I participated in the past to a rather similar project, called Imagination for people. Just as yours, it was innovative, it was potentially impactful. The weak point was sustainability. The plateform was mostly fed by hand at first, by the staff, to make sure there were enough entries to make it convincing (info was collected from existing initiatives). But from then on, once people started adding entries... it was often of poor quality and resulted in a lot of hand-work from staff to "filter", "improve", "censor if needed". So staff needed to be significantly numerous and when the plateform would be more famous, it would obviously get more costly. When it came from finding funds, several approaches were tested and none really successful. I recognise similar potential targets as you mention. But when those types of partners get involved... volunteers are no more willing to help... hence more staff time required. Hence more funding needed. This is an odd cycle. Conditions of uses : I read that the site reserve the right to modify the conditions of use of terms, without any obligation to inform the user of the site.