1. Our Funding Approach

• At Bloom, we prioritise projects that produce measurable impact and generate evidence, with a focus on improving mental health and wellbeing
• We fund initiatives globally, with a strong focus on supporting projects in low-and middle-income countries. 
• We make grantmaking decisions based on evidence, cost-effectiveness, and potential to scale — placing particular emphasis on interventions that track their impact using WELLBYs (Wellbeing-Adjusted Life Years).
• We don’t accept inbound applications, though we chair the Mental Health & Wellbeing Funding Circle, which does take applications.

2. What We Mean By Impact

When we talk about “impact,” we mean the real-world, lasting difference an intervention makes to people’s lives. To avoid confusion, we distinguish between inputs, outputs, outcomes, and impact, each representing a different level of value creation:

The Impact Logframe

• Inputs: The resources used: money, staff time, materials, etc. (e.g., $50,000 spent on a rural sanitation programme.)
• Outputs: The activities or services delivered. (e.g., 200 latrines constructed in a low-income region.)
• Outcomes: The short- to medium-term changes in people’s knowledge, behaviour, or health.
  (e.g., the number of local households using the new latrines instead of open defecation, leading to improved health outcomes and fewer missed workdays.)
• Impact: The longer-term, measurable improvement in people’s wellbeing. (e.g., the beneficiaries report an average 0.2-point increase in life satisfaction across one year.)

At Bloom, we’re particularly focused on this final piece: impact. That means we think it is essential to ask:

“Did this intervention make people feel their lives are going better?”

We measure this using WELLBYs (Wellbeing-Adjusted Life Years), which quantify changes in life satisfaction over time. On a 1-10 scale, a 1-point increase in life satisfaction lasting for one year = 1 WELLBY.

By using WELLBYs as a common currency to measure impact, rather than just tracking immediate outcomes, we can assess the effectiveness of radically different interventions — like therapy, anti-malarial bed nets, or cash transfers — on equal terms.

3. What Kind of Organisations Do We Fund?

Evidence-focused Charities & Projects

• Those with evidence of improving mental health and wellbeing 
  • Projects that have a focus on cost-effectiveness.
  • Organisations working on neglected but high-leverage areas within mental health and wellbeing.
  • We’re particularly interested in the areas of:
    • Mental health interventions
    • Policy & ecosystem building
    • Wellbeing research
    • New therapies

• Innovative and Scalable Models
  • Approaches that could be replicated and scaled to reach more people.
  • Projects that push forward our understanding of mental health interventions and their cost-effectiveness.
  • Organisations whose work can become increasingly cost-effective as they scale and grow. We’re not overly worried about initial cost-effectiveness if growth will drive down costs.
• Evidence-Informed Approaches
  • Organisations using RCTs, wellbeing surveys, or other rigorous impact evaluation methods.
  • Willingness to adapt based on new evidence.
  • Teams with a drive to improve their understanding of measurement and the crucial role it plays in driving beneficial outcomes.

4. How We Select Grantees

• Invitation-Only Process: We do not accept unsolicited applications. Instead, we find grantees through:
  • Our networks – trusted recommendations from experts, funders, and researchers.
  • Proactive research – identifying promising opportunities ourselves.
• Evaluation Criteria:
  • Potential impact per dollar – How many WELLBYs are created per each $1,000 spent?
  • Strength of evidence – How confident are we in the findings?
  • Organisational health – Is the organisation well-run, ethical, and transparent?
  • Scalability & long-term potential – Can this intervention grow sustainably?
  • Neglectedness – Are many others funding or working in this space? If so, we see less space for impact.

5. The Decision-Making Process

6. What We Don’t Fund

Whilst many organisations are absolutely worthy, given our theory of change we don’t tend to fund organisations that

• Receive long-term funding from very large funds or donors.
• Don’t have strong evidence of impact.
• Lack a convincing theory of change.
• Don’t have potential to scale or influence others.