Hi folks, the PSF just published a new blog post that âconnects the dotsâ about our current financial outlook. Sharing here to raise awareness and make sure this corner of the Python community gets the update from the source!
Hereâs the thread that we shared on social media:
Over the past year+, weâve shared updates on things like the Grants Program pause, PyCon US financial transparency, our NSF grant withdrawal, and the âOpen Infrastructure is Not Freeâ statement. This new post pulls those threads together into one clear overview.
In short: our costs have gone up, our assets and revenue have gone down, and demand for the PSFâs work continues to grow. Meanwhile, Python usage is surging (which is great!), but corporate investment in the language and community hasnât kept pace.
When we shared last week that we withdrew from a U.S. government grant due to conflicts with our mission, the community showed incredible support. 1400+ donors and 270+ new members raised $135K+ in solidarityâ thank you!! Weâve also had 3 new companies apply for sponsorship
Even still, weâre raising the flag early: the PSF has only ~6 months of runway and needs your support to sustain essential #Python & PyPI infrastructure, #PyConUS, and, hopefully, to reopen our Grants Program.
Read the full post to see how the PSF is tackling these challenges and how you can help power the future of Python. Many of you have donated in the past week- so we are looking for you to help us with reach. Please share this story, boost our upcoming fundraiser posts, and most importantly, tell the world your #Python story!
Then it seems that many of the concerns that Franz KirĂĄly brought up (in a somewhat impolitic fashion) two months ago appear to be validated? I donât recall anyone from the board or the staff saying that at the time.
None of the facts provided in this article are new[1] and werenât disputed when Franz brought them up. (like the fact that this year the PSF is money negative, that PyCon has gotten an expense rather than an income source in the last few years, that sponsor money has been reducing, that salaries are âhighâ[2])
There were also staff members that confirmed these things in those threads; If you donât recall them, thatâs faulty memory on your part. Please fact check before dragging up old discussions again. What got him banned is being unable/unwilling to engage in polite discussion with these peopple.
Also, please donât engage in the art of Just Asking Question. If you want to criticize the PSF, do it and make an argument[3] - donât ask leading questions like âAnd is a staff of 13 in fact small?â.
As can be seen by the obersevation that this article links back to previous articles mentioning the same issues âŠď¸
on a global comparison - on a US comparison they are medium âŠď¸
Probably in a separate thread. This should be the last post about this topic here. âŠď¸
I see no reason to suspect @mdcowles is "JAQ"ing here. He has no history of that, and heâs been around forever (although rarely active on this forum).
The principle of charity suggests he really doesnât know and is asking. JAQâing may be in play if someone repeatedly asks the same question(s), and even after theyâve been answered. Franz appeared to be into that.
I canât answer his question, but would also be interested in seeing a discussion. For historical context, the PSF was founded in 2001, and was 100% volunteer for a few years. If memory serves, Pat Campbell was the first paid employee (general Administrator, in 2005), and it wasnât until 2011 that Ewa Jodlowska was hired to help organize PyCon (part time, becoming full-time in 2012).
The PSFâs budget is on the order of 10x larger now, so on the face of it thereâs nothing obviously off base about having on the order of 10x more employees.
OTOH, revenues have apparently been shrinking, and the recent influx of US$135K in contributions only amounts to a few percent of its budget.
Iâll preface this with an important note: I feel very strongly that random strangers on the internet, who have no insight in my day-to-day job responsibilities, have absolutely no business speculating about whether my job is useful or necessary. So letâs extend that same basic courtesy to PSF staff and not discuss any individual position here!
Keeping that firmly in mind, we can look at the 2024 Annual Impact Report to see the roles of these staff members. (It lists 12 people, so there has apparently been a new hire in 2025, but that doesnât affect the conclusions by much.)
We see that a large fraction of these people is responsible for PyPI and other technical infrastructure for Python (engineering, security/safety and support). Itâs, honestly, flabbergasting to me that a service of this magnitude and importance is run by just a handful of people![1]
That leaves about 7 staff, who (in no particular order)
organize an annual international conference with 2000â3000 attendees
do fundraising (from large grant applications like the NSF one that the PSF had to decline recently[2], to working with over a dozen large corporate sponsors, to thousands of smaller companies or individuals)
manage a worldwide grant program of several 100k$ annually
provide administrative support for about 20 fiscal sponsorees (local user groups, regional conferences, and other orgs)
Coordinate with other Python orgs and conferences around the world
Work with lawmakers in Europe, the US and probably elsewhere to ensure new regulations work for Open Source projects
⌠and probably lots of other things Iâm forgetting or not even aware of
⌠plus all the line management, HR, accounting, tax, legal, reporting, etc. responsibilities that are necessary to support this work.
For some of these, I have a pretty good idea of how much work is involved; for others, I can make an educated guess; and for the rest, less so. But even considering just the tasks I can estimate reasonably well ⌠yeah, having just 7 paid staff to do all this is an astonishingly low number to me.
So 13 staff members may be a significant increase over the early days of the PSF; but considering both the growth in the overall community/ecosystem during that time and the additional requirements & expectations, it is still a very small number.
speaking as someone who has played a very minor role in a few academic funding applications of a similar scale, I can guarantee you that this one application alone required several months of staff time âŠď¸
Indeed, it would be impressive if an organization the size of the PSF managed to run a service of PyPIâs magnitude on its own, even if it were the only thing the PSF did. The report you linked to gives credit to Fastly, but probably not enough. Fastly has contributed its world-class CDN services (global caching, edge delivery, bandwidth offloading, âŚ) âfor freeâ to PyPI since 2013. At commercial rates, that would be worth millions of dollars per year.
Not trying to derail anything here, just trying to spread more credit around to where itâs due, and there are many unsung heroes in the PSFs current success. Iâll let Fastly toot its own horn now :
What are the specific requirements for the PSF to reopen the Grants Program? For example, whatâs the specific dollar amount that the PSF needs for 2026?
I understand that the Grants Program is behind essential items in the funding queue.
Is there any projected timeline to reopen the Grants Program?
Thanks for the discussion here so far, and the questions about the Grants Program.
Reopening the Grants Program is wholly dependent on revenue over the next 6-12 months. Because of our small number of âlevers to pullâ itâs incredibly hard to project a timeline for reopening the program. We are pursuing and exploring options to be able to reopen the program (e.g. funding sources and incrementally opening select categories of grants).
For context on the program spend in the past, please check out our Grants Program transparency reports:
Python Software Foundation News: Connecting the Dots: Understanding the PSFâs Current Financial Outlook
: