Engineering Research Funding Opportunities

As a follow-up to my recent post about the Space Economy and its impact on emerging nations In 2020, Africa’s growth was projected to exceed $10bn USD by 2024 (African Space Industry Report). Yet, according to the World Economic Forum, by 2023 the Global space economy was worth approximately $630bn USD. Emerging nations like AFrica are not significantly playing in this sector that has the ability to create value for multiple industries and solutions to many of the world’s most pressing challenges Influencing industries like– Tourism, Supply chain and transportation, to providing broadband Connectivity , supporting defence, for surveillance and resilient communications, Impacting broadcasting to supporting, scientific research, disaster management and environmental monitoring.. With the rapid way space is being commercialized, any country where space economy is not being developed might face challenges in the future. I rank Funding as one of the top barriers emerging nations face in playing in this sector, right after Technical expertise and capacity. How do you remedy this? One way growing space nations can invest in the acquisition of space capabilities is through partnerships. Public-Private Partnerships , a collaboration between Government and private enterprises. Where we leverage on the private sector’s financial resources to be used to finance, build and operate space projects. Some thoughts on PPPs ✅ They are not “one size fits all”. One approach cannot work for a continent that has 54 countries, each requiring and desiring varying things. ✅ Countries should consider setting up a robust policy, institutional & regulatory framework, including on assessment and management of fiscal risks and contingent liabilities; before taking that leap. ✅ Not all Space projects should be PPPs. Prioritize and screen projects for PPP suitability; are they commercially viable? Are they bankable? Investors need returns. ✅ Prepare !Prepare !!Prepare !!! Solid project preparation and structuring capacity ( risk allocation, government support and affordability) ✅ Get all the help you need; strong transaction support and contract management capacity. Seek out institutions that can support or advanced countries that have gone through that process. Fifteen African nations have already invested over $4.71 billion in 58 satellite projects, and African countries plan to develop 105 satellites in the next three years. The importance of public-private partnerships (PPPs) in accelerating the growth of the space economy, especially in developing nations like Nigeria, Egypt, and South Africa cannot be overemphasized. Any thoughts or other possible options for emerging economies? #PPPs #Funding #SpaceEconomy

Here are 5 battle-tested tips to raise funding successfully: 1. Stop Chasing "Investors"—Target the Right People Not all investors are worth your time. ✅ Skip anyone with "Angel Investor" in their bio (they’re spammed to death). ✅ Instead, target high-net-worth individuals (HNWIs)—anyone earning £100K+ per year (FCA definition). ✅ Focus on sector-specific individuals who already understand your industry. 2. Build Relationships Before You Need Money Raising starts long before you actually raise. ✅ Engage investors months before pitching—comment on their posts, connect, and add value. ✅ Don’t just pitch—ask for feedback first. It lowers resistance. ✅ Stay visible. Investors back founders they recognise and trust. 3. Show the Path to Profitability Investors don’t fund ideas—they fund returns. ✅ Have a clear financial model (not just “We’ll figure it out”). ✅ Show how their cash turns into more cash—growth metrics, revenue projections, and real traction. ✅ Be specific. “We’ll be profitable in 18 months” means nothing. Show how. 4. Make Your Round Investable Investors love momentum. ✅ Break your raise into small, fast-moving tranches (e.g., 10 x £25K instead of waiting for £250K). ✅ Offer perks—exclusive updates, advisory roles, or investor-only events. ✅ Don’t chase one big check—many small investors are easier to land. 5. Master the Follow-Up 80% of funding happens in the follow-up. ✅ Investors get busy—if they go silent, follow up every 7-10 days (without being annoying). ✅ Keep them engaged—update them on progress, new investors coming in, or fresh traction. ✅ If they say no, ask: “What would make this a yes?”—golden insights come from this.

There are many funding options beyond raising equity capital (my career actually started in helping companies access non-dilutive funding). When I’m building the funding strategy for founders from scratch, we map out all their liquidity options (not just the obvious ones). Here’s what I’ve seen work for private companies at different stages: 1 - Periodic liquidity mechanisms. There are a few emerging platforms I’m excited about here, which are changing the game for private companies. They offer intermittent trading windows that let early investors and employees access liquidity without forcing an IPO or acquisition. This is massive for retention and cap table management. 2 - Revenue-based financing. For companies with strong recurring revenue, RBF provides capital without equity dilution. Repayments can also adjust to your sales topline, making cash flow management far less painful. 3 - Asset-based lending. If you’ve got inventory, receivables, or equipment on your balance sheet, you can unlock capital against those assets. I’ve seen a lot of founders use it for bridging funding rounds. 4 - Non-dilutive grants. Government programs (such as Innovate UK) and corporate innovation funds provide capital that doesn’t ask for any equity stake. Underutilised,and incredibly valuable for R&D-heavy businesses. Most popular at Pre Seed. 5 - Strategic debt/ venture debt. For companies that have already raised equity and need working capital without further dilution, venture debt can be a tactical bridge to the next milestone. Most often used at Series A & above. Mixing all of the above in addition to raising equity capital can build your solid funding journey from Pre Seed all the way to an IPO. #capitalraising #startupfunding #fundingoptions

🌏The World Economic Forum, in collaboration with Capgemini and Cambridge Industrial Innovation Policy, has just released a crucial white paper: "United for Net Zero: Public-Private Collaboration to Accelerate Industry Decarbonization." This report provides a vital framework for manufacturers and supply chain companies to effectively partner with the public sector in the pursuit of net-zero emissions. Key Takeaways: 1️⃣ Industry decarbonization is lagging, with current efforts far from the 7% annual emissions reduction needed to stay on a 1.5°C pathway. 2️⃣ The report identifies key challenges hindering progress: securing buy-in, accurately calculating emissions, implementing mitigation strategies, and fostering green business growth. 3️⃣ The framework presents actionable opportunities for public-private partnerships, spanning two action levers: leveraging existing mechanisms (funding, standards, etc.) and shaping future policies. Opportunities for Collaboration: 📗 Understanding and leveraging existing public financial incentives (subsidies, carbon pricing, tax mechanisms) and co-developing sector-specific financial solutions. 📗 Facilitating adoption of robust carbon tracking methodologies across the value chain, promoting standardization, and supporting the development of new data collection methods. 📗 Proactively supporting net-zero solutions implementation across the value chain, bridging knowledge gaps, addressing skills shortages, and raising consumer awareness. 📗 Collaborating with governments to design effective policies that incentivize decarbonization, facilitate technology adoption, and create level playing fields. 📗 Co-investing in the development, infrastructure, and market creation for crucial climate technologies. Challenges: ✴️ Companies face the challenge of meeting growth objectives while simultaneously pursuing ambitious emissions reduction targets. ✴️ Lack of harmonized standards, data availability issues, and the complexity of Scope 3 emissions calculations pose significant obstacles. ✴️ High upfront costs, technological immaturity, and uncertain returns on investment hinder the adoption of certain climate technologies. ✴️ Inconsistent regulations, lengthy permitting processes, and a lack of comprehensive incentives can slow down progress. #NetZero #Sustainability #IndustryDecarbonization #Decarbonization #PublicPrivatePartnerships #PPP #ClimateAction #EnergyTransition

PPP 2.0 Should Focus on Matching Capital Risk India doesn’t lack capital. It lacks capital circulation. For nearly a decade, the infrastructure debate has largely shifted away from Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) towards public capital expenditure. While this has accelerated infrastructure creation, it is unlikely to be sufficient to finance India’s ambitions over the next two decades. India must simultaneously build world-class infrastructure, finance a green transition, and maintain fiscal sustainability. This requires rethinking not just how much capital we mobilise, but how capital moves through the life cycle of infrastructure assets. My latest article in Indian Express argues that the next generation of PPPs must be fundamentally different. Governments should finance high-risk phases where sovereign borrowing offers a cost advantage. As projects mature and risks decline, capital should progressively migrate to InvITs, Infrastructure Debt Funds, pension funds and insurance companies. The objective should be simple: as risks decline, the cost of capital should decline as well. The challenge is no longer merely capital scarcity. It is creating a financing architecture that continuously recycles capital from mature assets into the next generation of infrastructure and climate investments. I look forward to hearing your thoughts. #Infrastructure #PPPs #CircularFinance #ClimateFinance #InfrastructureFinance #InvITs #InfrastructureDebtFunds #CapitalMarkets #GreenTransition #FiscalPolicy #PublicPolicy #IndiaEconomy

Start-ups pitching #VCs often tout having a SBIR I/II, and insist that's proof that they have a strong customer demand signal. Veteran Ventures Capital politely disagreed; the #SBIR / #STTR program is great, but in it's original form, it suffered many weaknesses, the largest one being that it wasn't connected to any requirements, program offices, or acquisition pathways. That may have changed in the most recent SBIR/STTR reauthorization bill, due to the addition of two options upon completion of the program: the Accelerated Research for Transition (#ART) program (created by the #Pentagon) and the Strategic Breakthrough Awards (#SBA) program (created by #Congress). The details are a little fuzzy, and there seems to be a lot of overlap with the existing #TACFI and #STRATFI programs (and maybe even SBIR IIIs). Here is our understanding of it: #PhaseIII: the original. No dollar cap. No time cap. Sole source allowed. The destination, but only when a program office funds it from their procurement budget. TACFI / STRATFI: the proven model. TACFI runs $375K–$2M; STRATFI runs $3M–$15M. Both require 1:1 matching capital from private or non-SBIR government sources. Operationally validated since 2020. These two programs appear to be the blueprint for these new programs. ART: This appears to be TACFI/STRATFI, but scaled across all services. 1:1 match between an operational sponsor and the ART program, locked in by a signed Technology Transition Agreement. The end-user has put their name and their dollars on the line. SBA: (statutory, all agencies with a >$100M SBIR budget) — the largest play. Up to $30M, 48-month performance window, 90-day award timeline. Requires 100% non-SBIR matching capital. For Pentagon awards, 20% must come from new program-of-record funding, plus a senior acquisition official's written commitment. A lot is still being interpreted; these bills are now law, but the operating mechanics are still being worked out. Are TACFI/STRATFI matching dollars eligible toward the SBA's 100% match? Does an existing TTA with an Air Force sponsor count toward the senior-acquisition-official commitment for an SBA proposal? How will the Pentagon's Office for Small Business Innovation sequence ART decisions against existing AFWERX/SPACEWERX timelines? Will agencies outside the Pentagon (NIH, DOE, NASA) interpret the SBA matching rules consistently with one another? Regardless of the questions above, it's clear that small companies with a successful SBIR II (defined as a great product with strong customer pull) have a lot more options now. Definitely would value anyone's additional insight here. #DefenseInnovation #VentureCapital #DualUse #GovTech #DefenseStartups

Navigating Critical Challenges in Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) in Emerging Middle Eastern Economies Public-Private Partnership (PPP) programs have emerged as transformative tools for infrastructure development and economic diversification. While larger oil-producing powerhouses like Saudi Arabia and the UAE boast extensive pipelines of projects, many smaller non-oil producing Middle Eastern Arab nations are also embracing PPPs to deliver strategic initiatives. These projects hold enormous potential to shape the future and sustainability of these countries but face unique and critical challenges that threaten their successful implementation. Key Challenges Facing PPP Implementation 1. Limited Capacity in Sector Ministries One of the most significant hurdles is the lack of capacity within sector ministries to effectively manage and execute PPP deals. With inadequate experience in negotiating complex agreements and implementing large-scale projects, delays become rampant. Furthermore, inefficiencies arise as ministries often focus excessively on non-critical issues, derailing momentum and wasting valuable resources. This lack of institutional capability can heavily impact the strategic structuring and execution of projects, reducing overall effectiveness. 2. Fragmented Decision-Making Processes In these countries, decision-making processes within government institutions are often fragmented, with critical decisions being passed back and forth between agencies. This siloed approach creates roadblocks and slows down the pace of project implementation. Without unified authority and streamlined governance, PPPs risk being caught in bureaucratic red tape. A Strategic Solution To address these challenges, these smaller countries could establish and staff a strategic unit reporting directly to the head of government. Here’s how this can turn the tide: - Empowered Authority: This unit would possess decision-making power, allowing it to cut through inefficiencies and delays. While sector ministries can still provide technical input and expertise, ultimate decisions would rest with the strategic unit staffed by experienced PPP professionals. - Enhanced Coordination: Centralizing authority eliminates fragmentation, ensuring projects stay on track and aligned with the country’s broader economic goals. - Capacity Building: Over time, this strategic unit can also act as a training ground, building institutional knowledge and expertise that can eventually trickle down to sector ministries. The Way Forward In a region where resources vary significantly, smaller states have an opportunity to punch above their weight by focusing smartly on high-impact governance models. The successful structuring and execution of PPPs today will define the prosperity of tomorrow.

Most companies stumble before they even start when trying to partner with local government.  I've spent my career brokering innovative public-private partnerships that benefit consumers and companies — ensuring technology serves people, not just the businesses producing it. As Chief Innovation Officer of San Jose, I orchestrated a $500M investment in 5G deployment from multiple large telecom firms across the city, and worked with the City Council to commit $24M to a citywide Digital Inclusion Fund, closing the digital divide for 1M+ residents. I also brokered dozens of city innovation pilots with companies ranging from autonomous vehicle and robot delivery startups to established names like Meta and Airbnb. Here are my top tips for making a public-private partnership actually work: Build the right team first. Successful partnerships are built by many – city staff, council champions, community advocates, and company partners. Surround yourself with people who understand both sides of the table. Align incentives on both sides. Are you looking for a fast process? Is the city looking for a larger investment to justify prioritizing your project? Know what each side needs before you sit down. Identify the real blockers. What needs to be true for city leadership to get behind your efforts? Work backward from there. Negotiate on mutual value. The best deals leave everyone feeling like they won something. Get ahead of the press. It's better to own the narrative than to be outed mid-negotiation. Bring the public along early. Traditional public hearings are just one tool — think creatively about how to engage the local community in ways that build genuine enthusiasm and support. Cultivate engaged advocates. Know who's in your corner, and make sure you understand the positions of those who aren't. Manage all the political players. The City Council isn't your only stakeholder. Agency staff can make or break a project — treat them accordingly. Be honest about where you are on the innovation curve. Pilots require special procurement exemptions. Seek out cities with established innovation programs — it will save you significant time and money. Understand procurement upfront. Are there insurance requirements that seem excessive? Work with agency staff early to carve out the right exemptions before you're deep in the process. Seek out the right expertise. Local lobbying firms can help, but former city employees who now run consulting firms are often even more valuable for navigating the nuances. Where things go wrong: Wasting city time without clear project timelines or honest communication about staff impact. Relying solely on lobbyists instead of building direct, good-faith relationships with staff and elected officials. Pushing tech that's too early or too narrowly conceived to genuinely benefit the city. Blaming or shaming local officials when things get hard. And underestimating how thick a skin you'll need for the public debate.

This is a controversial take, but an important one for Europe’s innovation future, including in water. I agree with parts of the arguments, but I’d challenge the idea that startups should not begin with public or research grants. In capital-intensive, infrastructure-heavy sectors like water, early-stage risk is fundamentally different from software or typical VC-backed models. Fundamental research, tech validation, and proving real-world performance often require timelines and capital that private investors alone are unwilling - or unable - to support at the earliest stages. Public funding, when used well, plays a critical role: • It enables fundamental research that has no immediate commercial return • It helps prove technologies in real-world conditions • It de-risks innovation for both investors and society • It supports solutions to systemic challenges (water scarcity, pollution, resilience) that markets alone may underfund That said, the critique here is not wrong either. We’ve all seen cases where: – Startups are built around grant criteria instead of customer needs – Founders get stuck in “application mode” instead of execution – Time-to-market suffers So perhaps the real question isn’t public vs private first, but how and when each is used. Get that balance wrong, and we either: – Underfund critical innovation – Or create grant-dependent companies that never reach the market There’s never been a more important time for European science, but also never a more important time to get this balance right. Curious to hear your perspectives—especially from #founders, #investors, and #policymakers working in deeptech and water 👇 #waterstartups #waterresilience #waterinnovation #grants Jacob Tompkins OBEWayne ByrneBertrand ValletWater4All - PartnershipAhsan Muhammad, PhDSKion GmbHLiza Faber, PEPureTerra VenturesTom FreybergPernille Weiss-EhlerJessika RoswallEkaterina ZaharievaAmanda LoeffenFiona Regan

Are PPP Projects Truly Affordable for Governments? A Fiscal Perspective Public–Private Partnerships (PPPs) are often promoted as a way to accelerate infrastructure delivery without immediate pressure on public budgets. But the real question is: what are the long-term fiscal implications once these commitments are fully accounted for? A proper fiscal assessment is essential before approving any PPP project to ensure it is not only viable, but also sustainable for public finances. 1. Direct Fiscal Commitments These are the known and contractual obligations, including: Availability payments Capital contributions or subsidies (e.g., VGF) Revenue guarantees Land acquisition costs Tax incentives These must be fully integrated into budget planning from the outset. 2. Contingent Liabilities These are potential future exposures that may arise under certain conditions: Demand or revenue shortfalls Exchange rate and inflation risks Termination payments Government debt guarantees Force majeure events While uncertain, their fiscal impact can be significant and long-lasting. 3. Affordability Check The key issue is whether commitments fit within: Annual budget ceilings Medium-term fiscal frameworks Debt sustainability limits Sector investment priorities Without this, PPPs can quietly create future fiscal pressure. 4. Risk Allocation & Value for Money Effective PPPs allocate risks to the party best able to manage them. Poor allocation often results in higher government exposure and reduced value for money compared to traditional procurement. 5. Transparency & Monitoring All fiscal obligations should be: Clearly disclosed in financial reporting Regularly monitored throughout the concession period Integrated into fiscal risk management systems So, are PPPs always “off-balance sheet” savings—or future liabilities in disguise? The answer depends on how well fiscal risks are identified, quantified, and managed before financial close. A strong role from Ministries of Finance and PPP units is critical to ensure that only truly affordable and sustainable projects move forward. #PPP #PublicPrivatePartnership #InfrastructureFinance #FiscalRisk #ProjectFinance #GovernmentFinance #ValueForMoney #RiskManagement #FiscalSustainability #InfrastructureDevelopment