I’m probably less informed than you are, but depending on what you mean by “sources of funders” I disagree.
I think if you can demonstrate getting valuable results and want funding to scale, people will be happy to fund you. My impression is that several people influencing >=6 digit allocations are genuinely looking for projects to fund that can be even more effective than what they’re currently funding.
I’m fairly confident that if anyone hosted a conference or online program, got good results, had a clear theory of change with measurable metrics, and gradually asked for funding to scale, people will be happy to fund that.
I’m probably less informed than you are, but depending on what you mean by “sources of funders” I disagree.
I think if you can demonstrate getting valuable results and want funding to scale, people will be happy to fund you. My impression is that several people influencing >=6 digit allocations are genuinely looking for projects to fund that can be even more effective than what they’re currently funding.
I’m fairly confident that if anyone hosted a conference or online program, got good results, had a clear theory of change with measurable metrics, and gradually asked for funding to scale, people will be happy to fund that.
Ah sorry I should have just said “3 main / larger scale funders” (op, eaif + meta funding circle). Funders from those groups include individuals.
But I was also unclear in my comment—I’ll clarify this soon.