{
  "id": "source:current-problems-the-optimal-restriction",
  "commit": "8df2d0ddbc6d91b9841c6bbb94dbde1fc7c00137",
  "path": "src/content/problems/the-optimal-restriction.md",
  "sha256": "9c537a2f0738d0366c9d5e0ebafdc56657803d65f9fdaabbc9cb3d3835822c23",
  "byteLength": 844,
  "text": "---\ntitle: \"The Optimal Restriction\"\nnumber: 8\nstatement: \"When does restricting a gift help, and when does it harm?\"\nprogress: \"Evidence from natural experiments or trials on how restriction affects outcomes, including the conditions under which each kind of funding works better.\"\nconditions: [\"restriction-reflex\"]\nstatus: open\nbounty: \"Unfunded. The Question Bounties program will attach prizes once it is funded.\"\n---\n\n## Why it matters\n\nThe case for unrestricted funding is strong but mostly built on surveys of what charities prefer. A science of giving needs outcome evidence, including any cases where restriction does better.\n\n## Where to start\n\nLarge shifts toward unrestricted giving, such as funders that relaxed restrictions in 2020, are natural experiments. Comparing grantee outcomes before and after is a feasible first study.\n",
  "hash": "b2ba44826c6bbc3b74ed151b93049f6b2d574e4653710c8bf06d27035adee8f8"
}