). This week our class took stock of the experiment so far and continued posing questions about the financial future of the cultural sector and occasionally proposing solutions. 
for instance, talked about financial "literacy" as a metric (or not) of financial viability, and 
argued that podcasting presents one way forward. We've also kept writing about 1918, so be sure to #explore1918 with our hashtag for the project.If we want our grants to have impact (and continuing impact) but also are leery of many of the established non-profit organizations in Philadelphia, how can we build investment momentum? How can we work to have our grants grow rather than simply be paid out and be gone?
One option is to court matching donations from individuals and organization. We could do that, but it is still a finite solution that may also come with strings attached.
What if we didn't give money, but rather loaned it? Could we, humble graduate students, do that? Probably not, but there is at least one possible solution, I think: micro-lending organizations.
What if we formed a board from the members of this class and slowly phased ourselves out, with representatives from each loan recipient replacing us as they pay back the money with a small amount of interest and it rolls forward, snowballing?
What do you think, Steemians? Is this remotely viable? What concerns would you have? What criteria would you use to evaluate applicants for cultural sector microloans?
100% of the SBD rewards from this #explore1918 post will support the Philadelphia History Initiative
