My intuition is that the narrowing of CEEALAR is probably the correct choice: • The major funders in the space seem to be more likely to fund GCR interventions. • Insofar as the funders are interested in Global Health, they tend to prefer direct interventions like the Against Malaria Foundation and insofar as people want to kick off new projects Charity Entrepreneurship provides more specialized support. • Independently of cause area priorities, focusing the project more narrowly makes it more legible for funders (harder to evaluate a project that does a little bit of this and a little bit of that) • Focusing the project more narrowly makes it more competitive for high-potential grantees (who want to know that there will be other people with the same interest to bounce ideas off).
My intuition is that the narrowing of CEEALAR is probably the correct choice:
• The major funders in the space seem to be more likely to fund GCR interventions.
• Insofar as the funders are interested in Global Health, they tend to prefer direct interventions like the Against Malaria Foundation and insofar as people want to kick off new projects Charity Entrepreneurship provides more specialized support.
• Independently of cause area priorities, focusing the project more narrowly makes it more legible for funders (harder to evaluate a project that does a little bit of this and a little bit of that)
• Focusing the project more narrowly makes it more competitive for high-potential grantees (who want to know that there will be other people with the same interest to bounce ideas off).