Thanks for the post, Jamie!

Given the call for the Ask me Anything, I was wondering if you would be able to share additional context on the following from your application form:

Important Note: The EA Infrastructure Fund and the Long-Term Future Fund are currently unable to make grants with an end date after August 31st 2025, and any applications to these funds must have a grant period which ends on or before this date. We are working on a solution to this, and hope to be able to remove this restriction as soon as possible. If you were intending to apply for a grant past this date, you are welcome to apply for funding up until August 31st 2025, and once we’re able to make grants past this date again you will be able to apply again for the remaining period.

I'm specifically interested in asking about:

once we’re able to make grants past this date again you will be able to apply again for the remaining period

Is there a risk that EAIF will have to pause grantmaking after August if the issue is not solved, or do you expect this not to be a problem by then?

Thanks for providing such a quick update, Joris! 

we are not currently setting up the systems to provide part-time organizer financial support, but we are exploring whether to offer financial support for part-time organizers in the future

Would you recommend that uni group organisers in need of a part-time salary apply for funding from elsewhere in the meantime, such as EAIF?

new introductory resource for AI risk

Is there a public link to this? :)

On a related note, if all of these grants were rejected, would the applicants asking for 10-25% less funding would make them pass your bar? Do you often end up funding the "MVP" version of a project as opposed to the "mainline budget" they propose?

Thanks for sharing this, I have been really enjoying reading the comms coming from EAIF/LTFF lately! Here are some observations/feedback on the post:

Below is a fictionalized list of grants the Long-term Future Fund (LTFF) narrowly rejected or accepted in the last 6 months. We aim to broadly convey which grants we barely rejected, while anonymizing any individual one.
[...]
As the grants we’ve fictionalized are grants LTFF narrowly accepted or rejected

After reading the post, I feel like I really miss knowing which of these did or did not pass your bar. I understand that these are fictional examples that are all very close to the bar, but I think others might feel the same way. If you think it might be worth spelling out why you don't think it makes sense to give explicit verdicts.

The above fictionalized examples illustrate grants that are at or just below our current funding threshold

Or perhaps this means all of them were rejected? (It might just be my English, but it's not clear to me if something is at your funding bar, then you would accept or reject it)

Thanks for sharing this! It was a wonderful and inspiring read, and I feel like the CB ecosystem really needs this kind of content. Hope many of our fellow CBs get to read it. :)

I put the list in this doc, so anyone can add new entries and fix broken links etc. :)

Yeah it would be! tbh i just wanted to publish it fast as originally it wasn't intended for the forum, but figured I would share it. I might add the hyperlinks later

All of these map onto my understanding of what they wouldn't fund, but note that they have funded Atlas in the past, and also provide funding for Non-trivial which engage with young people including high-schoolers. They also fund ML4Good for in-person bootcamps

Is https://www.impactcolabs.com/ still active? They don't have the feature with the reputation system, but at least it's a start