GoodPower Education Fund is a nonprofit that works to accelerate the transition to a decarbonized economy. Through research, strategic communications, and campaigns, GoodPower engages people across the ideological spectrum in building an economy powered by renewable energy and other emerging technologies. Its work includes expanding civic participation, advancing renewable energy, and helping individuals and communities benefit from the clean energy transition.
GoodPower is testing whether renewable energy developers will pay for its hyperlocal communications, education, and turnout services, and whether greater brand awareness among developers is what moves them from interest to paid work. The working hypothesis is that visibility through LinkedIn and industry conferences will land more meetings and convert them into paying partners. Developer-paid engagements could diversify revenue and let GoodPower report local wins back to institutional funders.
To learn what works, GoodPower is running a three-year, $100K grant, funded at $33K per year, aimed at building 5–10 new developer relationships. The design pairs a two-month LinkedIn lead-generation campaign, integrated with Salesforce follow-up, with conference speaking and attendance, direct outreach, and a prospect map of about 20 targets. These are supported by a menu of services, statement of work templates, and a clearer value proposition.
The experiment is currently focused on building the groundwork for developer outreach and testing two main channels for reaching prospects. The foundation is in place: a menu of services, statement of work templates, and a renewables slide deck are complete. On LinkedIn, the campaign is live with two ad videos targeting developers. Results are expected biweekly, but none are available yet. At conferences, the CEO spoke at American Clean Power (ACP) in March 2026, and staff held one-on-one follow-ups afterward. Relational, one-on-one email outreach to developers also continues, though its deadline moved to September 26 after delayed grant disbursement.
The central question is whether LinkedIn drives meetings and conversions. The planned comparison is about 20 meetings from convenings versus about 10 from a two-month LinkedIn run. A second question is whether GoodPower can diversify beyond its two lead developers, and intentional outreach is planned for August to test this. The team is also waiting to see whether the pending New York proposal converts.
Upcoming learning moments include September's ACP battery-storage conference and the December, March, and June reflections, which should show what is and is not working. Decisions to pivot, scale, or pause will depend on end-of-year metrics that are still being defined, and on whether years two and three of funding are confirmed.
A high-stakes local problem. Clean energy projects often stall at local decision points, where outcomes turn on who shows up and what is submitted. Developers say turnout and public comment are their biggest obstacle, and their own outreach is not enough to secure approval. Misinformation raises the stakes: in Ohio, a utility commission rejected a project after AI-generated bot comments were mistaken for real residents.
A timely window to test. Federal and state action is largely blocked, which makes local bodies the main route for advancing renewables. Some developers are also racing to finish projects before key legislation changes take effect at year-end. GoodPower's renewables program is only two years old, yet its visibility at ACP grew markedly in a year. This may be a useful moment to learn whether that visibility can become paid relationships.
A funding gap that shapes the question. Developer revenue is not expected to dent GoodPower's roughly 90% institutional share, only diversify it. Earned revenue was roughly $100–150K against a roughly $23M budget. Developers pay roughly $5–25K per project, while finishing tools like True Voice may require millions. Understanding what developers will pay for, and how to reach them efficiently, is a practical question for the organization's financial resilience.
What it may unlock. The experiment feeds Progressive Multiplier's learning agenda on standard revenue-generating experiments. PM describes lead conversion as "bread and butter" work whose lessons may serve as a template for other revenue experiments. Early signals also point to a broader question: how to move from one-off campaigns toward multi-project portfolio agreements that make deployment repeatable. With each funding year treated as its own experiment, learning early helps inform decisions about what to continue.