Thin evidence; say so on the page.

3.2 Harm from well-meant actions (for the Q&A or drill)

• Orphanage support and volunteering. "Between 5 million and 6 million children (aged 0–18 years) worldwide are estimated to live in institutions ... although this estimate is based on scarce data" and "volunteers, visitors, and private donations ... are all important drivers of institutionalisation" (Lancet Child & Adolescent Health 2020 commission paper) [S116]; the coalition page estimates "80% are not actually orphans and have at least one living parent" (no source given on the page) and says "the transient nature of orphanage volunteering is harmful to children" [S115]. The companion Lancet Psychiatry review of developmental effects could not be opened today [S117]. Grade of the harm claim: moderate (a Lancet commission plus advocacy figures without a cited source for the 80%).
• Voluntourism. Guttentag (2009) lists the possible negative impacts: "a neglect of locals' desires, a hindering of work progress and completion of unsatisfactory work, a disruption of local economies, a reinforcement of conceptualisations of the 'other' and rationalisations of poverty" [S118]. Grade: weak (a review of possible impacts, not measured outcomes).
• In-kind gifts. Wydick, Katz & Janet (2014; cluster-randomised, 979 households, El Salvador): shoe donations showed "no statistically significant difference in market shoe purchases between treatment and control households", with point estimates slightly lower [S119]. Grade: moderate; the harm hypothesis was not confirmed for shoes. The in-kind evidence that does bite is for bulk food aid (section 1.2, A7).
• Surge giving after the photographs. Relief follows news, not need [S120]. The Practice page's advice stands.
• Matching and asking. Matching can reduce participation after it ends [S100]; door-to-door asks lowered the utility of the asked on average [S106].

3.3 Doing it with others: which formats have measured effects

Reading across the table: the formats with measured effects are the small, cheap ones a page can prompt — tell one person what you gave, show the amount others give, offer the split between a favourite cause and the best-evidenced program, and ask people to set an increase for next year rather than today. The formats sold as communal (circles, pledges, congregational drives) have only self-reported totals in what was fetched today.

4. Organisations (question D)

All checks dated 2026-11-05; 990 data from ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer [S122]; ratings from Charity Navigator (CN) [S123] and BBB Wise Giving Alliance [S124]. CharityWatch pages were blocked (403) for every organisation; its grades appear only as unread snippets and are omitted below. "None found" is bounded by the searches the agents could run, listed in their notes (section 7, S122–S133).

Lighter checks on the four GiveWell top charities the Do page describes without naming (item 1 only; no news searches could be run): Helen Keller Intl (13-5562162): operating (newsroom to 23 Sept 2026); CN Four-Star 97 on 1 of 4 beacons; its newsroom cites Inside Philanthropy (7 April 2026) saying it "lost a third of its operating budget because of abrupt U.S. government funding cuts" (unread) [S132]. Malaria Consortium US (98-0627052): site blocked; CN Four-Star 90 on 1 of 4 beacons with flags "Independent Board Size 4", "Tax Form Disclosed on Website = No"; GiveWell "do not currently have any significant concerns" [S41, S132]. New Incentives (45-2368993): operating (posts to 5 Aug 2026); CN Four-Star 94, 2 of 4, "Highly Cost-Effective", flags on board size and M&E investment; GiveWell notes higher fraud risk and some federal-government opposition [S43, S132]. Against Malaria Foundation (20-3069841): operating (counters live; "GiveWell – Top Rated 2009 to 2025"); CN Four-Star 91, 4 of 4, "Highly Cost-Effective", but "Financial Statements = No", "Working Capital = 0.00 years"; GiveWell: "our qualitative assessment of AMF is less positive than for our other top charities" [S42, S132].

Stronger-evidence organisation doing the same job?

• Malnutrition treatment: no evaluator fetched today recommends any malnutrition-treatment charity as a top pick. Giving What We Can's 2026 list and The Life You Can Save's 26 recommended charities contain none; Founders Pledge's fund page names none (Taimaka's claim of a Founders Pledge recommendation could not be confirmed on the Founders Pledge page read) [S51–S53, S26]. GiveWell funds the field at roughly 5–18× cash. Among the page's options, ALIMA has the strongest trial record and audited accounts; Taimaka the clearest single-program line and the thinnest governance file; IRC the largest scale and an unrestricted gift. There is no clearly stronger substitute; there is a clearly stronger alternative use of the same dollar (section 2, item 1), and the page already says so.
• US child food insecurity: the job with evidence is enrolment and policy, not food distribution. Organisations doing it include Feeding America's own network (312,000 SNAP applications assisted in FY2025) [S92] and local food banks' benefits outreach; Hunger Free America (NYC; national hunger hotline, SNAP enrolment) could not be read today (JavaScript-only pages) and is not vetted here. Benefits Data Trust, the partner in the enrolment RCT, was reported closed in 2024 — not verified today.

5. What would overturn this, and when it goes stale

Overturning evidence (things that could be found in the world):

• A randomised or quasi-experimental study measuring mortality among untreated versus treated children with SAM, or a credible natural experiment from the 2025 RUTF stock-outs, would replace the 1980s–90s observational base behind every malnutrition cost-per-death figure, in either direction.
• GiveWell's 2026 Taimaka renewal decision (not yet published) and any 2026 ALIMA grant page.
• A Senate FY2027 bill or a full-year CR with anomalies for Global Health Programs or Title II; the enacted vehicle by or after 11 December 2026.
• Charity Navigator publishing Impact & Measurement beacons for GiveWell, Taimaka or ALIMA USA; a BBB renewal for City Harvest.
• A 2025–26 regulator, court or major-outlet report on any listed organisation (the agents' searches were limited and French-language searches did not run).
• Full texts of the Cochrane reviews, Richterman 2023 and Bergan & Cole 2015, which would add magnitudes this review could only cite as present.

Staleness:

• 11 December 2026: the CR expires; everything in A7 and the call script goes stale that day. 3 January 2027: new Congress; the House majority changes (news grade).
• Annual: GiveWell top-charity estimates (October); UN IGME child mortality (March); UNICEF RUTF prices (August update); USDA ERS food security (status of the 2025 report unknown today); Summer EBT state participation (FNS page updated 14 August 2026; 2027 decisions pending); FEP retention (quarterly).
• 990 data are FY2024 (GiveWell, Taimaka, ALIMA USA, AAH) or FY2025 (IRC, UNICEF USA, Feeding America, City Harvest). ALIMA's accounts are calendar 2025; AAH's audited statements are calendar 2025; Feeding America's audit is FY2026.
• Taimaka's and Action Against Hunger's matching offers and per-child prices move; GiveWell's cash benchmark and bar can change.

6. Where the walk stops

• The 45% share of child deaths with undernutrition in the causal chain is Black et al. 2013's model of 2011 data; CHAMPS autopsies at seven sites (1,601 deaths, 2016–23) found 39.5%, 89.1% of those with an infectious cause [S4]. UN IGME's first direct estimate is >100,000 (5%) deaths caused by SAM in 2024 [S1]. The 2.2M on the site is arithmetic on the 45% share.
• Every cost-per-death figure for malnutrition treatment rests on GiveWell's use of Roodman's 2022 analysis of 1980s–90s observational mortality data [S16, S17]. Not re-derived here.
• The IRC 92% and 26% figures are IRC's own analyses of program data [S15]; ComPAS is a published trial [S11].
• Feeding America's meals and pounds are its own counts; the audited statements confirm pounds and values but not meals [S92, S93].
• The 2025 reconciliation law's SNAP figures and the November 2025 lapse come through Wikipedia to news reports that were not opened today [S95, S96].
• The Save the Children August 2025 RUTF shortage release and the State Department's denial that deaths followed were not re-fetched today; they stand on the research file's snippets [S31].

7. Sources

Format: [S#] citation — URL — how read — grade. "Fetched" means opened on 2026-11-05 with WebFetch or curl; "E-utilities" means the PubMed abstract via NCBI's efetch API on 2026-11-05; "API" means Crossref, OpenAlex, Semantic Scholar or Europe PMC on 2026-11-05; "agent" means fetched on 2026-11-05 by one of the two organisation-check sub-agents; "unread" means title or snippet only.

Burden and context

• [S1] UNICEF / UN IGME, "Progress in reducing child deaths slows: 4.9 million children under five died in 2024", 18 March 2026 — https://www.unicef.org/press-releases/progress-reducing-child-deaths-slows-49-million-children-under-five-die-2024 — fetched — primary.
• [S2] Fortune, "Bill Gates: childhood death rate under 5 ... first reversal this century", 4 December 2025 (Goalkeepers 2025, IHME modelling; 4.6M in 2024 → 4.8M projected 2025) — https://www.fortune.com/2025/12/04/bill-gates-childhood-death-rate-under-5-first-reversal-this-century — fetched — news.
• [S3] Gates Foundation, Goalkeepers 2025 report landing page — https://goalkeepers.gatesfoundation.org/report/2025-report/ — fetched (navigation only; report PDF not read) — primary, unread body.
• [S4] Madewell ZJ et al., "Contribution of malnutrition to infant and child deaths in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia", BMJ Global Health 2024;9:e017262, PMID 39638608 — https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39638608/ — E-utilities abstract — primary.
• [S5] Bhutta ZA et al., "Evidence-based interventions for improvement of maternal and child nutrition", Lancet 2013;382:452–477, PMID 23746776 — https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23746776/ — E-utilities abstract — primary.
• [S6] Cavalcanti DM et al., "Evaluating the impact of two decades of USAID interventions and projecting the effects of defunding on mortality up to 2030", Lancet 2025;406:283–294, PMID 40609560 — https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40609560/ — E-utilities abstract — primary (observational model).
• [S7] Keats EC et al., "Effective interventions to address maternal and child malnutrition: an update of the evidence", Lancet Child Adolesc Health 2021;5:367–384, PMID 33691083 — https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33691083/ — E-utilities abstract — research.

Malnutrition treatment

• [S8] Schoonees A et al., "Ready-to-use therapeutic food (RUTF) for home-based nutritional rehabilitation of severe acute malnutrition", Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2019, CD009000.pub3, PMID 31090070 — https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31090070/ — E-utilities abstract (cochranelibrary.com blocked) — research.
• [S9] Lenters LM et al., "Treatment of severe and moderate acute malnutrition in low- and middle-income settings", BMC Public Health 2013;13(Suppl 3):S23, PMID 24564235 — https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24564235/ and https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC3847503/fullTextXML — E-utilities abstract + Europe PMC full text — research.
• [S10] Stobaugh HC et al., "Relapse after severe acute malnutrition: a systematic literature review and secondary data analysis", Matern Child Nutr 2019;15:e12702, PMID 30246929 — https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30246929/ — E-utilities abstract — research.
• [S11] Bailey J et al., "A simplified, combined protocol versus standard treatment for acute malnutrition in children 6–59 months (ComPAS trial)", PLOS Medicine 2020 — https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003192 — fetched — primary.
• [S12] Kangas ST et al., "Impact of reduced dose of ready-to-use therapeutic foods in children with uncomplicated severe acute malnutrition (MANGO)", PLOS Medicine 2019 — https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1002887 — fetched — primary.
• [S13] Cazes C et al., "Simplifying and optimising the management of uncomplicated acute malnutrition in children aged 6–59 months in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OptiMA-DRC)", Lancet Glob Health 2022;10:e510–e520, PMID 35303461 — https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35303461/ — E-utilities abstract — primary.
• [S14] Daures M et al., OptiMA Niger three-arm trial protocol, Trials 2022;23:89, PMID 35090531 — https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35090531/ — E-utilities abstract (ALIMA affiliations) — primary.
• [S15] IRC, "Evidence overview: a simplified, combined protocol...", research summary, July 2023 — https://rescue.org/sites/default/files/2023-07/Simplified%20Protocol%2C%20IRC%20Research%20Summary_July7.pdf — fetched PDF, text extracted — charity's own figures.
• [S16] GiveWell, "International Rescue Committee — Acute Malnutrition Treatment (January 2024)", published April 2024 — https://www.givewell.org/node/4024 — fetched — evaluator.
• [S17] GiveWell, "Taimaka — Acute Malnutrition Treatment in Gombe State, Nigeria (November 2024) and Program Monitoring (March 2025)", published June 2025 — https://www.givewell.org/node/4359 — fetched — evaluator.
• [S18] GiveWell, Metrics Report 2025 (metrics year Feb 2025–Jan 2026) — https://files.givewell.org//files/metrics/GiveWell_Metrics_Report_2025.pdf — fetched PDF, text extracted — evaluator.
• [S19] GiveWell, "Our response to the 2025 US aid cuts" — https://www.givewell.org/research/response-to-2025-aid-cuts — fetched — evaluator.
• [S20] GiveWell, "Funding cuts" page (last updated February 2026; ACF $1.39M RUTF grant) — https://www.givewell.org/research/funding-cuts — agent — evaluator.
• [S21] Chui J et al. 2020 cost review, summarised in ENN Field Exchange 64, 18 January 2021 — https://ennonline.net/fex/64/cmamcosteffectiveness — fetched — research (summary).
• [S22] UNICEF Supply Division, "Ready-to-use therapeutic food price data 2003–2026", last updated 14 August 2026 — https://www.unicef.org/supply/media/25986/file/Ready-to-use-therapeutic-food-price-data-2003-2026.pdf — fetched PDF, text extracted — primary.
• [S23] Clinton Health Access Initiative, "New agreement cuts the price of life-saving malnutrition treatment by 30 percent", 11 August 2026 — https://www.clintonhealthaccess.org/news/new-agreement-cuts-the-price-of-life-saving-malnutrition-treatment-by-30-percent/ — fetched — primary (organisation release).
• [S24] Taimaka home — https://www.taimaka.org/ — fetched — charity's own figures.
• [S25] Taimaka donate — https://taimaka.org/donate — fetched — charity's own figures.
• [S26] Taimaka impact — https://taimaka.org/impact — fetched — charity's own figures.
• [S27] Taimaka model — https://taimaka.org/model — fetched — charity's own figures.
• [S28] Nigeria Health Watch, "Taimaka's community-based model...", 13 April 2026 — https://nigeriahealthwatch.com/articles/torchlight/taimakas-community-based-model-is-bringing-severe-malnutrition-care-closer-to-children-in-gombe/ — agent — news.
• [S29] UNICEF USA Inspired Gifts, Nutrition category — https://www.market.unicefusa.org/inspired-gifts/nutrition/ — fetched (curl) — primary.
• [S30] UNICEF USA Inspired Gifts, "150 Ready-to-Use Therapeutic Food Packets (RUTF)" product page S0000240-B26 — https://www.market.unicefusa.org/inspired-gifts/150-ready-to-use-therapeutic-food-packets-rutf/S0000240-B26/ — agent — primary.
• [S31] Save the Children, "Countries in Africa at risk of running out of 'wonder food' over next 3 months due to aid cuts", 28 August 2025 — https://www.savethechildren.net/news/countries-africa-risk-running-out-wonder-food-over-next-3-months-due-aid-cuts-0 — NOT fetched today (HTTP 403 by two methods); figures stand on source/research/child-hunger.md snippets — charity's own figures, unread today.
• [S32] GiveWell ALIMA grant pages: incubation grant (node/3591) https://www.givewell.org/node/3591 ; Chad and Niger/Nigeria grants (node/4067) https://www.givewell.org/node/4067 ; Chad exit grant Feb 2024 https://www.givewell.org/research/grants/ALIMA-malnutrition-Ngouri-NDjamena-February-2024 ; Cameroon June 2025 (node/4451) https://www.givewell.org/node/4451 — agent — evaluator.
• [S33] ALIMA, Annual Report 2025 (EN) — https://alima.ngo/wp-content/uploads/2026/10/ALIMA-ANNUAL-REPORT-2025-EN.pdf — agent — charity's own figures.
• [S34] ALIMA, Comptes annuels 2025 (English), auditor In Extenso, 29 May 2026 — https://alima.ngo/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/ASSOCIATION-ALIMA-Comptes-annuels-2025-anglais.pdf — agent — primary.
• [S35] ALIMA donate page — https://alima.ngo/en/take-action/donate/ — fetched — primary.
• [S36] IRC monthly giving page — https://www.rescue.org/make-lasting-impact — fetched — primary.
• [S37] Action Against Hunger, "Give monthly: Lifeline" — https://www.actionagainsthunger.org/take-action/give-monthly-lifeline/ — fetched — primary.
• [S38] Action Against Hunger USA: 2024 Form 990 PDF https://www.actionagainsthunger.org/app/uploads/2025/11/24-AAHUSA-990-PD.pdf ; 2025 audited financial statements (issued 25 Sept 2026) https://www.actionagainsthunger.org/app/uploads/2026/10/ACF-USA-2025-FS.pdf ; financials page https://www.actionagainsthunger.org/who-we-are/financials-reports/ ; donate page https://www.actionagainsthunger.org/donate/ — agent — primary.

GiveWell top charities and evaluators

• [S39] GiveWell, "Our top charities", last updated October 2026 — https://www.givewell.org/charities/top-charities — fetched — evaluator.
• [S40] GiveWell, Helen Keller Intl review (published April 2024, updated January 2025) — https://www.givewell.org/charities/helen-keller-international — fetched (first 100,000 characters) — evaluator.
• [S41] GiveWell, Malaria Consortium review (published January 2024, updated April 2024) — https://www.givewell.org/charities/malaria-consortium — fetched (first 100,000 characters) — evaluator.
• [S42] GiveWell, Against Malaria Foundation review (published December 2023) — https://www.givewell.org/charities/amf — fetched (first 100,000 characters) — evaluator.
• [S43] GiveWell, New Incentives review (published April 2024, updated September 2024) — https://www.givewell.org/charities/new-incentives — fetched (first 100,000 characters) — evaluator.
• [S44] GiveWell, "Cost-effectiveness" criteria page (published November 2017, updated April 2025) — https://www.givewell.org/how-we-work/our-criteria/cost-effectiveness — fetched — evaluator.
• [S45] GiveWell, "Our mistakes" (entries to March 2026) — https://www.givewell.org/about/our-mistakes — agent (first 100,000 of 119,538 characters) — evaluator.
• [S46] Imdad A et al., "Vitamin A supplementation for preventing morbidity and mortality in children from six months to five years of age", Cochrane 2022, CD008524.pub4, PMID 35294044 — https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35294044/ — E-utilities abstract — research.
• [S47] Awasthi S et al., "Vitamin A supplementation every 6 months with retinol in 1 million pre-school children in north India: DEVTA", Lancet 2013;381:1469–77, PMID 23498849 — https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23498849/ — E-utilities abstract — primary.
• [S48] Pryce J et al., "Insecticide-treated nets for preventing malaria", Cochrane 2018, CD000363.pub3, PMID 30398672 — https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30398672/ — E-utilities abstract — research.
• [S49] Meremikwu MM et al., "Intermittent preventive treatment for malaria in children living in areas with seasonal transmission", Cochrane 2012, CD003756.pub4, PMID 22336792 — https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22336792/ — E-utilities abstract — research.
• [S50] ACCESS-SMC Partnership, "Effectiveness of seasonal malaria chemoprevention at scale in west and central Africa: an observational study", Lancet 2020;396:1829–1840, PMID 33278936 — https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33278936/ — E-utilities abstract — primary.
• [S51] Giving What We Can, "Best charities to donate to in 2026" — https://www.givingwhatwecan.org/best-charities-to-donate-to-2026 — fetched — evaluator.
• [S52] Founders Pledge, Global Health and Development / Catalytic Impact Fund page — https://www.founderspledge.com/funds/global-health-and-development-fund — fetched — evaluator.
• [S53] The Life You Can Save, "Best charities to donate to in 2026" — https://www.thelifeyoucansave.org/best-charities/ — fetched — evaluator.

Cash transfers

• [S54] Walker MW, Shankar N, Miguel E, Egger D, Killeen G, "Can Cash Transfers Save Lives? Evidence from a Large-Scale Experiment in Kenya", NBER Working Paper 34152 (August 2025, revised January 2026) — https://www.nber.org/papers/w34152 and https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w34152/w34152.pdf — fetched page and PDF (section 7 of the paper read) — research.
• [S55] Richterman A et al., "The effects of cash transfers on adult and child mortality in low- and middle-income countries", Nature 2023;618:575–582, PMID 37258664 — https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37258664/ — E-utilities abstract; full text not retrievable (Nature and Europe PMC) — primary, magnitudes unread.
• [S56] GiveDirectly, "Research at GiveDirectly" — https://www.givedirectly.org/research-at-give-directly/ — fetched — charity's own page (lists studies).
• [S57] GiveWell, GiveDirectly review (published November 2020; a newer version exists and was not reached) — https://www.givewell.org/charities/give-directly — fetched (first 100,000 characters) — evaluator.

Advocacy, appropriations, food aid

• [S58] Congressional Management Foundation, "Citizen-Centric Advocacy: The Untapped Power of Constituent Engagement", 2017 (reports the 2015 staff survey, n = 190–192) — https://www.congressfoundation.org/s/cmf-citizen-centric-advocacy.pdf (redirects to static1.squarespace.com) — fetched PDF, text extracted — primary (survey of staff opinion).
• [S59] Bergan DE, "Does Grassroots Lobbying Work? A Field Experiment Measuring the Effects of an e-Mail Lobbying Campaign on Legislative Behavior", American Politics Research 2009, DOI 10.1177/1532673X08326967 — https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X08326967 — Crossref API abstract (SAGE page 403) — primary.
• [S60] Butler DM, Nickerson DW, "Can Learning Constituency Opinion Affect How Legislators Vote? Results from a Field Experiment", Quarterly Journal of Political Science 2011, DOI 10.1561/100.00011019 — https://doi.org/10.1561/100.00011019 — Crossref API abstract — primary.
• [S61] Bergan DE, Cole RT, "Call Your Legislator: A Field Experimental Study of the Impact of a Constituency Mobilization Campaign on Legislative Voting", Political Behavior 2015, DOI 10.1007/s11109-014-9277-1 — https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-014-9277-1 — metadata only via Crossref, OpenAlex and Semantic Scholar; Springer page blocked — primary, unread.
• [S62] Congressional Research Service, R48956, "National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs (NSRP): FY2027 Budget and Appropriations", version 7, updated 13 October 2026 (versions 8 and 9 return 404) — https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/R/PDF/R48956/R48956.7.pdf — fetched PDF, text extracted — primary.
• [S63] Federal News Network, "With 25 days left on the clock after elections, Congress has to decide what gets done first" (interview with Loren Duggan, Bloomberg Government), published 26 October 2026 — https://federalnewsnetwork.com/congress/2026/10/with-25-days-left-on-the-clock-after-elections-congress-has-to-decide-what-gets-done-first/ — fetched (curl) — news.
• [S64] Roll Call, appropriations tag page, headlines dated 4–5 November 2026 ("Mike Johnson won't seek top GOP spot as House flips"; "Thune to run for minority leader") — https://rollcall.com/tag/appropriations/ — fetched (headlines only) — news.
• [S65] GAO-09-570, "International Food Assistance: Local and Regional Procurement Can Enhance the Efficiency of U.S. Food Aid...", May 2009 — https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-09-570 — fetched (summary page; cost and time figures not on page) — primary.
• [S66] GAO-11-636, "International Food Assistance: Funding Development Projects through the Purchase, Shipment, and Sale of U.S. Commodities Is Inefficient...", June 2011 — https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-11-636 — fetched — primary.
• [S67] GAO-15-666, "International Food Assistance: Cargo Preference Increases Food Aid Shipping Costs...", August 2015 — https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-15-666 — fetched — primary.
• [S68] Lentz EC, Passarelli S, Barrett CB, "The Timeliness and Cost-Effectiveness of the Local and Regional Procurement of Food Aid", World Development 2013;49:9–18 — https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/wdevel/v49y2013icp9-18.html — IDEAS abstract — research.
• [S69] Nunn N, Qian N, "US Food Aid and Civil Conflict", American Economic Review 2014;104(6):1630–66 — https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.104.6.1630 — fetched abstract — research.
• [S70] Christian P, Barrett CB, "Spurious Regressions and Panel IV Estimation: Revisiting the Causes of Conflict", Economic Journal 2023, DOI 10.1093/ej/uead091 — https://doi.org/10.1093/ej/uead091 — Crossref API abstract — research.
• [S71] Edesia Nutrition home — https://www.edesianutrition.org/ — fetched — industry (company).
• [S72] MANA Nutrition home — https://mananutrition.org/ — fetched — industry (company).

US domestic

• [S73] USDA ERS, "Food security in the U.S.: key statistics & graphics", updated 30 March 2026 — https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/food-security-in-the-u-s/key-statistics-graphics — fetched — primary.
• [S74] Ratcliffe C, McKernan SM, Zhang S, "How Much Does the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Reduce Food Insecurity?", Am J Agric Econ 2011;93(4):1082–1098, PMID 25197100 — https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25197100/ — E-utilities abstract — research.
• [S75] Mabli J et al., "Measuring the Effect of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Participation on Food Security", USDA FNS, August 2013 — https://fns-prod.azureedge.us/sites/default/files/Measuring2013.pdf — fetched PDF (curl), executive summary extracted — primary.
• [S76] Hoynes H, Schanzenbach DW, Almond D, "Long-Run Impacts of Childhood Access to the Safety Net", American Economic Review 2016;106(4):903–34 — https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.20130375 — fetched abstract — research.
• [S77] Bailey MJ, Hoynes H, Rossin-Slater M, Walker R, "Is the Social Safety Net a Long-Term Investment? Large-Scale Evidence from the Food Stamps Program", NBER Working Paper 26942 (April 2020; later Review of Economic Studies) — https://www.nber.org/papers/w26942 — fetched — research.
• [S78] Finkelstein A, Notowidigdo MJ, "Take-up and Targeting: Experimental Evidence from SNAP", NBER Working Paper 24652 (May 2018; QJE 2019) — https://www.nber.org/papers/w24652 — fetched — research.
• [S79] Abt Associates for USDA FNS, "Summer Electronic Benefit Transfer for Children (SEBTC) Demonstration: Summary Report", May 2016 — https://fns-prod.azureedge.us/sites/default/files/ops/sebtcfinalreport.pdf — fetched PDF (curl), executive summary extracted; FNS landing page https://www.fns.usda.gov/sebt/demonstration-summary-report (updated 24 January 2025) — primary.
• [S80] USDA FNS, "Summer EBT Participating Areas", 2026, page updated 14 August 2026 — https://www.fns.usda.gov/sebt/participating — fetched (curl) — primary.
• [S81] summerebt.org (Alpenglow Impact), state participation list (12 non-participating states) — https://www.summerebt.org/ — fetched — advocacy/industry.
• [S82] FRAC, Summer EBT page ("children in 12 states are missing out"; $120 per child) — https://frac.org/summer-ebt and https://frac.org/solutions/federal-nutrition-programs/summer-ebt/ — fetched — advocacy.
• [S83] USDA FNS, "SUN Bucks (Summer EBT)" program page, updated 22 July 2026 — https://www.fns.usda.gov/summer/sunbucks — fetched (curl) — primary.
• [S84] Marcus M, Yewell KG, "The Effect of Free School Meals on Household Food Purchases: Evidence from the Community Eligibility Provision", SSRN 2021 / NBER w29395 (later AEJ: Policy) — https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3949205 — Crossref API abstract — research.
• [S85] Cohen JFW et al., "Universal School Meals and Associations with Student Participation, Attendance, Academic Performance, Diet Quality, Food Security, and Body Mass Index: A Systematic Review", Nutrients 2021;13:911, PMID 33799780 — https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33799780/ — E-utilities abstract — research.
• [S86] Hunger Solutions New York, school meals page ("New York enacted statewide universal free school meals, starting in the 2025-2026 school year") — https://hungersolutionsny.org/federal-nutrition-programs/school-meals/ — fetched — advocacy.
• [S87] USDA FNS, "WIC Eligibility and Program Reach Estimates 2021", page updated 1 December 2025 — https://www.fns.usda.gov/research/wic/eligibility-and-program-reach-estimates-2021 — fetched (curl) — primary.
• [S88] Hoynes H, Page M, Stevens AH, "Can targeted transfers improve birth outcomes? Evidence from the introduction of the WIC program", Journal of Public Economics 2011;95(7–8):813–827 — https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/pubeco/v95y2011i7-8p813-827.html — IDEAS abstract — research.
• [S89] An R et al., "A systematic review of food pantry-based interventions in the USA", Public Health Nutrition 2019;22(9):1704–1716, PMID 30834852 — https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30834852/ — E-utilities abstract — research.
• [S90] Feeding America, "How Feeding America turns $1 into at least 10 meals" — https://www.feedingamerica.org/ways-to-give/faq/about-our-claims — fetched — charity's own figures.
• [S91] Feeding America, Ways to give FAQ ("at least 12 pounds of food", "98% ... into programs") — https://www.feedingamerica.org/ways-to-give/faq — fetched — charity's own figures.
• [S92] Feeding America, 2025 Annual Report (FY July 2024–June 2025) — https://www.feedingamerica.org/sites/default/files/2025-12/FA_25AnnReport_DIGITAL_final.pdf — fetched PDF, text extracted — charity's own figures.
• [S93] Feeding America, audited financial statements, year ended 30 June 2026 — https://www.feedingamerica.org/sites/default/files/2026-10/Feeding_America_26_FS_Final.pdf — fetched PDF, text extracted — primary.
• [S94] USDA FNS, "SNAP: Participation and Costs, 1969–2025", data as of 9 October 2026 — https://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/resource-files/snap-annualsummary-10.pdf — fetched PDF (curl) — primary.
• [S95] Wikipedia, "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" (wikitext via API, read 2026-11-05), SNAP section citing Axios, "Where SNAP cuts in Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' could hit Americans hardest", 3 July 2025 (https://www.axios.com/2025/07/03/trump-big-beautiful-bill-snap — 403, unread), Newsweek 30 June 2025 (unread), Texas Border Business 1 July 2025 (unread) — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Big_Beautiful_Bill_Act — tertiary.
• [S96] Wikipedia, "2025 United States federal government shutdown" (wikitext via API, read 2026-11-05), SNAP passages citing USA Today 27 Oct 2025, New York Times 28 Oct 2025, NBC News 31 Oct 2025, ABC News 7 Nov 2025, HuffPost 9 Nov 2025, NBC News 9 Nov 2025 (all unread) — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_United_States_federal_government_shutdown — tertiary.
• [S97] City Harvest, food drives page — https://www.cityharvest.org/food-drives/ — fetched — charity's own.
• [S98] City Harvest: FY2025 audited financial statements https://www.cityharvest.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/2025-City-Harvest-Inc-FS.pdf ; our story https://www.cityharvest.org/our-story/ ; food rescue https://www.cityharvest.org/food-rescue/ ; donation form https://secure.cityharvest.org/site/Donation2?2621.donation=form1&df_id=2621&mfc_pref=T — agent — primary / charity's own.

Group formats and harms

• [S99] Karlan D, List JA, "Does Price Matter in Charitable Giving? Evidence from a Large-Scale Natural Field Experiment", American Economic Review 2007;97(5):1774–1793 — https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.97.5.1774 and https://ideas.repec.org/a/aea/aecrev/v97y2007i5p1774-1793.html — fetched abstracts — research.
• [S100] Meier S, "Do Subsidies Increase Charitable Giving in the Long Run? Matching Donations in a Field Experiment", Journal of the European Economic Association 2007;5(6):1203–1222 — https://ideas.repec.org/a/tpr/jeurec/v5y2007i6p1203-1222.html — IDEAS and OpenAlex abstracts — research.
• [S101] Huck S, Rasul I, "Matched fundraising: Evidence from a natural field experiment", Journal of Public Economics 2011;95(5–6):351–362 — https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/pubeco/v95y2011i5p351-362.html — IDEAS abstract — research.
• [S102] Shang J, Croson R, "A Field Experiment in Charitable Contribution: The Impact of Social Information on the Voluntary Provision of Public Goods", Economic Journal 2009;119(540):1422–1439 — https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/econjl/v119y2009i540p1422-1439.html — IDEAS abstract — research.
• [S103] Frey BS, Meier S, "Social Comparisons and Pro-social Behavior: Testing 'Conditional Cooperation' in a Field Experiment", American Economic Review 2004;94(5):1717–1722 — https://ideas.repec.org/a/aea/aecrev/v94y2004i5p1717-1722.html — IDEAS abstract — research.
• [S104] Smith S, Windmeijer F, Wright E, "Peer Effects in Charitable Giving: Evidence from the (Running) Field", Economic Journal 2015;125(585):1053–1071 — https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/econjl/v125y2015i585p1053-1071.html — IDEAS abstract — research.
• [S105] Castillo M, Petrie R, Wardell C, "Fundraising through online social networks: A field experiment on peer-to-peer solicitation", Journal of Public Economics 2014;114:29–35 — https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/pubeco/v114y2014icp29-35.html — IDEAS abstract — research.
• [S106] DellaVigna S, List JA, Malmendier U, "Testing for Altruism and Social Pressure in Charitable Giving", NBER Working Paper 15629 (QJE 2012) — https://www.nber.org/papers/w15629 — fetched — research.
• [S107] Breman A, "Give more tomorrow: Two field experiments on altruism and intertemporal choice", Journal of Public Economics 2011;95(11):1349–1357 — https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/pubeco/v95y2011i11p1349-1357.html — IDEAS abstract — research.
• [S108] Caviola L, Greene JD, "Boosting the impact of charitable giving with donation bundling and micromatching", Science Advances 2023, DOI 10.1126/sciadv.ade7987 — https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.ade7987 — Crossref API abstract — research.
• [S109] Caviola L, Schubert S, Teperman E, Moss D, Greenberg S, Faber NS, "Donors vastly underestimate differences in charities' effectiveness", Judgment and Decision Making 2020, DOI 10.1017/S1930297500007452 — https://doi.org/10.1017/S1930297500007452 — Crossref API abstract — research.
• [S110] Karlan D, Wood DH, "The Effect of Effectiveness: Donor Response to Aid Effectiveness in a Direct Mail Fundraising Experiment", NBER Working Paper 20047 (April 2014, revised July 2015) — https://www.nber.org/papers/w20047 — fetched — research.
• [S111] Wilhelm MO, Brown E, Rooney PM, Steinberg R, "The intergenerational transmission of generosity", Journal of Public Economics 2008;92(10–11):2146–2156 — https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/pubeco/v92y2008i10-11p2146-2156.html — IDEAS abstract — research.
• [S112] Fundraising Effectiveness Project, 2026 Q2 report — https://publications.fepreports.org/ (redirect from https://data.givingtuesday.org/fep-report/) — fetched — industry.
• [S113] Giving What We Can, "About us" (11,401 lifetime 10% pledgers; "donated over $500 million USD") — https://www.givingwhatwecan.org/about-us — fetched — charity's own figures.
• [S114] Philanthropy Together, "In Abundance" collective giving report page ($3.1bn 2017–2023) — https://philanthropytogether.org/in-abundance/ — fetched — industry.
• [S115] ReThink Orphanages (Better Care Network) — https://bettercarenetwork.org/rethink-orphanages (redirect from https://rethinkorphanages.org/) — fetched — advocacy coalition. Note: the page carried an unrelated spam paragraph; ignored.
• [S116] Goldman PS et al., "Institutionalisation and deinstitutionalisation of children 2: policy and practice recommendations for global, national, and local actors", Lancet Child Adolesc Health 2020;4:606–633, PMID 32589873 — https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC7311356/fullTextXML — Europe PMC full text — primary.
• [S117] van IJzendoorn MH et al., "Institutionalisation and deinstitutionalisation of children 1: a systematic and integrative review of evidence regarding effects on development", Lancet Psychiatry 2020;7:703–720, PMID 32589867 — https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32589867/ — E-utilities record (no abstract in PubMed; Lancet page blocked) — primary, unread.
• [S118] Guttentag DA, "The possible negative impacts of volunteer tourism", International Journal of Tourism Research 2009, DOI 10.1002/jtr.727 — https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.727 — Crossref API abstract — research.
• [S119] Wydick B, Katz E, Janet B, "Do in-kind transfers damage local markets? The case of TOMS shoe donations in El Salvador", Journal of Development Effectiveness 2014, DOI 10.1080/19439342.2014.919012 — https://doi.org/10.1080/19439342.2014.919012 — OpenAlex API abstract (T&F page 403) — research.
• [S120] Eisensee T, Strömberg D, "News Droughts, News Floods, and U.S. Disaster Relief", Quarterly Journal of Economics 2007;122(2):693–728 — https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/qjecon/v122y2007i2p693-728..html — IDEAS and OpenAlex abstracts — research.
• [S121] Lumos home (2025 impact figures; no prevalence figures on the page) — https://www.wearelumos.org/ — fetched — charity's own.

Organisation checks (both sub-agents, 2026-11-05)

• [S122] ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer: GiveWell https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/208625442 ; Taimaka https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/843964208 ; ALIMA USA https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/260397519 ; IRC https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/135660870 ; Action Against Hunger USA https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/133327220 ; UNICEF USA https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/131760110 ; Feeding America https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/363673599 ; City Harvest https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/133170676 — agent — primary (IRS data; full-filing views blocked).
• [S123] Charity Navigator: https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/208625442 ; /ein/843964208 ; /ein/260397519 ; /ein/135660870 ; /ein/133327220 ; /ein/131760110 ; /ein/363673599 ; /ein/133170676 ; /ein/135562162 (Helen Keller) ; /ein/980627052 (Malaria Consortium US) ; /ein/452368993 (New Incentives) ; /ein/203069841 (AMF) — agent — evaluator (ratings published 5–6 October 2026 where dated).
• [S124] BBB Wise Giving Alliance: GiveWell https://give.org/charity-reviews/community-development-and-civic-organizations/givewell-in-oakland-ca-1116-879399 ; IRC https://give.org/charity-reviews/relief-and-development/international-rescue-committee-in-new-york-ny-3041 ; Action Against Hunger https://give.org/charity-reviews/other-charitable-organizations/action-against-hunger-in-new-york-ny-9999-636 ; UNICEF USA https://give.org/charity-reviews/children-and-youth/unicef-usa-in-new-york-ny-9999-1982 ; Feeding America https://give.org/charity-reviews/human-services/feeding-america-in-chicago-il-9999-2331 ; City Harvest https://give.org/charity-reviews/human-services/city-harvest-inc-in-brooklyn-ny-0121-153065 — agent — evaluator.
• [S125] The Clear Fund (GiveWell), 2025 audited consolidated financial statements (auditor signed 14 October 2026) — https://files.givewell.org/files/ClearFund/Clear_Fund_2025_audited_financial_statements.pdf ; GiveWell donation form https://secure.givewell.org/ — agent — primary.
• [S126] IRC 2025–26: The New Humanitarian, "IRC cutting thousands of staff after US aid freeze", 19 February 2025 https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/news/2025/02/19/irc-cutting-thousands-staff-after-us-aid-freeze ; Democracy Now headlines 20 February 2025 https://www.democracynow.org/2025/2/20/headlines/international_rescue_committee_lays_off_thousands_of_workers_amid_trumps_spending_freeze ; WARN Tracker, 56 layoffs effective 30 Sept 2026 https://www.warntracker.com/layoff/international-rescue-committee-2026-09-30 ; Modesto Bee via Yahoo, 5 August 2026 https://www.yahoo.com/news/us/articles/layoffs-refugee-resettlement-program-impact-211407011.html ; Semafor, 22 September 2026 https://www.semafor.com/article/09/22/2026/world-has-entered-age-of-impunity-amid-global-aid-cuts-miliband-says ; IRC FY2025 annual report https://www.rescue.org/2025annualreport — agent — news / industry / charity's own.
• [S127] USAID OIG / DOJ press release, 19 March 2021, IRC $6,934,500 False Claims Act settlement — https://oig.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/2022-02/Department-of-Justice-PressRelease-031921.pdf and https://www.oversight.gov/investigative-press-releases/International-Rescue-Committee-%E2%80%9CIRC%E2%80%9D-Agrees-Pay-69-Million-Settle — agent — primary (government).
• [S128] IRC Ethics & Compliance Unit FY2023 annual report (January 2024) — https://rescue.org/sites/default/files/2024-01/ECU_FY23-Annual-Report_Final_EN.pdf — agent — charity's own.
• [S129] Alliance magazine, "GiveWell in turmoil after 'horrible lapse of judgement' by founders", 1 April 2008 — https://www.alliancemagazine.org/news/givewell-in-turmoil-after-horrible-lapse-of-judgement-by-founders/ — agent — news.
• [S130] Action contre la Faim, "Action Against Hunger is forced to close its U.S. aid-funded programs", 28 February 2025 — https://www.actioncontrelafaim.org/en/news/press/action-against-hunger-is-forced-to-close-its-u-s-aid-funded-programs/ — agent — charity's own.
• [S131] Feeding America press releases: CEO departure, 14 August 2025 https://www.feedingamerica.org/about-us/press-room/feeding-america-announces-ceo-claire-babineaux-fontenot-to-leave-2026 ; Denis McDonough named CEO, 25 February 2026 https://www.feedingamerica.org/about-us/press-room/denis-mcdonough-named-feeding-america-CEO ; press room https://www.feedingamerica.org/about-us/press-room ; homepage https://www.feedingamerica.org/ ; donate https://give.feedingamerica.org/a/donate — agent — charity's own.
• [S132] Top-charity sites: Helen Keller Intl https://helenkellerintl.org/ and https://helenkellerintl.org/newsroom/ ; New Incentives https://www.newincentives.org/ ; Against Malaria Foundation https://www.againstmalaria.com/ ; Malaria Consortium https://www.malariaconsortium.org/ (403, unread) — agent — charity's own.
• [S133] ALIMA financial transparency index https://alima.ngo/en/about-us/financial-transparency/ ; ALIMA 2025 annual report web page (17 July 2026) https://alima.ngo/en/news/on-the-ground/from-resilience-hope-alima-2025-annual-report/ ; ALIMA home https://alima.ngo/en/ ; Taimaka blog https://taimaka.org/blog ; Charity Navigator / ProPublica as above — agent — charity's own / primary.

Not fetched today, by name, so the gaps are visible: Save the Children 28 Aug 2025 release (403); the Reuters report of the Secretary of State's denial that aid cuts caused deaths (research-file snippet only); Giving USA 2026 figures (page gave none); Hunger Free America pages (JavaScript-only); Benefits Data Trust closure; the USDA ERS decision on the 2025 food security report; any FY2026 apportionment or obligation data for Nutrition and Title II; CBO's estimate for P.L. 119-21 (cbo.gov topic page 403); the full texts of the Cochrane reviews; Charity Navigator Impact & Measurement scores for GiveWell, Taimaka and ALIMA USA (not published).

No tracking on any link.Ticks stay on this device.What changedContested