AI safety needs capital — here are some of the best projects even small donors can help

A major shift is occurring in artificial intelligence safety funding, as one of the field’s largest donors – Good Ventures, a philanthropic foundation that previously provided over half of all AI safety funding – recalibrates its giving strategy. This transformation has created unexpected gaps in the funding landscape, but also presents a unique opportunity for new donors to make significant impacts. With established organizations now operating at reduced capacity and promising new initiatives emerging, the current moment offers philanthropists a rare chance to shape the future of AI safety before the field attracts broader institutional attention.

Current funding landscape: Good Ventures, which previously provided over 50% of philanthropic AI safety funding, has recently stopped or reduced funding across several key areas.

• Funding has been cut or reduced for Republican-leaning think tanks, post-alignment causes, rationality community initiatives, and high school outreach programs
• Non-US think tanks, technical safety non-profits, and political campaigns are experiencing funding gaps
• Organizations deemed below Good Ventures’ funding threshold are also affected, including most agent foundations work

Emerging opportunities: The funding shift has created a significant disparity in capital access, with many organizations now operating with limited resources.

• Affected organizations can typically access only about 25% of available philanthropic capital
• The funding bar for these organizations is now 1.5 to 3 times higher than before
• This creates opportunities for donors to fill critical gaps in underfunded areas

Notable funding targets: Several organizations have been identified as particularly worthy of consideration for additional funding.

• SecureBio, a leading biorisk organization focusing on AI-Bio intersection, could utilize up to $1M in additional funding
• Regional opportunities exist for non-US donors, particularly in supporting AI governance non-profits like CLTR (UK) and CeSIA (France)
• The Center for AI Safety and its Political Action Fund, led by Dan Hendrycks, have demonstrated success in AI policy but lack Open Philanthropy funding
• Technical evaluation organizations like METR and Apollo Research require additional support for compute resources and research expansion

Strategic considerations: The current funding environment presents unique advantages for strategic donors.

• Smaller donors can act as “angel donors” for promising new organizations, potentially identifying opportunities that larger organizations might miss
• Diversifying funding sources can help reduce centralization risks
• Supporting organizations with funding gaps can achieve effectiveness comparable to or exceeding that of major foundations

Looking ahead: The AI safety funding landscape appears to be in transition, with potential implications for future opportunities.

• New donors, including Jed McCaleb’s Navigation Fund, are beginning to make larger grants
• The mainstreaming of AI safety is likely to attract more diverse funding sources
• Current funding gaps may represent a temporary opportunity for heightened impact
• Future opportunities may emerge in scalable AI alignment efforts, suggesting the potential for even greater impact

Broader implications: The evolving funding dynamics in AI safety present both challenges and opportunities, with the current moment potentially offering uniquely impactful giving opportunities before the field becomes more saturated with donors.