GiveBetter x SF

What we learned from 100 reports

Research synthesis · 11 September 2026

Summary

Our first places to investigate are ReCARES, Project Homeless Connect and Pacific Hearing Connection. They connect relatively specific services to identifiable health needs. Pacific Vision Foundation remains a fourth diligence lead, but its whole-gift calculation captures only first-eye health; most portfolio health is unquantified. A patient-care restriction would be a different giving decision.

These are recommendations for where to focus giving diligence, not verified prices for purchasing health outcomes. General mission support is possible today. For a larger effectiveness-driven gift, we would first confirm the extra useful care, complete cost and available capacity.

What seems promising?

Look for a specific obstacle between a person and effective care. Reused medical equipment, supported hearing care and timely dental or eye treatment can combine modest cash costs with existing clinical knowledge and donated resources. But more screening is not necessarily more completed treatment, and a donated device must fit its recipient and remain useful.

The question is what an additional gift changes. Does it remove a cash constraint, or add demand to a full clinic? What care would happen anyway, and how much sooner or better would the outcome be? Donated staff time, equipment and public services have real costs even when they do not appear on the charity’s bill.

Housing and policy are not ruled out. GLIDE’s housing-prevention model illustrates a potentially valuable timely intervention, but rights, income and stability are only partly captured by health estimates. Less certain QALYs do not establish less total social value. Our clinical leads are easier to investigate, not proven universally superior.

How to compare the estimates

A better life means 10 additional QALYs. One QALY is one year of full-health equivalent; gains can be shared across people. Under $100,000 per better life requires more than 0.0001 additional QALY per donor dollar. It is a hypothesis to test, not a target for choosing assumptions.

A conditional program and an unrestricted organization gift answer different questions. GLIDE retains the whole Foundation gift while quantifying named clinical and housing health; the historical rental-assistance estimate answers a different question. Breathe now retains the whole gift while quantifying a limited clinical subset; it does not establish a complete expected return. NEMS assumes recurring support over 20 funded years. Project Homeless Connect models the designated project, not its whole fiscal sponsor.

Whole-cost estimates can omit substantial benefits in the other direction. The new Oakland Eviction Defense Center report is distinct from San Francisco Eviction Defense Collaborative: its $21.4M housing-health estimate does not replace that organization’s research.

We keep null, harmful and unfavorable findings. The HEPPAC correction shows why: removing repeated-rescue credit worsened the estimate, while a separate survival-prior revision improved it. Neither change establishes a cash-priced opportunity.

Our ten giving priorities

Editorial order, not numerical rank. None has a verified marginal health offer in the reviewed public evidence. The questions below are for a prospective donor; we have not contacted these organizations.

1. The ReCARES Network

Gift scope: Whole organization; partial equipment-health estimate.

General support route and physical handling constraints are documented. Existing training/software support does not establish an unfunded safe-placement increment.

What to confirm before a larger gift
  • What dated, fully costed inspection, repair, storage or access increment would an additional gift enable, with staff and space available?
  • How many additional unique Bay recipients would receive useful equipment beyond current funding and realistic alternatives, and will a purpose restriction be accepted?

Primary sources, reviewed 11 September 2026: Source 1 · Source 2

2. Project Homeless Connect

Gift scope: Whole designated sponsored project, not whole Community Initiatives; partial clinical-health estimate.

Project-designated giving, a dental waitlist and denture lottery are documented. Donation examples and a coordinator vacancy do not establish additional funded clinical slots.

What to confirm before a larger gift
  • Which eligible clinical queue could the gift shorten, with confirmed partner appointments and complete coordination, device and follow-up costs?
  • What current project funds and alternative coverage already support those patients, and will the fiscal sponsor accept the intended clinical designation?

Primary sources, reviewed 11 September 2026: Source 1 · Source 2 · Source 3

3. Pacific Hearing Connection

Gift scope: Whole accounting cost; modeled hearing-care component and unpriced donated resources.

Transport, language and device needs are described. The $129,987 Health Authority award supports training, education and mobile screening; $500 device contribution examples are not complete additional-fitting prices.

What to confirm before a larger gift
  • What additional completed fittings and supported use can a dated gift fund, including clinician capacity, suitable devices, transport, testing and follow-up?
  • How do patient fees, inventory, Health Authority and Ability Central commitments affect that increment, and will a fitting-specific restriction be accepted?

Primary sources, reviewed 11 September 2026: Source 1 · Source 2 · Source 3 · Source 4

4. Pacific Vision Foundation

Gift scope: Whole ordinary gift; first-eye earlier-care health only. Remaining 90% of assumed allocation health unquantified; historical restricted-program comparison retained.

Patient sponsorship and a $250 monthly surgery-support tier are advertised. Neither $250 nor its annual arithmetic establishes a complete additional-procedure price or accepted Bay/first-eye restriction.

What to confirm before a larger gift
  • How many additional completed eligible surgeries would the proposed gift enable, at full cost with committed surgeon, facility and follow-up capacity?
  • Will patient-care and relevant geography/procedure restrictions be accepted, and what funding and treatment timing would apply without the gift?

Primary sources, reviewed 11 September 2026: Source 1 · Source 2 · Source 3

5. Dentists on Wheels

Gift scope: Whole clinic organization; finite symptomatic relief only.

Lottery-like access and expansion aspirations are documented. $250 patient and $500 denture donation examples lack dated extra sessions, complete costs and a funding counterfactual.

What to confirm before a larger gift
  • What additional dated clinic sessions and unique completed symptomatic-treatment episodes could a gift fund, with committed clinical staff and a full budget?
  • Which patients otherwise wait or obtain alternative care, and which existing funds or partner subsidies already cover those episodes?

Primary sources, reviewed 11 September 2026: Source 1 · Source 2 · Source 3

6. Face to Face — Sonoma County AIDS Network

Gift scope: Whole organization cost; finite unique-person overdose-survival component, with other portfolio health unquantified.

Ongoing naloxone delivery and retrospective categorical rescue reports support the mechanism. Public support and existing distribution remain baseline; reported rescues do not identify prospective hazards or cash-created coverage.

What to confirm before a larger gift
  • What dated additional outreach, supply-access or response-support activity would a gift enable beyond current public and donor commitments, at full cost?
  • What unique-person, repeat-event and alternative-rescue evidence supports the expected additional coverage, and can the intended use be accepted and tracked?

Primary sources, reviewed 11 September 2026: Source 1 · Source 2 · Source 3

7. Friends of the Urban Forest

Gift scope: Whole organization; additional tree planting/care and uncertain finite health transfer.

Current yard-tree funding extends through August 2027; this does not establish street-tree funding room. Historical contract and donation examples are not a priced backlog of additional surviving trees.

What to confirm before a larger gift
  • Which approved but unfunded sites or establishment-care tasks could a dated gift activate, at full cost and with expected additional surviving tree-years?
  • How do current city maintenance, planting contracts, grants and donor commitments cover the same sites, and will a non-substituting purpose restriction be accepted?

Primary sources, reviewed 11 September 2026: Source 1 · Source 2 · Source 3

8. Breathe California

Gift scope: Whole organization gift cost; partial clinical health from cessation, child/adult asthma and prescription CPAP access. Remaining services and outside resources are incompletely quantified.

Current services and CPAP inventory constraints do not establish cash-created additional care. Public-funded asthma delivery, free cessation alternatives, donated machines and external clinical calibration remain part of the baseline and resource boundary.

What to confirm before a larger gift
  • What dated additional completed care could the gift fund—supported quitting, asthma home visits or safely calibrated CPAP episodes—with a full budget, suitable inventory and committed clinical capacity?
  • Which existing public payments, patient fees, other donors and realistic alternatives already cover that care, and will the organization accept and track the proposed purpose, Bay recipients and useful outcomes?

Primary sources, reviewed 11 September 2026: Source 1 · Source 2 · Source 3 · Source 4 · Source 5

9. GLIDE Foundation

Gift scope: Whole Foundation gift cost; partial clinical and housing health. Not a separate Memorial Church gift or a complete organization return.

Current Foundation services and historical consolidated accounts do not establish a Foundation-only marginal budget. Public prescribing, HSH/Abode rental support, partner resources and other donors remain in the baseline. A general gift is not an accepted clinical or rental restriction.

What to confirm before a larger gift
  • Which additional completed clinical or housing services would a dated Foundation gift fund, with a complete budget and confirmed staff or partner capacity?
  • How do public funding, private commitments, existing treatment and household alternatives cover the same services, and will the Foundation track the proposed allocation and unique Bay recipients?

Primary sources, reviewed 11 September 2026: Source 1 · Source 2 · Source 3

10. North East Medical Services

Gift scope: Foundation EIN94-3171797 is separate from operator EIN94-1722562. Ordinary-gift allocation and Bay health are unestimated; recurring HBV model is conditional only.

Current broad Foundation campaign cites flu vaccination and mold mitigation, not a priced HBV offer. Existing ReLink and routine care overlap the conditional model.

What to confirm before a larger gift
  • Which additional Bay patient panel or extension is outside current ReLink and routine-care commitments, with a dated full navigation and downstream-care budget?
  • What support duration, retained monitoring/treatment and alternative-care assumptions are justified, and will the Foundation accept and transfer the restricted gift to that work?

Primary sources, reviewed 11 September 2026: Source 1 · Source 2 · Source 3

Method and limits

The research library contains 79 Bay reports; 21 expanded-geography reports remain in the archive. This synthesis reviews their mechanisms, cost scope, additionality and funding evidence rather than sorting numbers alone. Shared clinical evidence and correlated assumptions mean 100 reports are not 100 independent experimental results.

Public donation examples, waitlists and reserves do not prove a marginal funding gap. A useful next step is a dated, accepted gift purpose with full delivery costs, available partner capacity, existing commitments and expected additional useful care. No organization is required to guarantee QALYs.

Each linked report preserves its sources, dates, model and uncertainties. The original 25-program ledger remains historical evidence, not the current recommendation list. Read all research or browse expanded geography.