We’re excited to announce the launch of Focus Philanthropy, a new organization that connects philanthropists with outstanding giving opportunities to reduce the harms of factory farming.
Focus Philanthropy aims to fill a gap in the effective animal advocacy space. The factory farming cause area is both fast-changing and complex in its variety of approaches and we aim to reduce barriers for new funders interested in entering the space. We offer thoughtful, tailored funding advice and engage with donors to increase their commitment and inspire them to support impactful giving opportunities within the cause area over the long term.
Our core principles
- Impact: We help philanthropists maximize the impact of their donations, ensuring their funds go where they can do the most good.
- Evidence: Our recommendations are based on research, the current state of scientific evidence, and expert judgment.
- Independence: Our advice is always free of charge, allowing us to provide unbiased and impartial giving recommendations.
Focus Philanthropy was founded by Leah Edgerton and Manja Gärtner.
Leah has extensive experience in effective animal advocacy ranging from volunteering and direct work to having acted as a leader, mentor, and advisor. She previously worked as a philanthropic advisor, at Animal Charity Evaluators, and at ProVeg International.
Manja has several years of experience as a researcher, grantmaker, and advisor in effective animal advocacy. She previously worked as a philanthropic advisor and at Animal Charity Evaluators. She holds a Ph.D. in economics.
Please approach us directly with any feedback or questions.
How does Focus Philanthropy compare and contrast with Farmed Animal Funders?
Farmed Animal Funders has a minimum requirement of 250k donation per year to qualify for their donor advising services. Focus Philanthropy doesn't list a minimum that I can see. Other than that, I'm not sure what the differences are.
Equally enthusiastic about your project, good luck. Would love to hear the answer to this though -- and also why the broad name? Would you ever move beyond factory farming?
There's an annoying trend of funders using non-descriptive names. It makes it harder to remember what they do. It seems mutually negative for a bunch of reasons.
1. Makes you appear lower down search rankings for relevant terms e.g. "Farmed Animal Welfare Funder"
2. Makes it harder to remember what they do, so people forget and have to click on their website over and over to remind themselves
-> more relevant people forgetting what you do and thus not applying & more irrelevant people viewing your information (thus wasting their time)
Compare and contrast to something like "Mental Health Funding Circle" or "EA Animal Welfare Fund" where it's immediately apparent to both the relevant and irrelevant.