Checked 12 September 2026.
The useful next question after finding a donor is what the money enables and what obligations accompany it. This pass found two distinct arrangements: substantial support for a policy organization that asserts strategic independence, and smaller recurring support whose published conditions explicitly require alignment with an organizing movement’s priorities.
CLTR annual report 2024, published 2025 · CLTR: support our work
CLTR’s report, published in 2025, describes a £4m three-year Open Philanthropy commitment plus matching up to £3m. It says grant commitments deny funders influence over strategy. Its current support page separately offers expert access and advocacy opportunities. Together these disclose resources and relationship benefits; neither a bank receipt nor a hidden donor veto has been established.
CLTR annual report 2024, published 2025 · CLTR: support our work
The April 2026 parliamentary submission proposes Cabinet Office AI coordination, independent oversight, parliamentary scrutiny and citizen deliberation. These are intelligible destinations for institutional capacity: people writing recommendations for who should make which public decisions. Parliamentary publication makes the proposals public; it does not adopt them.
CLTR evidence to the National Resilience Committee · National Resilience Committee: written evidence index
The stipend rules require agreements, meetings and continuing contributions aligned with Global priorities. The microgrant rules connect delivery and reporting to future eligibility. Those conditions are a firmer basis for understanding obligation than assuming that everyone sharing a donor takes instructions from them. Individual agreements and actual decisions remain the missing evidence.
PauseAI: volunteer stipends · PauseAI: microgrants
Power here moves through several bargains. Funders support capacity; organizations provide expertise, access or outputs; public bodies decide what to adopt; campaign organizations condition future support. Some arrangements protect independence and others explicitly narrow discretion. A useful map must preserve that variation, because it tells us where decisions can actually be made—and challenged.