How FWI Calculates Cost-Effectiveness

This post explains how we calculate cost-effectiveness at FWI—a key part of how we prioritize and evaluate our programs. Specifically, we will:

1. Give an overview of the programs FWI runs

2. Explain the elements of our cost-effectiveness calculation

3. Share our current cost-effectiveness numbers

4. Discuss the values guiding our process

FWI’s Programs

At present, the Alliance for Responsible Aquaculture (ARA) is FWI’s only implementation program. We started the ARA in 2021 and are currently working with over 180 farms committed to improving water quality and maintaining stocking densities suitable for improved fish welfare. You can explore the ARA in more depth in previous posts.

FWI also investigates other interventions that may turn into programs in the future. We are continuing this exploration because the ARA has not yet met our minimum scaling thresholds. While we work to improve this (e.g., see our remote-sensing model), we want to widen our bets by exploring alternative program options. You can read our posts for more details on these projects.

How We Calculate Cost-Effectiveness

We aim to improve the lives of as many fishes as possible. Our goal is at least 20 fishes per dollar for any program we scale (see our 2026 Goal). Our process has three main steps:

1. Measure program impact: Count the number of fishes helped via an FWI-approved method, such as the Welfare Assessment Protocol or ARA-specific Impact Counting Process (more on this in an upcoming blog post).

   
   

2. Calculate total program costs, including:

   • Direct programmatic expenses (e.g., equipment, transportation, program staff time)

   • Shared operational expenses (e.g., office rent, legal fees, admin support), allocated proportionally to the number of staff working in the program

     
     

3. Calculate cost-effectiveness: Divide the total number of fishes helped by the total program cost.

   
   

This standardized approach allows us to compare programs over time and across different interventions to ensure we allocate our resources appropriately. You can find more details on each of these three steps here.

Organizational Cost-Effectiveness

The process above is intended to calculate program-specific cost-effectiveness. We also calculate organizational cost-effectiveness, which includes all costs since our founding—including research, early operations, and similar.

On our website, we share both these numbers, allowing supporters to make their own decision about which number they prefer.

Current Cost-Effectiveness

As mentioned above, the ARA is FWI’s only program at this point. Its programmatic cost-effectiveness (calculated per the process above) is currently at 13 fishes per dollar. 

Our organizational cost-effectiveness is at 1 fish per dollar.

This cost-effectiveness is still below our 20 fishes per dollar target (which refers to programmatic cost-effectiveness). You can read more about how we plan to improve this in 2026 here.

The Values Guiding Our Process

We have formalized our cost-effectiveness calculation to ensure consistency and comparability across programs. The final process was guided by the following values:

1. Conservative estimates: We err on the higher end for costs and on the lower end for impact. We prefer to under- rather than overestimate our impact.

   
   

2. Honesty and Transparency: In line with our organizational values, we share this process publicly and welcome feedback from readers.

Finally, thank you to our supporters: Every fish we helped has been possible because of you, and as of now, that’s 13 fishes for every dollar spent and over 4.8 million in total!