Strong upvote because it’s an important question to raise. I am a newcomer/outsider, and my reaction comes with all the downsides and (potential) advantages that implies . . .
It sounds like you got some feedback, although it may not have been stated clearly. Reading between the lines, it sounds like the grantmakers—who have limited time for independent research—do not have much relevant knowledge about Romania, so you would have some extra tasks that someone who was seeking funding for a group in (say) a large US city would not. In the US-city example, the reviewer would assume—or could easily verify—that there was a reasonably-sized group of potential future donors and/or potential full-time EAs to justify the expenses of building a community and the risk of failure. The reviewer probably has a better sense of whether the proposed project will work, because they would know about projects in similiar US cities. Do you think you made a good business case for (a) the likelihood that your project would succeed and (b) the upside of the project succeeding? I am not a grantmaker, but for (a) I’d want to hear about what your group has done without funding, and for (b) I’d want to hear about the people you have already recruited (for lack of a better word), where you planned to expand your group’s reach, and why you thought funding would help that happen.
I could be reading your post incorrectly, but it leaves me with the vague idea that you may think that (1) community building is important as an end to itself, not as a means to ultimate ends; and (2) a comparison to what gets funded in other environments is an important means of evaluation—possibly for fairness reasons. I doubt either impression would help your grant with most funders in this space. I think the reason I get this vague impression is that your post doesn’t seem to engage with the feedback implied by questions like “what’s the comparative advantage of Romania”? You may not think either of those things, but it might be helpful to read through your grant proposal (or ask someone else to do so) to see if anything in them gives off either of these impressions.
Strong upvote because it’s an important question to raise. I am a newcomer/outsider, and my reaction comes with all the downsides and (potential) advantages that implies . . .
It sounds like you got some feedback, although it may not have been stated clearly. Reading between the lines, it sounds like the grantmakers—who have limited time for independent research—do not have much relevant knowledge about Romania, so you would have some extra tasks that someone who was seeking funding for a group in (say) a large US city would not. In the US-city example, the reviewer would assume—or could easily verify—that there was a reasonably-sized group of potential future donors and/or potential full-time EAs to justify the expenses of building a community and the risk of failure. The reviewer probably has a better sense of whether the proposed project will work, because they would know about projects in similiar US cities. Do you think you made a good business case for (a) the likelihood that your project would succeed and (b) the upside of the project succeeding? I am not a grantmaker, but for (a) I’d want to hear about what your group has done without funding, and for (b) I’d want to hear about the people you have already recruited (for lack of a better word), where you planned to expand your group’s reach, and why you thought funding would help that happen.
I could be reading your post incorrectly, but it leaves me with the vague idea that you may think that (1) community building is important as an end to itself, not as a means to ultimate ends; and (2) a comparison to what gets funded in other environments is an important means of evaluation—possibly for fairness reasons. I doubt either impression would help your grant with most funders in this space. I think the reason I get this vague impression is that your post doesn’t seem to engage with the feedback implied by questions like “what’s the comparative advantage of Romania”? You may not think either of those things, but it might be helpful to read through your grant proposal (or ask someone else to do so) to see if anything in them gives off either of these impressions.