That’s a great suggestion, thank you. It will take me a few days to figure this out, so I expect to reply in a week or so. (Edited Sat 27 Feb: Still need a bit longer, sorry.)
After looking more into this, we’ve decided not to evaluate applications for Community Building Grants during this grant application cycle. This is because we think CEA has a comparative advantage here due to their existing know-how, and they’re still taking some exceptional or easy-to-evaluate grant applications, so some of the most valuable work will still be funded. It’s currently unclear when CBG applications will reopen, but CEA is thinking carefully about this question and I’ll be coordinating with them.
That said, we’re interested in receiving applications from EA groups that aren’t typical community-building activities – e.g., new experiments, international community-building, spin-offs of local groups, etc. If you’re unsure whether your project qualifies, just send me a brief email.
I’m aware this isn’t the news you and others may have been hoping for, so I personally want to contribute to resolving this gap in the funding ecosystem long-term.
Edit: Huh, some people downvoted. If you have concerns about this comment or decision, please leave a comment or send me a PM.
I didn’t downvote your comment, though I am disappointed you won’t be considering applications this cycle. I hope that if CEA does choose to restrict CBG applications going forward (which seems to be under consideration per Harri) that the EAIF will fill the gap. FWIW I’d like to see EAIF funding this space even if CEA does open up applications, as I’d value diversifying funder perspectives more than any comparative advantage CEA might have.
That’s a great suggestion, thank you. It will take me a few days to figure this out, so I expect to reply in a week or so. (Edited Sat 27 Feb: Still need a bit longer, sorry.)
Thanks for investigating Jonas!
After looking more into this, we’ve decided not to evaluate applications for Community Building Grants during this grant application cycle. This is because we think CEA has a comparative advantage here due to their existing know-how, and they’re still taking some exceptional or easy-to-evaluate grant applications, so some of the most valuable work will still be funded. It’s currently unclear when CBG applications will reopen, but CEA is thinking carefully about this question and I’ll be coordinating with them.
That said, we’re interested in receiving applications from EA groups that aren’t typical community-building activities – e.g., new experiments, international community-building, spin-offs of local groups, etc. If you’re unsure whether your project qualifies, just send me a brief email.
I’m aware this isn’t the news you and others may have been hoping for, so I personally want to contribute to resolving this gap in the funding ecosystem long-term.
Edit: Huh, some people downvoted. If you have concerns about this comment or decision, please leave a comment or send me a PM.
I didn’t downvote your comment, though I am disappointed you won’t be considering applications this cycle. I hope that if CEA does choose to restrict CBG applications going forward (which seems to be under consideration per Harri) that the EAIF will fill the gap. FWIW I’d like to see EAIF funding this space even if CEA does open up applications, as I’d value diversifying funder perspectives more than any comparative advantage CEA might have.