Fundraising cycles for PE funds have shortened significantly over the past couple of years as sponsors have scrambled to stay competitive in the frothy deal market and provide financial support to their existing portfolio companies. In situations in which fundraising comes up short, sponsors have creatively pursued alternative avenues to bridge funding gaps. Some of those solutions are conveniently internal (e.g., spreading funding across multiple funds; amending fund documents to free up additional liquidity; etc.), while others involve looking for support from third-party opportunity funds. Those trends were addressed at a recent panel at Proskauer’s Private Funds Annual Review Conference that featured Proskauer partners Camille Higonnet, Edward Lee, Nicholas C. Noon and Brian S. Schwartz. This first article in a two-part series analyzes recent PE fundraising trends and the relative merits of the alternative approaches sponsors have pursued to satisfy their liquidity needs. The second article will examine some PE fund terms that have been at the forefront of negotiations between GPs and LPs, including with respect to fees and expenses; fundraising extensions; and recycling opportunities. For additional commentary from Proskauer attorneys, see our two-part series: “Evolving PE Fund Management Techniques and Considerations During a Financial Crisis” (May 19, 2020); and “Impact of Economic Uncertainty on PE Fundraising and Fund Formation Efforts” (May 26, 2020).