<p>In this paper I develop a Kantian alternative to effective altruism, which I call enlightened beneficence. Firstly, I argue that a Kantian framework, based on the standard of universalizability and the ideal of humanity as an end in itself, is strongly committed to impartial beneficence. In fact, Kant anticipated the idea of the expanding circle of morality as an inclusive shift toward a point of view that is universally impartial. Secondly, I propose a distinction between absolute effectiveness, aligned with utilitarian maximization, and relative effectiveness, which focuses on optimizing outcomes within given constraints and is integrated in a Kantian framework that combines value pluralism with procedural monism. I argue that while consequence evaluation is contentious at a foundational level in Kantian ethics, it is inherent in fulfilling the imperfect duty of beneficence. Kant’s practical considerations about effective aid reflect a concern for impact and evidence-based decision-making. In the third section, I will illustrate how a Kantian approach broadens the scope of global aid to include interventions that effectively improve human agency, not just people’s welfare. Finally, I argue that the intellectual sources of using reason and evidence to improve society lie in the Enlightenment movement and the rise of experimental social sciences. Enlightened beneficence can overcome some of the limitations of effective altruism by focusing on rational compassion rather than strict calculations of lives saved.</p>