Here's an initial brainstorm of project types for which there might be substantial ongoing demand from EA organizations, perhaps enough for them to be provided by one or more EA consultancies:
Run an EA-related RFP, filter the responses, summarize the strongest submissions for the client to consider funding
And also writes in the same post, in relation to why he's enthusiastic about EA consultancies:
Why not just use RFPs? I'm more optimistic about the consultancy model because it can more often leverage an existing relationship with an existing organization that is known to have hit some quality threshold for similar-ish projects in the past. In contrast, with RFPs the funder often need to build a new relationship for every funded project, has much less context on each grantee on average, and grantees are less accountable for performance because they have a lower expectation for future funding from that funder compared to a consultancy that is more fundamentally premised on repeat business with particular clients.
I think it'd be good to briefly discuss the distinction between RFPs, prizes, impact certificates, regular grantmaking, and maybe hiring, and the pros and cons of RFPs relative to those things.
RFPs are a bit like job ads for organizations, usually for contract work. Instead of hiring an individual for a job, an RFP is put out to hire an organization or individual for a contract, and there’s much less management overhead than if the project was done in-house. (If you’d like a more detailed explanation of how they work, please see Appendix A.)
The reason why RFPs are amazing is that they fix an underlying problem with most grantmaking: you can make an idea happen even if nobody is currently working on it.
Think of it from the perspective of a large foundation. You’re a program officer there and just had an awesome idea for how to make AI safer. You’re excited. You have tons of resources at your disposal. All you have to do is find an organization that’s doing the idea, then give them oodles of money to scale it up.
The problem is, you look around and find that nobody’s doing it. Or maybe there’s one team doing it, but they’re not very competent, and you worry they’ll do a poor job of it.
Unfortunately for you, you’re out of luck. You could go start it yourself, but you’re in a really high impact role and running a startup wouldn’t be your comparative advantage. In your spare time you could try to convince existing orgs to do the idea, but that’s socially difficult and it’s hard to find the right team who’d be interested. Unfortunately, the usual grantmaking route is limited to choosing from existing organizations and projects.
Now, if you had RFPs in your toolkit, you’d be able to put out an RFP for the idea. You could say, “The Nonlinear Fund is looking to fund people to do this idea. We’ll give up to $200,000 for the right team(s) to do it.” Then people will come.
Values-aligned organizations that might not have known that you were interested in these projects will apply. Individuals who find the idea exciting and high impact will come forward. It will also help spread the idea, since people will know that there’s money and interest in the area.
This is why Nonlinear (1) will do RFPs in addition to the usual grantmaking. This will allow our prioritization research to not be limited to only evaluating existing projects.
This would be analogous to the Job listings tags, and sort of the inverse of the Funding requests tag
This overlaps in some ways with Get involved and Requests (open), but seems like a sufficiently distinct thing that might be sufficiently useful to collect in one place that it's worth having a tag for this
I only have time to plant the initial seeds of those things, but hopefully someone else can do more on them!
Some ideas/arguments that could be drawn on for the body of this entry
Muehlhauser writes:
And also writes in the same post, in relation to why he's enthusiastic about EA consultancies:
I think it'd be good to briefly discuss the distinction between RFPs, prizes, impact certificates, regular grantmaking, and maybe hiring, and the pros and cons of RFPs relative to those things.
Kat Woods writes:
I think this entry should serve three roles:
I only have time to plant the initial seeds of those things, but hopefully someone else can do more on them!