This question resolves positively if GiveWell gives a grant or publishes a recommendation that grants be given to fund Eyeglasses to improve workers' manual dexterity on or before December 31, 2026. Or if a charity undertaking the same work is designated a "Top Charity" or a recipient of "All Funds" before the deadline. This resolves according to a statement from GiveWell or a credible news organisation.
It resolves "No" otherwise.
The most likely resolution mechanism is that GiveWell writes "yes" in the column "Have we recommended one or more grants to support this program?" in the “Eyeglasses to improve workers' manual dexterity” row of the GiveWell program reviews spreadsheet (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1TG7WRU85p1SEjir-5qvIEg4kVG9a4Lnzdgwcub8aKSs/edit#gid=0) or a spreadsheet that supersedes it.
N.B. Eyeglasses can be distributed for the purpose of improving manual dexterity or other purposes. The funds must go towards the distribution of eyeglasses for the purpose of improving workers' manual dexterity, not a charity that largely does other work.
-- Note --
Can you find issues with this question. I will reward good comments with mana.
-- Background --
GiveWell has recommended grants to over 10 charities over the years. They are currently investigating 12 charity areas with other areas of research in the pipeline including Eyeglasses to improve workers' manual dexterity
The following is a very brief summary of GiveWell’s explanation of the topic
"Suffering from visual impairment may cause a loss of productivity at work, which may, in turn, affect incomes and employment opportunities. These economic effects are likely to be especially pronounced for individuals who rely on their manual dexterity (fine motor control) and/or visual discrimination for their work.
Reddy et al. 2018 is an RCT conducted on tea pickers in Assam, India. It found that, among the population of workers diagnosed with presbyopia, those randomly selected to receive eyeglasses experienced a 21.7% increase in productivity (95% confidence interval: 18.6-24.8%), measured in terms of the weight of tea picked, relative to those who did not.
There have been no studies on the effect of being given eyeglasses on the productivity of those who rely on their manual dexterity who work inside.“
Betting this down because the case for this intervention is that eyeglasses are (a) cheap and (b) generate lots of productivity improvements for workers, yet the workers and their employers are not already buying sufficient eyeglasses. This despite workers/employers probably capturing almost all of the economic gain between them, despite the payback period for the investment being short, and despite said gain being directly and almost immediately measurable for a treated individual.
This suggests to me either that the gains are not in fact nearly as big as the Reddy RCT estimates, or maybe that all you need to do is tell people about how eyeglasses make them money. In the former case, perhaps Givewell will discover this and decide not to fund this cause area; in the latter, Givewell will presumably not be funding direct distribution.
Estimated a 24% base rate among programs GiveWell listed in 2017 but had not given a grant too yet (https://www.givewell.org/research/intervention-reports/august-2017-version)