Per our transparency page we are “funded through a combination of direct donations from members and other individuals, as well as grants from philanthropic foundations. So far our largest funders have been Open Philanthropy and the Future Fund.”
Would you consider making the main sources public, subject to their being willing (as eg Vox Future Perfect does), and if not, why not?
Yes, they are public on our transparency page and FAQ
What barriers would there be to receiving some or all operational support as a service from a legally unconnected org?
The main service we receive is finance support (reconciling donations, selling shares that are donated, regranting to other organisations etc). We could contract some of that (e.g. bookkeeping) but because we are the same legal entity it makes sense to be done together. If we were to spin off (become a different legal entity) we’d need to set up a new charity in both the UK and USA (not a small feat) cancel and restart all recurring donations and bequests etc (which we’re bound to lose people – especially bequests could be risky), transfer all contacts (huge privacy considerations) and IP, and do a lot of stakeholder management. There are other potential models here (e.g. start another nonprofit for the core operations but still use EVF as a fiscal sponsor for regranting in the US and UK) but I’d estimate many versions of this would put us back ~1-2 years at this stage in terms of potential growth and distraction from our core focus. I’m not against making steps in this direction (as I said in my original comment it’s something I’m thinking about) but I think that the complexity and distraction is severely underrated by the OP and many commenters.
Thanks for the reply, Luke. Is it reasonable to understand that if you were to start up a new GWWC-esque charity as an independent entity vs starting one as a new branch of EV, you’d expect the difference in costs primarily to be the extra work of gaining charitable status in whatever regions you needed it?
What are the main sources of your funding?
Per our transparency page we are “funded through a combination of direct donations from members and other individuals, as well as grants from philanthropic foundations. So far our largest funders have been Open Philanthropy and the Future Fund.”
Would you consider making the main sources public, subject to their being willing (as eg Vox Future Perfect does), and if not, why not?
Yes, they are public on our transparency page and FAQ
What barriers would there be to receiving some or all operational support as a service from a legally unconnected org?
The main service we receive is finance support (reconciling donations, selling shares that are donated, regranting to other organisations etc). We could contract some of that (e.g. bookkeeping) but because we are the same legal entity it makes sense to be done together. If we were to spin off (become a different legal entity) we’d need to set up a new charity in both the UK and USA (not a small feat) cancel and restart all recurring donations and bequests etc (which we’re bound to lose people – especially bequests could be risky), transfer all contacts (huge privacy considerations) and IP, and do a lot of stakeholder management. There are other potential models here (e.g. start another nonprofit for the core operations but still use EVF as a fiscal sponsor for regranting in the US and UK) but I’d estimate many versions of this would put us back ~1-2 years at this stage in terms of potential growth and distraction from our core focus. I’m not against making steps in this direction (as I said in my original comment it’s something I’m thinking about) but I think that the complexity and distraction is severely underrated by the OP and many commenters.
Thanks for the reply, Luke. Is it reasonable to understand that if you were to start up a new GWWC-esque charity as an independent entity vs starting one as a new branch of EV, you’d expect the difference in costs primarily to be the extra work of gaining charitable status in whatever regions you needed it?