Don’t waste time:

ABCT launched a new website in 2020, developed with input from partners in the field. It gives detailed and clear explanations of our programmes, priority areas and what our Trustees are looking for. The website includes a list of exclusions and an FAQ section. A general email address and phone number is included on the site, and we are happy to take calls and answer emails on eligibility queries. Details of all our grants are published through 360Giving on GrantNav.

Ask the relevant questions:

ABCT has an online application process and does initial sifting & assessment on the basis of a two-page application form, plus audited accounts and cashflow forecast. If the applicant is successful in going forward, they are not required to submit any further documents. One of the principles agreed at ABCT’s 2018 strategy review is to reduce funder burden, we actively look for ways of doing this. The most recent example, agreed in Oct 2020 is: getting back to applicants being rejected as quickly as possible by getting approval from Trustees by email rather than waiting for the next Grants Committee meeting.

Accept risk:

ABCT provide unrestricted core funding, recognising the charities we fund are experts in what they do, and know best how to use the funds to achieve their aims. We trust organisations to make their own operational decisions.

Act with urgency:

ABCT publishes quarterly deadlines a year in advance, with details on when decisions will be taken. This timetable does not change. This links to funder burden. Another principle we follow is being led by the organisations we seek to support, which includes the ability of organisations to choose the start date of their grants and monitoring schedule, based on timing that suits them.

Be open:

ABCT contacts every declined applicant with a declination letter providing an overall reason for declination and offers all applicants the opportunity to have a phone call with a staff member for feedback if that would be helpful. Success rates for applications are published on our website.

Enable flexibility:

ABCT provide unrestricted funding through all three of our funding programmes. In the period 2018-2020, 77% of our funding was unrestricted core funding. We encourage partners to ask for core funding if that is what they want. Restricted grants were either i) where this was requested by the applicant because the restriction would help them, or ii) where just one component of the organisation’s work fitted within one of ABCT’s priorities.

Communicate with purpose:

ABCT aims to be a relational funder, with contact with applicants and grantees positive and purposeful. Through assessments and a general email address, grantees have direct access to get in touch with staff. We worked on our grant offer letter last year, with input from trusted partners to make this as clear as possible. We believe relationships and trust are so important – another principle which lies at the heart of the work we aspire to do.

Be proportionate:

ABCT has a light touch reporting requirement. Grantees need to submit no more than two pages and it can be in any format. The Trust is also happy to accept monitoring reports prepared for other funders. If, due to timing, an organisation is applying again at the end of a grant, the monitoring report and next application can be combined.

Don’t waste time:

We will work with our steering group – including representatives from the frontline, to draft guidance which is as clear and simple as possible.

Ask the relevant questions:

If information is available elsewhere, i.e. from the Charity Commission or if we already hold it, we wont ask for it again.

Act with urgency:

We will hold extra meetings to reduce delay, and will prioritise applicants in the most financial need.

Enable flexibility:

We make grants as flexible as possible, and explain why any restrictions which exist are there.

Be proportionate:

We aim to explain why we are asking for the information in reports, and are clear about what we intend to do with it.

Don’t waste time:

We have an initial enquiry form which takes only moments to complete and enables us to rapidly advise organisations about whether their ideas are within our scope. We also encourage people to pick up the phone to discuss their proposals before submitting anything to us. We publish our priorities on our website, and review them if it becomes clear from the enquiries we receive that we haven’t got our guidance clear enough. We encourage grant holders to use material they already have (Board papers, reports to other funders etc.) to report on progress.

Ask the relevant questions:

We only ask questions in our forms where we use the information provided. We quickly change the wording on our forms if it becomes clear that we have asked a question clumsily or confusingly. We do not ask organisations to submit documents that are publically available (e.g. accounts from the Charity Commission website).

Accept risk:

Our Board’s risk appetite is strong for social justice impact. The more far reaching the impact will be felt, the greater our willingness to risk failure.

Act with urgency:

We have executive delegated powers for decisions on smaller grants, effectively allowing us to make decisions between Board meetings.

Be open:

We provide feedback to all unsuccessful applicants. We publish our grants online and on 360Giving. We publish our social investments online.

Enable flexibility:

We encourage our partners to disclose barriers to progress and vary the grant accordingly to make the most impactful use of it. Many of our grants are to key long-term partners and therefore core or quasi core (such as the Chief Executive’s salary). Where our grants are restricted this is usually for work as part of a collaborative strategy to achieve collective goals (i.e. a piece of a bigger jigsaw). During the pandemic we have amended timeframes and purposes on request and made sure all grant holders are aware of this.

Communicate with purpose:

One of our organisational mantras is that we should always leave an organisation stronger than when we got involved with it.

Be proportionate:

We believe that reporting should be proportionate and appropriate. A commissioned piece of academic work, a core grant for core purposes and a project grant for one piece of work therefore require different and sensitive approaches to balance a) least additional work for them with b) most useful learning, dissemination and influencing.

Don’t waste time:

All applications begin with a telephone call to ensure the charity fits within the CiS funding criteria. The process continues with a visit to the charity or project and only then will the organisation be invited to apply. All funding information is on the CiS website, including the application form.

Ask the relevant questions:

Our application form is specifically designed to be short, straightforward, and not onerous for applicants. We are always available to work through the application form with the charity if help is needed. We use the Charity Commission for accounts information.

Accept risk:

We keep our criteria for funding simple and explicit. We are also aware that things do not always go to plan when working with grassroots organisations who are working with vulnerable groups and encourage charities to keep in touch and reach out when there are changes.

Act with urgency:

We have three rounds of funding each year and inform successful applicants within the week of trustee decision meetings. Funding is granted within the month unless there has been a mutual agreement otherwise.

Be open:

Feedback tends to come at the early stage of applying to ensure that there is a good fit when the application moves forward. Our website is open and transparent as to who we have funded in the past, and what for. The Trustees are closely involved in the grant-making process.

Enable flexibility:

Being a smaller funder gives us the ability to be flexible and open when it comes to charities re-directing their funding should they need to. This past year has shown that now more than ever funders need to respond to changing needs. Applications for core funding are encouraged.

Communicate with purpose:

A good relationship with the charity is important to us and we are keen to understand their own needs.

Be proportionate:

In our successful award letter, the list of reporting requirements are stated: no more than a two-page report towards the end of the grant, successful aspects of the year, number of participants, and what could have worked better.

Don’t waste time:

We will continue to publish our funding criteria, guidelines for completing our application form and FAQs clearly on our website. To strengthen this, we will develop a video or other media to help explain the process. We update our webpages regularly with information about how long applications take to assess. We regularly review how we explain the different priority areas open for funding at any point in time.

Ask the relevant questions:

We will review our application form in 2021 to make sure we are only collecting information useful to us and our funded organisations. If we already have some information from applicants, we will import this where our data systems allow. We will continue to use a shortened application form to continue work that we are already funding. We will work with our funding team to make sure all assessors understand and assess information provided consistently. We will review this at least quarterly.

Accept risk:

We will share how we assess risk and what we ask applicants to provide on our website. Our definition of risk will extend beyond financial risk. We will clearly communicate to applicants the purpose of our Financial Assessment – what we require, why we require it and how it will be used.

Act with urgency:

We will continue to hold grant decision-making meetings every 2 months and use an appropriate scheme of delegation to allow decisions on smaller grants to be taken more quickly in between meetings. We aim to make decisions on our small grants programme within 12 weeks of the receipt of a fully completed application. We will make ourselves better aware of the amount of time organisations spend on the application, assessment and monitoring processes and take any steps required to make this efficient, reasonable and fair.

Be open:

We will invite all unsuccessful applicants to telephone us for feedback. We will hold large grant decision-making meetings in public and publish our grant-making data fortnightly through 360Giving.

Enable flexibility:

We will explore further options to award core funding in 2021 following a review of our 2020 offer for existing grantees to convert project funding to core funding. We recognise the expertise of the delivery agent and work in partnership to ensure that projects can be flexible across the lifetime of the grant. This includes making sure all funded organisations can speak to a Funding Manager with the authority to approve reasonable adjustments to active grants.

Communicate with purpose:

We encourage applicants to provide anonymous feedback on their experience of applying for a grant through GrantAdvisor. We will regularly review this and act on areas that we need to improve.

Be proportionate:

We will review our grant monitoring and evaluation processes in 2021 to make sure we are only collecting information useful to us and our funding partners.

Don’t waste time:

We will develop clear and focused guidance and criteria, with specific examples of the types of projects and organisations we aim to support. This will prevent ineligible applicants and projects. We will publish details of the types of organisations and projects we cannot support. We will continue to have clear fund guidance and eligibility criteria on our website, and utilise the eligibility checklist pre-application, so that applicants do not waste time applying for funds that they may not be eligible for. We will encourage pre-application support calls to advise on criteria and to ensure applicants and projects are eligible for a particular fund. For each fund, and round, we will review and update criteria that may not have been clear. We will also review fund processes and update guidance on processes, where lack of clarity is identified. We will provide detailed feedback on rejections and ineligibility, to enable future eligible applications as much as possible.

Ask the relevant questions:

We will continue to adapt our application forms, and ensure we only ask relevant questions, and seek relevant supporting documentation to the fund criteria and to enable us to make final decisions. All applications questions and lengths will reflect the level of the award offered, and the complexity of the projects. For smaller awards we will have a simple and straightforward application form, and criteria. We will support applicants that have provided supporting documentation within the last three months for other funds, to enable them not to have to resubmit the same documentation again. Where possible, we will review public documentation such as the Charity Commission website, and our own salesforce database, to seek further information if required. We will not make applications ineligible if we do not immediately have access to this information, without checking other public sources. When assessing, we will only take into account responses to questions related to the key criteria, and we will not be overly bureaucratic around how we interpret these responses, where appropriate. When managing and awarding funding on behalf of other funders we will share our learning and expertise and use best practice.

Accept risk:

Where possible, and in particular with our own unrestricted funding, we will not limit applications from organisations, with high income levels, or low income levels, or high or low levels of reserves. We will not have unreasonable due diligence checks, and we will give as much flexibility as we can around eligible costs, and times for spend. We will ask for simple project plans in the application, and a simple indication of how the project meets the fund criteria. We will not be overly bureaucratic about evidence and paperwork required to show impact, and our interpretation of this. Our assessment strategy will be based on the values of trust, and flexibility.

Act with urgency:

We will make decisions no later than within 30 days of receipt of application, for those funds where dates are set by us and not others. We will make use of online decision-making panels, and approval systems to have regular decisions made and issued for applicants. We will use external assessment support, and set up ad hoc panels to enable fast turnaround of applications, particularly those that are providing small grants. We will avail of in-house staff panels where possible, to enable prompt responses. Post-panel decisions will continue to be done during a panel meeting, or immediately thereafter. Decisions will be issued within 48 hours of final decisions being agreed. Terms and conditions will be accepted by email and processed for payments within two weeks of issuing letters of offer.

Be open:

We will ensure that a clear reason for rejection is added to the email of rejection. We will provide advice and FAQs on our website to raise awareness of common mistakes in applications. We will offer telephone calls following rejections, if required, to ensure the applicant is clear as to why they have been rejected. We will publish our complaints process on our website, with clear details around our decision-making process.

Enable flexibility:

Our Trustees are committed to making our unrestricted resources as flexible as possible within the next financial year. This will include flexibility to support core costs, and to offer unrestricted funding. We will encourage our donors and fundholders, both new and existing, to support operational, as well as project costs, and to develop fund criteria that supports flexibility. We will regularly survey and listen to the VCSE organisations we fund and we ask them to contribute to strategic decisions.

Communicate with purpose:

We will commit to working in partnership with all our grantees, and to support and trust them to manage the funding as easily as possible. Our terms and conditions will be clear, and the grantee will sign up to these conditions prior to payment of awards. The conditions will be as fair and flexible as possible, and will have limited restrictions around spend, and monitoring, where appropriate. We will not develop fund criteria and terms where grantees are required to meet unrealistic time challenges around spend. We will encourage our donors and fundholders to enable us to administer their funds with the same minimal restrictions. Any restrictions for funds that we do not have flexibility with will be clear and concise prior to application, and prior to acceptance of any awards. We will encourage grantees to raise any challenges as quickly as possible with us, and ensure that we are as supportive and flexible as we can be, to support them in any challenges. We will develop fund leads for all our funds, to enable grantees to each of our funds to have a main point of contact, and to address any issues they may have. We will update our website accordingly.

Be proportionate:

We will commit to asking projects to only complete one end of grant report for all of our own funds, and for any that we have the flexibility with on behalf of other donors and fundholders. For any projects awarded under £1,000 we will simply ask them to provide a short update on their project and the impact of this support. Where possible, we will collate this information from a simple telephone call. We will appoint a fund lead to carry out this monitoring, and will not allocate online monitoring for these funded projects. We will only request relevant information from our monitoring reports. Our end of grant reports will be as simple and as clear as possible, and we will not ask each grantee to provide evidence of all spend, other than for those projects awarded over £10,000. We will collate qualitative information as much as possible through our grantee network and through our communications department. We will only verify those projects awarded funding of over £10,000. Where appropriate, we will be flexible with dates for completion of end of grant reports. We will only add alerts to our system for those grantees who have not abided by agreed terms and conditions, following reasonable contact to enable addressing of any issues. We will not take into account any previous issues with monitoring and reporting of awards, without giving the grantee the opportunity to rectify within a reasonable timeframe.

Don’t waste time:

Our funding criteria are outlined in our applicant guidance notes, and current priorities are updated regularly on our website. If we find ourselves receiving applications for certain types of work that are unlikely to be funded, then we will: - Update our criteria accordingly
- Recommend to applicants that they do not reapply and explore whether they deliver other work that is a better match with our priorities or signpost them to other funders.
We commit to seeking regular feedback about this in our annual stakeholder survey and acting on what we’re told.

Ask the relevant questions:

We are in the process of streamlining our application and reporting forms. For larger grants, we have stripped back our first stage application form to an expression of interest. We are streamlining data collection requirements for reporting and have only kept the data that: - We require for our own funders
- We regularly use and publish
We commit to regularly seeking feedback and acting on the results, including for: -The design of the application and reporting questions -The level of application and reporting requirements.

Accept risk:

We understand that organisations are facing increased financial pressures during this time. So long as they have budgeting and financial reporting structures in place, we are satisfied with their financial management practices and won’t ask for reassurances about their current or future financial position. Similarly, because restrictions are continuously subject to change, we’re not seeking detailed delivery plans. So long as organisations are undertaking contingency planning and aren’t just waiting around for a return to ‘normal’ - that’s enough.

Act with urgency:

We will continue to approve project changes with speed and without unnecessary bureaucracy. The majority of our funding decisions are made within 12 weeks. We publish our application deadlines with good notice and always meet the published deadlines. In 2020 we speeded up response times on our larger grants fund and introduced more funding rounds each year. Should we run any emergency response funds, we would ensure a very quick turnaround time for both decisions and payments (the benchmark from our 2020 emergency fund was one week for decisions. On average grantholders were paid within 23 days).

Be open:

We always provide feedback to unsuccessful applicants and are open about success rates. If there are common reasons why applicants are rejected, we will publish these and integrate them into our applicant guidance. We will continue to seek feedback from applicants about our decision-making and acting on what they tell us. We publish our grants data on 360Giving, regularly update our public project map and send lists of new grantholders to key stakeholders in each region.

Enable flexibility:

We have a covid-19 policy which allows for flexibility of plans in response to the ever-changing environment. We already provide grants on a full cost recovery basis but will be seeking to integrate additional core funding opportunities into the future funding strategy.

Communicate with purpose:

Every grant is assigned a dedicated Grants Officer, who is introduced alongside the funding offer and is the first port of call for queries and support. We are stripping back our grant recommendations to focus on ‘need to have’ rather than the ‘nice to haves’. The funding agreement outlines grant requirements and deadlines. Reporting templates and other grant requirements documents are all published on our website; across various guidance documents we will be messaging the importance of allocating enough time and budget from the grant to fulfil them.

Be proportionate:

Grant requirements are proportionate to the grant size. We know our current reporting requirements are onerous. A new, streamlined framework will be introduced in April 2021 which allows for greater flexibility in reporting. It has been designed in consultation with current grantholders and will enable them to submit reports to us that they have written for other funders.

Don’t waste time:

We do not ask prospective applicants to contact us with speculative proposals, instead ‘we do the homework’ – using research and referral as our principal route to identify potential grantees and gathering existing information in the public domain before speaking to them. However, we are trying to balance our clear public messaging about our invitation-only approach to not deter relevant unsolicited enquiries from organisations we might otherwise not hear about. To help people judge if they should make an enquiry, we publish our approach and interests in our Annual Review on our website. We will be working on our website in 2021 to improve transparency and timely communication of our evolving interests.

Ask the relevant questions:

We do not use an application form but customise the proposal process to suit the context. We gather publicly available information including accounts, reports and websites before inviting an applicant to put anything in writing, and only ask for additional, relevant information where we need it to help us make a decision. We will accept a copy of an application written for another funder if it is current and relevant to the funding opportunity. We are about to launch an applicant/grantee feedback system to help us improve our processes.

Accept risk:

We only use restricted funding where we feel this is appropriate, and try to keep our funding as flexible as possible as the norm. We do not require detailed project plans; if we decide to fund an organisation, we trust them to judge best how to deliver the aims and objectives they have set out. We will invest in helping fragile organisations remain sustainable and ride out challenges if we think their importance merits it.

Act with urgency:

We do not operate fixed timetables for decisions and make decisions between formal meetings if urgency requires. We recognise that timeliness is one of the things that can add value to our funding.

Be open:

We now publish our grant-making data using the 360 Giving standard. We provide detailed statistics about the kind of grants we make and to whom in our Annual Review, which is available online. Our proactive, staged process leads to few rejections at the final proposal stage – and we always give feedback in such cases. If we have asked an applicant to spend time providing a bespoke written proposal or hosting a visit for us and we then choose not to make a grant to them, we make an ex gratia payment (usually £250) in recognition of their time. We are introducing a real-time routine grantee feedback system to help us learn and improve.

Enable flexibility:

We only use restricted funding where necessary – see our LinkedIn blog for our four-tier system regarding how we use restricted/unrestricted funding. We monitor and report on the proportion of u/r grants annually in our Annual Review.

Communicate with purpose:

We are working to improve the clarity of expectations with all grantees at the grant set-up stage – covering outcomes; communication and reporting; and learning opportunities. Questions about the clarity of expectations and the quality of our relationship are a specific focus of our new grantee feedback system – to help us learn and improve.

Be proportionate:

We already take a flexible and light touch approach to reporting. We will accept reports written for other funders as a baseline, only asking for additional information if we need it to support our learning. We are working to ensure greater clarity regarding reporting expectations and what we wish to learn from our grantees at grant set-up and throughout our funding relationship. We have built-in questions about this to our feedback system to help us improve.

Don’t waste time:

We will continue to make sure that application guidelines and priorities are written in plain English and easy read formats. And ask people every year if we have got it right. We will continue to make sure that the team is available and happy to discuss any queries or questions about any of the funding programmes Corra runs. We will offer application information in different formats, for example a short video is available for the Henry Duncan Grants criteria. Whenever appropriate to do so, we will offer bespoke support to applicants (e.g. completing the form for a disabled applicant) and explore relevant formats (e.g. alternative languages).

Ask the relevant questions:

We will continue to conduct an annual customer satisfaction survey and publish the findings, highlighting what changes we have made to forms and processes. We will continue to ensure the information asked for in application forms is proportionate to the size of the grant. When delivering funds on behalf of others, we will discuss good practice in relation to the content of application forms, and make recommendations.

Accept risk:

We will make sure risk measures are proportionate to the size of the grant. We will conclude the reviewing of our Risk Policy and publish it on our website.

Act with urgency:

We will continue to work to a rolling calendar of activity to ensure efficiency and publish the timelines for all funding programmes. Where decisions are out of our control (managing funds on behalf of others), we will continue to commit to working to agree timelines that are in the best interest of prospective applicants. We will aim to give a decision within four weeks for applicants seeking less than £2,000.

Be open:

We will continue to provide tailored individual feedback on the majority of funding programmes. We will continue to publish our grant information on 360Giving. We will continue to publish an annual impact report that includes application and grant analysis. We will commit to carrying out more detailed analysis on the diversity and equity of grant distribution and to publishing this.

Enable flexibility:

We will continue to provide unrestricted funds whenever possible thorough the Henry Duncan Grants programme. We will not restrict funding to a specific item. If project funds are requested, we will be clear that the grant can be used for any aspect of the cost to deliver the project, including overheads. We will aim to offer unrestricted grants in the majority of our funding programmes within the next 5 years.

Communicate with purpose:

We will aim to build relationships based on respect and trust. We will recognise organisational expertise and will not interfere. We will continue to regularly asks applicants about their needs and offer support they would find helpful. We will continue to review grant offer letters to ensure all grantholders are aware of reporting requirements, type of relationship, time commitment and support available.

Be proportionate:

Wherever possible, we will accept reports produced for other funders. We will aim to provide optional reporting templates that are proportionate to the size of the grant for all its funds by the end of 2021. We will make sure that reporting templates are written in plain English, and whenever possible offer tick box options for monitoring and accountability purposes.

Don’t waste time:

After each funding round, we review all rejected applications, looking for ‘rules’ that we hadn’t identified or made clear. All our published application documents are independently copy edited for clarity and consistency.

Ask the relevant questions:

We use a 2 stage process. We aim to support 75% of applications at stage 2, so stage 1 is all about the three questions that most strongly influence our funding decisions. We take responsibility for compiling information for applicants from publicly held records.

Accept risk:

In the light of Covid-19, we are reviewing ‘what good looks like’ in relation to e.g. reserve levels; diversity of funding; financial projections. We will share this with applicants. We don’t require detailed activity plans. We trust organisations to make their own operational decisions.

Act with urgency:

We make all decisions about small grants within 30 days of receiving an application. If we have problems meeting our timetables, we get extra help rather than giving applicants less time or changing their deadlines.

Be open:

We try to think creatively about how and when to give useful feedback to all unsuccessful applicants – we never just say ‘we had more applications than we could fund’. We publish details of the reasons for rejection at each stage of our application process.

Enable flexibility:

Our Trustees are committed to moving 90% of our annual spend to unrestricted grants within three years. We contribute towards the essential operating costs of an organisation, not just to direct project costs.

Communicate with purpose:

When we make a grant, we jointly agree the expectations for the relationship between us. We are working on ways for funded organisations to safely raise challenges in their grant relationship with us.

Be proportionate:

We explain why we have awarded a grant and then jointly agree what grant reporting will work best for us both. We use a simple ‘tick box’ form to deal with all reports for accountability purposes.

Don’t waste time:

We review and clarify grant criteria documents on an ongoing basis, even while a fund is open. We have started to produce an FAQs document for each fund, especially while we are not available easily on the phone to respond to queries, and will continue to do this going forward.

Ask the relevant questions:

We review our application form at the launch of each new programme to ensure we’re only asking the questions we need to.
We plan to introduce an application guidance document that sets out clearly why we ask for each piece of information

Accept risk:

We have refined our approach to light-touch due diligence, especially for organisations we know, in light of Covid emergency funding.
Our planned guidance document will explain more clearly how we judge risk in assessing applications for pilot or more experimental activities.
We will consider our communication with donors, to develop their understanding of the value of supporting less tried-and-tested work.

Act with urgency:

Building on our experiences of rapid decision making in the pandemic, we plan to increase the number of regular grants rounds, so that groups are funded more quickly.
We will undertake to be more transparent with organisations about timescales for decisions on applications.

Be open:

We will publish analysis of our applications on our new website, along with examples of applications that were rejected for differing reasons, to help guide applicants. When practicable, we will give individual feedback on unsuccessful application decisions.

Enable flexibility:

We always aim to facilitate flexibility in grant spending, as situations change, through conversations with grantholders.
We will continue our growing commitment to funding organisations’ core costs. We will consider a strategic approach to unrestricted grantmaking

Communicate with purpose:

Our priority is to create opportunities for frank and honest exchange. Where possible we are pro-active in offering support, as well as constructive challenge.
We are reviewing our processes to enable more time for purposeful conversations with grantholders.

Be proportionate:

We aim for reporting to be an opportunity for mutually beneficial reflection, as far as possible. We will tell grantholders in advance what we will require at reporting stage.
We will expand our use of telephone evaluations, which yield higher quality feedback, and are less bureaucratic for small grants.
We will facilitate other non-standard forms of reporting, such as video, possibly asking grantholders at application stage to express a preference for reporting format.

Don’t waste time:

We will continue to publish our guidelines on our website and be available to talk via the phone to any applicant with questions about our priorities or processes. We will feed back what we are learning from applications, and applicant questions, into future guidelines and messaging on our website, in order to be as clear and transparent as possible. This year we are specifically thinking about how we keep our guidelines open, yet be as clear as possible about definite exclusions.

Ask the relevant questions:

We will continue to keep our first stage application short and only ask questions we need to make funding decisions. We will continue to take a relational approach at second stage, with no standard form to complete and grants managers taking responsibility for documenting second stage conversations with applicants. This year we are particularly looking at if our first stage questions are relevant to the current, rapidly changing context.

Accept risk:

We will be clear with applicants that we understand the uncertainty that many groups now face, and will continue to be led by a trusting relational approach. See our commitments to applicants during COVID here. This year we are working with trustees to agree the level of financial information they need to support effective decision making.

Act with urgency:

We will continue to work at the speed of the applicant, acting quickly where helpful and taking time where needed. This is in line with our principles. We aim to get back to first stage applicants within a month, which we achieved in 2020.

Be open:

We will continue to give detailed feedback for both successful and unsuccessful applicants at second stage, and continue to share success rates in our annual report. Although we are available for discussion on the phone in advance of an application, we are unable to give detailed individual feedback to the seven out of eight applicants who are unsuccessful at first stage.

Enable flexibility:

Last year 92% of our funding, by value, went to core costs for things like key salaries, and day-to-day running expenses. We continue to be flexible with grant holders around how funds are spent. See our commitment to grantholders during COVID here. We are committed to making more unrestricted grants, where an organisation’s legal structure makes this possible and where it would be welcomed by the applicant.

Communicate with purpose:

We will continue to use our relational approach to both applications and grant management to understand the needs of the grant holder, be clear at the start of the relationship what is expected of both parties, and ask what the people we work with want us to be accountable for over the grant period.

Be proportionate:

We will continue to work to further our understanding of what type of reporting would be useful to both the grant holder and us, prioritising learning and avoiding a ‘one size fits all’ approach. See our reporting guidance here.

Don’t waste time:

Guidelines for our grant schemes are available on our website and team members review to ensure they clearly state eligibility requirements and priorities. We provide Grants Workshops to help applicants understand our applications and process and encourage inquiries and phone calls from applicants before they apply to our grants to help provide clarification on any aspects of eligibility if needed.
We will promote the availability to speak with the Grants Team through our website and newsletter more regularly and provide more resources on our website for grantees/applicants. We will continue with our plan to schedule 1-2-1’s with organisations to offer support (which had to be paused due to COVID-19).

Ask the relevant questions:

Our application forms are tailored to the grant scheme being applied to and we take into consideration the size of grant, to ensure the questions are relevant and proportional. For larger grant schemes we have a ‘first stage’ phone call, to ensure the grant scheme is a good fit for the applicant’s programme before they spend time on an application.
Currently, we collect anonymous feedback on our website and receive feedback from grantees through End of Grant reports. We plan to review this feedback at least twice a year to assess improvements that can be made in our application form and overall process.

Accept risk:

We are flexible with the level of detail provided in the supporting documents of applicants/grantees. We do not reject organisations based on financial position alone and take a holistic approach to our due diligence. With our funding, we also aim to be non-prescriptive with project plans and budgets and trust the organisations to allocate funding appropriately to achieve the agreed outcomes.
We are currently thinking through how we can better demonstrate this flexibility to applicants (for example, letting organisations know their financial records do not have to be audited and can be informal) to reduce perceived barriers and provide more context on why we ask information and supporting documents.

Act with urgency:

We do our best within a small team to have grant decisions made and communicated quickly. We have our grant programmes open for a minimum of 4-6 weeks to give applicants adequate time to apply. We utilise freelance grant assessors where necessary to ensure deadlines are met without reducing applicants time. Our usual turnaround time for applications is 10-12 weeks.
We plan to review our grant approval levels this year to reduce the decision-making time for smaller grants, such as within 30 days.

Be open:

We provide information on the success rates in our notification letters, grants workshops and in annual reports. Typically, our grant programmes have a 30-40% success rate. We provide individual feedback on unsuccessful applications on request.
We will review how we provide feedback with the aim of providing detailed feedback to applicants, proportional to our staff capacity. We plan to publish on our website our general success rates and more information on the application journey/process to increase transparency.

Enable flexibility:

Through our own Foundation grantmaking we offer core funding. For our project funding, the majority of our programmes allow full cost recovery including a contribution to overheads. We are flexible with project extensions and re-adjustments made to budgets, activities and timescales.
We will ensure this flexibility is better communicated to our grantees and to keep open communication with them.

Communicate with purpose:

Our Conditions of Grant provides clear expectations for the grantee and also details our commitment to them e.g. a dedicated point of contact and support with volunteering. We check-in with our grantees through the life of their grant to identify any thing we can support with.
We will review our conditions of grant and offer letter templates in 2021 to ensure our commitment to grantees is clearly communicated.

Be proportionate:

We apply reporting requirements proportionally to the size of the grant and provide guidelines to grantees to complete the end of grant report. We use an online system that grantees can easily enter data and attach supporting documents and offer an offline template if preferred. We are flexible in our interim report formats if one is needed.
We will review the interim and end of grant report templates to ensure the information requested is proportional. A new, more flexible, reporting system will be implemented in 2021 through our database system which will further improve this.

Communicate with purpose:

We are looking to make our funding terms and conditions more of a two-way agreement, with commitments from us as well as the funded organisation.

Don’t waste time:

Our published guidance, application forms and all relevant documents developed for our 10-year Strategy (2020-30), were user tested with a range of external stakeholders, including low-capacity groups. This approach will be applied to the development of any new documents. We capture data on reasons for declining applications and use this to refine our external messaging and inform knowledge building across the team. We provide individual feedback to those applicants who have been unsuccessful and where possible, identify the specific issue which has informed our decision. We will also explain what an unsuccessful applicant would need to address in order to reapply and increase their chances of success, if appropriate.

Ask the relevant questions:

As part of the development of our Funds, we reviewed our application forms to ensure that we are only asking for information that we need to make a decision or for learning purposes. As we have a 1 stage process, the questions we ask are used:

• To inform our funding decisions
• To provide information on governance which is not available publicly.
• To capture information which will be reviewed as part of future reporting. 


• We are committed to adopting a proportionate approach in all aspects of our application and reporting processes. As our Funds are structured around the size of organisations based on income, this enables us to increase or reduce questions depending on the size/capacity of the applicant groups and the level of funding being requested.
• We have agreed a set of Learning questions which have been used to inform the data/information we request in application forms.
• We are committed to reviewing the information we gather as part of an 18-month review and considering the extent to which we are using the information we gather.

Accept risk:

We consider risk within the context of developing relationships with funded organisations where there is trust on both sides and a strong desire to redress the power imbalance between funder and funded organisations. We do not have a published policy on reserve levels but encourage applicants to share with us any financial information which they feel is important. The level of uncertainty faced by charities in the light of COVID is such that it would be unreasonable for us to expect meaningful financial forecasts from many of our applicant charities. Where we see that there is an element of financial risk but believe the proposed work to be closely aligned with our own strategic goals, we acknowledge this internally and put into place appropriate grant monitoring procedures. We no longer ask for detailed ‘activities’. We place trust in the organisation to deliver what is needed to support their client group.

Act with urgency:

We make all decisions about small grants within 30 days of receiving an application If we have problems meeting our timetables, we get extra help rather than giving applicants less time or changing their deadlines

Be open:

We try to think creatively about how and when to give useful feedback to all unsuccessful applicants – we never just say ‘we had more applications than we could fund’ We publish details of the reasons for rejection at each stage of our application process

Enable flexibility:

Our Trustees are committed to moving 90% of our annual spend to unrestricted grants within three years We contribute towards the essential operating costs of an organisation, not just to direct project costs

Communicate with purpose:

When we make a grant, we jointly agree the expectations for the relationship between us. We are working on ways for funded organisations to safely raise challenges in their grant relationship with us

Be proportionate:

We explain why we have awarded a grant and then jointly agree what grant reporting will work best for us both We use a simple ‘tick box’ form to deal with all reports for accountability purposes

Don’t waste time:

We provide unsuccessful applicants at each stage of our application process with feedback on our decision to reject them. We review our funding guidelines annually, ensuring that everything on our website is aligned to our guidelines and application forms. Our funding guidelines make clear what we do and don’t fund and includes a FAQs section too. the guidelines that we publish externally are the same as the ones we use to assess applications against. At our monthly review meetings for first stage applications we consider the ways in which our feedback to unsuccessful applicants may be as a result of our guidelines not being clear enough. With applicants moving to second stage, we share any questions or queries we have about their application, so that they can address these. We offer pre-application advice over email, telephone and in person (over video)

Ask the relevant questions:

We have a two stage process and all the questions that we ask and information that we collect is used to inform our decision making, and to identify trends about the reach of our applications in terms of cause/art form/collection type, geography, and organisation type and size.
We ask four main questions at first stage, alongside basic organisation information at stage one. At stage two we ask for a written application covering four questions, alongside more detailed information about the organisation’s safeguarding and their finances. We then conduct an in person (over video) conversation with the applicant to discuss their application further before making a decision. Our written applications are short (two page at first stage, four page at second stage), and so the conversation allows for a deeper discussion about the organisation and its application.
The quality of our application process has been independently assessed by nfpSynergy through a Perception Survey.

Accept risk:

We review our approach to risk through Board discussion and inform our Trustees of key trends to support their assessment of risk, e.g, on reserves levels, governance etc.
We offer core costs funding in the main, although project funding is available if requested. We trust organisations to use our money well and ask for an annual progress report, where we ask four key questions.

Act with urgency:

Our timetable for our main grants programme is published on our website and the timetable for our Museums and Galleries Fund. We have reviewed our Museums and Galleries Fund timeline and reduced the length of this by three months this year, and we will continue to keep this under review.
Two trustees meet on a monthly basis to review first stage applications and the Board meets every two months to decide on second stage applications. We offer support to applicants as needed and always offer feedback.

Be open:

All applicants are provided with feedback on our reason for rejecting or accepting an application. We publish our success rates in our annual report and a summary of the main reasons for rejecting applications. We now have data and information which allows us to do a deeper dive into the types of applications we are rejecting.

Enable flexibility:

All our funding is for core funding towards core costs and unrestricted core funding, unless project funding is specifically requested. We review our definition of core costs regularly and are increasingly discussing as a Board and with applicants our commitment to providing unrestricted core funding.

Communicate with purpose:

Our grant offer letter – which is sent via email – states who in the team will be the point of contact for the grantee and they are provided with that person’s contact details. The offer letter also outlines thereporting requirements for the grantee. As part of their second stage application process, they are also introduced to our Grants Assistant, thus providing them with another point of contact in the team should they need it during the lifetime of their grant. Our contact details and staff bios are publicly available.
The progress reporting process is clearly outlined by our Grants Assistant and grantees are provided with reminders well in advance, as well as the option to discuss altering the reporting as needed. Issues, the need to change the grant usage etc. are all things that we are happy to support on a case by case basis and in discussion with the grantee.
As part of our Progress Reporting request, we now ask for feedback from the grantee about the impact of their grant amount varying from what they originally requested – if this is applicable.

Be proportionate:

The quality of our progress reporting process has been independently audited through a Perception Survey led by nfpSynergy. We ask for annual reporting only, and ask four questions for grantees to report back on. We do not offer a template, beyond just the four questions.
We have plans to begin group reviews of Progress Reports that the Grants Team processes and signs off, in order to spot trends, recurring themes etc. more easily and discuss the ways in which we may wish to support/respond to these.

Don’t waste time:

• We use our website to clearly explain the parameters of each of our grant funds and the requirements for application. We have a page outlining what we do not fund.
• We ask for feedback on our online forms from applicants and review annually, updating where necessary.
• Where appropriate, we have introduced eligibility checkers into the application process to ensure all those who apply to the Charity fulfill our basic requirements.

Ask the relevant questions:

• We use a two stage process for Main Grants and meet with all applicants prior to sending the stage two application to ensure that we only take forward those requests which have real potential of funding.
• We regularly review applications to ensure we are receiving the information we need and that all information provided is utilised.
• We only collect information which is required to make a funding decision or to aid us to support organisations over the longer term (e.g. capacity building needs, intelligence on activities within our Beneficial Area.).

Accept risk:

• We recognise that COVID-19 has put an immense strain on organisations and therefore some may not be as financially secure as they expected/hope, or be operating with the same level of efficiency due to resourcing changes (staff redundancies etc.).
• When grantees delivery plans change significantly we are open to discussing this and will take the risk in adjusting the grant purpose if required.

Act with urgency:

• We are clear on our deadlines and explain the rationale behind them, offering flexibility when possible should a grantee require it.
• Applications to the SHAF are considered within two weeks of the holiday deadline, with all applications receiving a decision within a month of application.
• We have a diversity of funds which have proportionate timescales – for example our Small Grants Fund has a shorter response time and offers funding for smaller groups /projects more quickly than the Main Grants.

Be open:

• We have recently reviewed the declination coding, with a view to providing more relevant feedback on the correspondence sent to grantees.
• We meet with applicants to discuss their applications and explain when a grant proposal cannot be taken to the second stage. If there is the potential to do so, we explain how an applicant can overcome these challenges to ensure future applications are successful.

Enable flexibility:

• We are open to core and unrestricted funding within our grant parameters (age range/Beneficial Area).
• We make ourselves readily available to grantees to discuss unexpected challenges/changing needs and will be flexible in helping the grantee meet these.
• We provide a contribution to overheads as part of direct project funding.
• In light of COVID-19 we will provide further support to our grantees to ensure they remain viable organisations for the future.

Communicate with purpose:

• We demonstrate the type of relationship we like from the outset and explain that as a funder we are here to support the grantee.
• We strive to be an approachable and contactable grantmaker to allow grantees the freedom to discuss their challenges or concerns as openly as possible.

Be proportionate:

• We only ask applicants for the information necessary to obtain approval for the release of further tranches or to support JLC’s intelligence gathering on our Beneficial Area.
• Reporting is proportionate to the size of the grant received.
• Reporting requirements are explained on the grant contract at the time of award and reporting forms are made available to grantees two months before the report is due.
• Reporting requirements are reviewed on an annual basis to ensure they remain proportionate and relevant.

Don’t waste time:

Whilst we do not currently have an open grants programme, should we open one in the future we will encourage all potential applicants to pick up the phone and speak to us first, thus ensuring that no-one wastes their time submitting an application that has little chance of success.

Ask the relevant questions:

When assessing new organisations we do not have a standard application form, we start with a conversation and then ask for two sides of A4 explaining what they want to do, supplemented by publicly held information, their website, social media etc.

Accept risk:

We make core grants to organisations and do not require them to set or report against targets. We trust them to make their own operational decisions.

Act with urgency:

We make core grants to organisations and do not require them to set or report against targets. We trust them to make their own operational decisions.

Be open:

We give clear information on our website about our grant-making status (i.e. not currently having an open grants programme) and respond promptly to all unsolicited requests.

Enable flexibility:

We give mostly unrestricted, core funding.

Communicate with purpose:

We are clear about our expectations of the relationship between the Foundation and our grant-holders (we call them Strategic Partners). Our grant conditions are set out in a single page document and we have a brief (just over a page long) Partnership Agreement which gives further clarity about our expectations of the relationship between the Foundation and its Strategic Partners.

Be proportionate:

We require an annual two-page report on ‘what the world looks like where you are’, supplemented by sight of their six-monthly management accounts. Most ‘grant management’ is carried out through conversation with the Trust Manager. Trustees understand what each organisation does through visits and discussion with each Strategic Partner developing a relationship with a ‘paired’ trustee.

Don’t waste time:

We will review incoming queries from prospective applicants and use these to clarify any areas of our information that are unclear or causing confusion. We will review our reasons for rejecting applications and will use these to ensure our published criteria and exclusions are transparent and up to date. We will develop our approach to providing information in different formats and forums to make it more accessible for prospective applicants – this will include more accessible, written formats and opportunities to speak to staff through enquiry calls and webinars.

Ask the relevant questions:

We use a 2 stage process for open applications and aim to support at least 70% of applications at stage 2. We will ensure the questions at stage 1 allow us to make effective decisions on which applications to take forward. We will undertake user testing on new application forms to ensure the questions are clear and not duplicative. Every 6 months, we will monitor how long applicants are spending on completing application forms. We will then review our forms to ensure that the questions we are asking are providing the information we need in a way that is as efficient as possible – e.g. asking 1 question rather than 3.

Accept risk:

Through Covid-19, we have re-assessed how much detail we require from applicants concerning their stability, acknowledging the complexity of planning in a rapidly changing environment. We are looking at how to continue these principles into our ongoing funding to make sure that we are realistic about risk management and sharing risk with organisations.

Act with urgency:

We publish our application turnaround times and commit to sticking with those. We will bring in additional resource if necessary to meet these commitments. We have developed systems for responding more rapidly to need through the Covid pandemic, and we are working with Trustees to embed some of these approaches going forward.

Be open:

We publish information about all our awarded grants on our website and to the 360Giving data standard. We will give written feedback on the main reason for declination to all unsuccessful applicants and will give more detailed feedback to applicants that are declined at the second stage. We will aim for this feedback to be developmental.

Enable flexibility:

We offer a high degree of flexibility in the work and costs that we will fund, including project and operating costs depending on the needs of the organisation. During the life of the grant, we will continue to offer flexibility to ensure organisations can use the funds appropriately as the context shifts.

Communicate with purpose:

We publish written information about the grant relationships we expect to hold to inform prospective applicants about what they can expect. When we award a grant, we will jointly agree to the expectations for the relationship between us, and each grant-holder is clear on who the key point of contact is to raise any issues with as they arise.

Be proportionate:

We will explain why we have awarded a grant and will jointly agree on an approach to grant reporting. The approach will be flexible, allowing grant-holders to provide update reports verbally rather than in writing. A brief, written report at the end of the grant will be required for accountability and learning purposes; however, we do not require a bespoke report or a particular format. We are happy to receive the information in the way which is easiest and most efficient for the organisation to provide. We will provide independent opportunities for grant-holders to provide feedback on their relationship experience and commit to acting on this feedback to improve the experience.

Don’t waste time:

We will base our eligibility and application questions on key considerations we require to make funding decisions. We will continue to make sure our funding criteria and exclusions are distilled in one place on our website, and are clear and easy-to-understand, without the need for additional documents to download. After each funding round, we review all applicant feedback and make improvements that aim to save future applicants’ time. We will monitor the percentage of organisations we turn down and the rationale to make adjustments to our funding criteria if there are improvements to be made. We will review how our new, 3 Stage process works and adjust it in response to feedback.

Ask the relevant questions:

We use a 3 stage process:
• Stage 1 asks just three questions (in addition to basic name/address details): i) Why are you well placed to meet the needs of the people you want to help?; ii) What difference are you making?; iii) What do you want to do at the moment but cannot do?
• Stage 2 asks two additional questions on the applicant’s leadership and how it currently evaluates its work (and any help it may need to develop this), and asks for two case studies/stories that help describe the applicant’s work. At this stage, we request the latest existing safeguarding policy and management accounts, leaving room for applicants to add anything they want, including any comments they want to make about their latest audited accounts.
• The majority of Stage 2 applicants are invited to Stage 3. Those not invited generally are not due to concerns identified in our due diligence phase, but we explain this to those not successful.
• Stage 3 is a visit to the applicant by our Director and a Trustee. We aim to fund 100% of applicants at Stage 3 unless specific concerns emerge at this stage (feedback is then given). We explain, ahead of the Stage 3 visit, about our approach, what we want to talk about and invite applicant questions.
We offer unrestricted grants, so do not ask for financial information that is not already available in the form of annual audited accounts or the latest management accounts. We take responsibility for compiling information on applicants from publicly held records.

Accept risk:

We offer unrestricted grants and make it clear in our Terms and Conditions that it is the grantee’s decision on how to spend those funds, whether that be on reserves or activity. We don’t require a detailed activity plan and trust organisations to make their own operational decisions. We want to learn more from grantees and other funders about how best to evaluate unrestricted grants. In the light of Covid-19, we are reviewing ‘what good looks like’ in relation to reserve levels, diversity of funding etc. and will share with applicants.

Act with urgency:

Our Open Fund grants are for up to £30,000 for up to 3 years to small charities, so these are large grants. We need to get to know charities through our 3 stage process before awarding a grant. However, we have a clear timetable on our website that sets out what decisions are made and when, and let applicants know the outcome at each stage. As we plan the second round of our Open Fund grants programme, we are committed to reducing decision-making times where possible. We have a Strategic Fund that we use to make quick decisions in response to urgent needs, such as Covid-19, when we work in partnership with other funders.

Be open:

We give written, personalised feedback to all unsuccessful applicants, and also offer a phone call. As we plan for Round 2 of our Open Grants programme, we will review the reasons for turning down Round 1 applications on our website. We will find ways of sharing these with potential applicants in a way that is helpful and transparent.

Enable flexibility:

100% of our Open Fund grants have been unrestricted since we re-launched in July 2019. When we collaborate with other funders through our Strategic Fund, we are committed to influencing other funders and maximising unrestricted funding. When we award a Strategic Grant directly to an organisation - directly from Peter Minet Trust - the grant will be unrestricted.

Communicate with purpose:

We include information on our website about the expectations of our relationship we aim to build with charities we fund. At each stage of the application, we share our approach and expectations and invite questions. When an award is made, the Terms and Conditions set the relationship out clearly, incorporating suggestions from the grantee. We will continue to explore ways of grantees to have a two-way dialogue during the funding relationship to ask questions and raise any concerns.

Be proportionate:

We are committed to light touch monitoring. We don’t have a monitoring form or ask for bespoke monitoring. At the start of the funding relationship, we ask grantees to tell us what monitoring works for them (e.g. visits, zooms or phone calls; sharing reports they are already producing for other funders or a combination). We agree that ahead of the beginning of the grant period. As funders of unrestricted grants, we are interested in understanding what the organisation, as a whole, has undertaken over the year – not specific activities. It remains important to ensure that grantees are compliant in terms of safeguarding and regulatory matters, but we aim to monitor this in a way that is transparent and supportive. We will continue to take advice on this from other funders and charities.

Don’t waste time:

We do not accept applications for funding. We are clear about this on our website and in our interactions with grant-seekers. If we are, on occasion, a partner in specific grant schemes that do take applications, we will be open and transparent about the purpose of the fund and clearly explain any requirements and exclusions.

Ask the relevant questions:

We go through a due diligence process with our grantees that is as streamlined as possible, asking only for information that cannot be sourced publicly. We only ask the questions we need to ask to ensure we understand the organisation, the context in which it operates, and the main risks and challenges. We do this as part of wider relationship-building or, for renewals, as part of a check-in conversation.

Accept risk:

Our funding is based on individual relationships, and we do not measure our grantees against tick box standards. We do not expect our grants to be risk-free or everything to go to plan. What we do ask for is a frank and honest dialogue with our grantees, so that both sides can understand the challenges and maximise the opportunities for learning. All organisations go through challenging periods from time to time, even without a pandemic, and by providing unrestricted funds over long periods of time we demonstrate trust in our grantees, an acceptance of risk and a willingness to be with them on their journey.

Act with urgency:

We make decisions as quickly as possible and communicate clearly with grantees on the timings of decisions and payments. We will respond swiftly to urgent requests and try to be accommodating of any timetables they are working to.

Be open:

We do not take applications, but we communicate clearly and carefully with our Partners regarding any changes in their funding.

Enable flexibility:

The majority of our grants are either unrestricted or for core costs, e.g. a staff post. When we fund a project, this is often at the request of the organisation itself, for example, to pilot a new initiative or carry out research that will feed into the wider organisation, and we expect overheads to be included in the budget. We are flexible and responsive to our grantees’ needs and changing circumstances.

Communicate with purpose:

When we make a grant, we are committing to more than funding, we are starting a relationship. Both partners will need to invest time in building that relationship but relational grant-making should not be a burden for the grantee. We make it clear to our grantees that we will be better able to support them if we understand the challenges they face and the contexts in which they are operating, and that they will not be penalised for honesty. When a grant closes, we give as much notice as possible, as well as bridging support, so that the organisation can plan for the future. We are taking steps to be even clearer with our grantees about why we are funding them and the purpose of the grant.

Be proportionate:

We allow our grantees to report to us in whatever style works best for them. We make it clear that their reports are the trigger for a wider conversation and should not be onerous to write, and that we are happy to accept joint reporting with other funders. The purpose of reporting is to encourage reflection for our grantees and to give them a check-in point to state their achievements and challenges, and for us to learn so that we can be a more effective funder. We prefer the written report to trigger a face-to-face conversation, so it does not need to be long or overly detailed, and can be replaced with a verbal update if a grantee is under pressure.

Don’t waste time:

We will review our funding guidelines to be clearer about who and what we fund, including our exclusions. We will review these quarterly to take on any feedback and in light of funding decisions that we have made, to see if they can be made clearer and more helpful. We will keep our simple stage one form to give applicants an early indication of whether to apply to the Trust without them having to do additional work, fill in a long form or wait a long time. We will attend ‘meet the funders’ and other sector-specific meetings where relevant to talk about our funding priorities, and answer questions. We will improve the information that we provide for grant holders so it is easier for them to make a grant claim and they do not waste their time asking for help. We tell any applicant that clearly does not meet our programme criteria the outcome of their application as soon as possible.

Ask the relevant questions:

We use a two-stage process that enables us to give applicants feedback at an early stage based on minimal information. We will review the information that we ask for at stage two so that we only ask for information that we will actively use in assessing applications. We will ensure that the level of information required is proportionate to the size and type of grant. We take responsibility for compiling information on applicants from publicly held records (e.g. accounts from the Charity Commission).

Accept risk:

In light of Covid-19, we are flexible when grantees have to change the timescale and nature of their work. We will build closer relationships to grantees to better understand the issues that they are facing and how we can help. We keep our Board of Trustees up to date on the sector and its needs to understand the issues facing applicants and grantees.

Act with urgency:

We respond to all stage one applications within four weeks. We make decisions on small grants (£5,000 or less) within four weeks of receiving an application. We will publish assessment timetables for our quarterly Board meetings. We will let applicants know the meeting at which their application is being considered. If there is a change, we will discuss this with the applicant.

Be open:

• We give tailored feedback to unsuccessful applicants.
• We will publish our success rates in our annual report.
• We publish our grants data on 360 Giving.
• We publish the grants awarded on our website.

Enable flexibility:

• We will review the nature of the funding that we provide, and give unrestricted funding where applicable.
• We provide funding for core operating costs under our social welfare grants programme.
• We will be open to discussions with grantees about potential changes to delivery if necessary.

Communicate with purpose:

• We will review our grant holder information to be clearer on the information that we require from grantees during the course of the project and why we require it.
• We aim to develop closer and stronger relationships with grantees – more relational rather than transactional.

Be proportionate:

We are reviewing the monitoring information that we require to make sure that it is proportionate to the size of the grant. We will introduce light touch methods to gather data and insights on funded projects which will also help us evaluate the impact of our funding.

Don’t waste time:

We are fortunate that our only criterion is that the grant must be used in support of older people in Southwark – this is made clear in all our communications. On occasion, we receive applications for activities or initiatives that are wider than this, but which include an older group of people. In such cases, we sometimes make a proportional grant.

Ask the relevant questions:

We have a very straightforward application process that asks applicants to describe the activity and the target group, the budget, and other funding sources they are investigating. We tend to give a lot of grants to the same organisations year on year, so the due diligence WRT to governance and financial management has already been done.

Accept risk:

This issue of risk rarely arises. As already mentioned, we know the VCS (Voluntary and Community Sector) organisations who are working with the older population and we support them regularly. Many of the same programmes repeat annually, e.g. befriending, or activities around Christmas time, and so we trust the organisations to deliver what they say they will.

Act with urgency:

Although the sub-committee of trustees that assesses and approves grants meets quarterly, most of our grant recipients know the schedule and submit their applications accordingly. On the occasions when we receive an urgent application, the CEO (Chief Executive Officer) and the Chair of the Committee will review the application. The Chair will circulate the headlines to the other trustees and ask them to indicate their approval, so we are usually very quick to respond and quick to actually send the funds!

Be open:

Because our criteria are so simple, it is rare that we actually refuse a funding application. Our grant-giving activity is still quite modest, but this will increase significantly in the future as a result of major property development. It is forecast to treble our annual income and increase our grants budget ten-fold to c.£750k annually by 2025. This increase will require a totally different management and administration level, which we are planning for now.

Enable flexibility:

Provided that the target of the application is older people, then all our grants are unrestricted; alternatively, it could be argued that all our grants are restricted to be used in support of older people…We do provide core funding support, for example, towards the salary costs of a support worker, and sometimes for physical equipment. In light of the Covid-19 crisis, grants that had been made pre-covid were repurposed to meet the unique challenges it represents.

Communicate with purpose:

We have developed close working relationships with the organisations we fund; many of our own older members and residents use the facilities, services and activities that we fund through these organisations. We trust them to do what they say they will, and we share a common purpose of trying to address the problems of isolation, loneliness and reduced mobility that affect older people.

Be proportionate:

We require little more than a confirmation that the activity etc. happened, and how many people were able to participate. We particularly welcome feedback from participants so that we can have a conversation with the organisation about the outcome as a learning tool for future planning.

Don’t waste time:

• We will publish our Funding Strategy, clearly explaining our funding priorities and application processes.
• We will publish assessment criteria alongside all application forms, showing which questions relate to which criteria.
• After each funding round we will review our materials to see what we can do better next time.
• We will continue to run at least one webinar for interested applicants for open funding rounds so that they can hear about our priorities and ask any clarifying questions.
• We will review application forms to keep them as brief as we can, without compromising the detail of information and data we need to collect.
• Where possible, we will not use hyperlinks as a shortcut to communicating related information.

Ask the relevant questions:

• We use a two-stage process.
• All applicants invited to Stage 2 have access to a mentor to support them through the application. They will have a mixture of online and in-person support.
• The number of questions we ask are proportionate to the size of the grant, and we will do our best to ensure that there is no duplication or overlap in the questions we ask.
• Where materials required for due diligence are publicly available, we will compile them, but we may ask for more detailed or up-to-date documents (e.g. safeguarding policies or management accounts) as part of the process if we need to.

Accept risk:

• We will be clear with applicants about the assessment criteria for due diligence and our rationale (e.g. reserve levels, turnover etc.) and ensure they are proportionate to the grant and take into account the post-COVID environment for charities.
• We know that we can learn just as much from the unexpected – including what doesn’t work, and actively encourage grantees to revise their plans in relation to new circumstances and learning.
• We prioritise outcomes rather than high outputs. We don’t treat anticipated beneficiary numbers as fixed ‘targets’ and trust organisations to make decisions about why these might change.

Act with urgency:

• As a funder that doesn’t accept unsolicited applications, we will be clear with applicants about the timescales in application materials and we will continue to be flexible in shifting deadlines, only if this is required for applicants (not for Spirit).

Be open:

• We offer tailored and high-quality personal feedback to all unsuccessful applications at every stage of the process.
• As we have small numbers of applicants, we do not publicly publish the reasons for rejection for funding rounds.
• We share our funding data on 360 giving.

Enable flexibility:

• We contribute to the operating costs of the organisation at a level that is proportionate to the grant size (except if we are disbursing funds for a third party with set limits, i.e. Government).
• As a spend-out Trust, due to committing our remaining endowment by 2022, we cannot commit to giving unrestricted grants within three years.
• We can’t give fully unrestricted funding. However, at any stage in the grant, we welcome open conversations about things grantees want to do differently from their original application.
• We make it clear that grantees should fully cover costs beyond their direct engagement with participants – and that includes proper time for planning, reflection and getting to people they believe would benefit the most from their activity.

Communicate with purpose:

• We aim for honest, open relationships with our grant holders and seek opportunities for them to give feedback on us as an organisation, including to our independent evaluator.
• We are clear about expectations in our grant offer letter and grant set-up meeting but approach this as a discussion to agree on the parameters of the relationships with grantees.
• We have a close working relationship with grantees, where they can, and do, raise issues and risk with us in a safe and supported environment.
• Our external evaluator seeks independent feedback on how we are doing as a funder and we act on that feedback.

Be proportionate:

• As a spend-out Trust, whose remit is to develop knowledge and evidence to benefit the wider sectors we work in, we do require grantees to report on outcomes and impact in an agreed format.
• Reporting is always proportionate to the size and scope of the grant.
• We are clear at the application, award and set-up stages what information we are interested in and why we ask for the information that appears on formal reports.
• We are committed to not asking for information that we do not use.
• During the grant, we are flexible about the detail of reports and since the start of the COVID pandemic, have reduced and adapted our reporting requirements.
• We review our reporting processes regularly to see how we can improve them.

Don’t waste time:

We consciously seek feedback on our application process both before and after our funding round. We consult externally on our application form, aiming to produce a document which is accessible and efficient for all parties. We endeavour to remain approachable throughout the application process to address any queries applicants may have.

Ask the relevant questions:

We use a two-stage application process requesting an overview of requirements initially. We send shortlisted candidates a list of points for discussion, inviting relevant parties to participate in a call with our Programme Director and Trustees. We only request documentation which applicants will have already produced for other parties.

Accept risk:

We are conscious of the increased burden on our partners in light of the Covid-19 pandemic and are mindful of not prolonging due diligence checks. We request the necessary documentation required for compliance checks at the initial application stage to facilitate timely execution of this process. We will only request anticipated programme and budget frameworks, and we will remain flexible as to the agreed scope and timing of spend. We will avoid overtly bureaucratic requests for evidence of impact and will rely on the strength of the relationships and trust we have developed with our partners to inform our insights.

Act with urgency:

We will be transparent with applicants about the duration of our grant application process and will give guidance on when they can expect to receive our response. We will endeavour to shortlist prospective grant recipients within 30 days of the application deadline and make efforts to begin awarding grants shortly thereafter.

Be open:

We will share a personalised response to unsuccessful applicants and will endeavour to give constructive feedback on their application. We will always endeavour to remain approachable and willing to have an open dialogue with all applicants, whether they are shortlisted for a grant or not.

Enable flexibility:

We will offer a range of different grants to suit our partners' varying needs, including the options of unrestricted and matched funding. We recognise that the Covid-19 pandemic has placed extraordinary pressure on VCSE (Voluntary, Community and Social Enterprises) organisations, and we endeavour to adapt our procedures and practices to best support them. We recognise the full costs associated with running a VCSE organisation and encourage grant applicants to include operational costs in their funding requests.

Communicate with purpose:

We encourage an open dialogue with all our partners and work hard to develop a level of trust whereby they feel comfortable approaching us if they need to alter their plans. We aim to remain flexible and considerate in our funding approach and how we communicate with partners.

Be proportionate:

We recognise that impact reporting processes and documentation will vary for each of our partners. In acknowledgement of this, we are happy to review existing reports and reviews rather than insist on bespoke documentation being created in respect of our grant.

Don’t waste time:

We approach organisations for 45 - 60 minute conversations instead of using written application forms. We try to be clear about why we are approaching organisations, what we want to know about and what the conversation might lead to (e.g. the scope of potential funding). Working proactively, we only approach organisations for conversations whom we think we are likely to want to fund, so we do not waste time for those we are unlikely to support. We aim to follow up with organisations to let them know if we’re able to offer a grant quickly, usually within 1-2 weeks, sometimes 3-4 weeks.

Ask the relevant questions:

We try to gather as much information as possible from desk-based research, e.g. Charity Commission searches and organisations’ websites. We do not use application forms, as we try to reduce, as much as possible, the administrative burden placed on grantees. When we invite potential grantees for a call, we give contacts an idea of what we want to talk about. This process responds to feedback from grantees who suggested that a rough agenda for these calls would be helpful. Where we do ask for more detail of information, we try, as much as possible, to use documents/info that is already compiled, and/or make sure to be clear that rough outlines and notes are totally acceptable.

Accept risk:

We fully understand that a good application form does not necessarily indicate good past/future service provision (and vice versa). Instead, we work by getting to know organisations and seeking to understand their work, how they think about what ‘good’ looks like, and how they take on board community (service user) feedback and input – ideally with community leadership. Working without application forms could be perceived riskier, but we are happy to take a different approach and appreciate the different risks this entails.

Act with urgency:

Following a call about potential funding with organisations, we seek to make decisions within 1-2 weeks, sometimes up to 3-4 weeks. We make grants soon after decisions.

Be open:

Where we decline to make a grant, we try to offer a meaningful explanation and/or feedback to explain our decision. We also seek feedback from grantees, for example, via a short anonymous survey seeking grantees’ input and experiences. We let grantees know how their feedback has influenced our approach so that they can see the impact of their suggestions. We also ask grantees to recommend and suggest other organisations we might want to look at; where we make a grant to one of those recommendations, we try to let the person who suggested it know to see the impact of their suggestion.

Enable flexibility:

We try to give unrestricted grants as far as possible. Where we do discuss supporting a specific project or work area with a grantee we are clear that if their plans change, we would be happy to see the funds used elsewhere. Unrestricted grants are more difficult to follow up, as we cannot ask where exactly the money went or what precise difference it made. Therefore, we ask open-ended, follow-up questions, seeking to understand if the organisation as a whole is doing effective work and making good progress. We are comfortable when we think our donation supports work that is responsive to community needs and creates tailored, thoughtful provision for those an organisation supports.

Communicate with purpose:

We try to be as respectful as possible of organisations’ time. By inviting conversations rather than applications, we hope to reduce organisations’ time spent ‘applying’. By reaching out to organisations we think we want to fund, we hope to avoid organisations applying unsuccessfully. After holding short conversations (45 - 60 mins) we aim to get back to organisations to let them know if we’re able to offer support within 1-2 weeks, sometimes slightly longer. We try to get supportive feedback if we do not make a grant. We always aim to build positive relationships, recognising that we learn most from organisations on the ground in the communities we hope to support. We ask grantees (and some non-grantees) to make suggestions and recommendations, to help broaden our networks and to share the power we have as a grantmaker.

Be proportionate:

We recognise that reporting can be burdensome and create significant extra work for grantees. Responding to feedback from grantees invites follow-up in a number of formats, including welcoming reports written for other funders/other purposes. We let grantees know at the point of donation that we will follow up in 'x' months, but that we will welcome contact in between. During follow up conversations, we seek to learn about organisations’ work and their reflections post-grant. We also try to identify other ways in which we can be supportive beyond our funding.

Don’t waste time:

We regularly review and update information on our funding criteria to help reduce the number of ineligible applications and to avoid wasting applicants’ time.
We actively encourage charities to contact us for advice before applying.

Ask the relevant questions:

We have developed a simple two-page application form which we believe is proportionate to the size of grants we give whilst providing us with sufficient information to make an informed funding decision.
We check applicant details on the Charity Commission website to help reduce the amount of information required from the applicant.
We regularly ask applicants for their views on the grant application process.

Accept risk:

As a Foundation we believe we should be prepared to accept some element of risk when supporting small charities undertaking work in the arts field where success cannot be guaranteed.
Our light-touch grant application process demonstrates our trust in the abilities of these charities to deliver their work.

Act with urgency:

We hold two regular trustee meetings a year for grant decision-making.
In addition, we have recently implemented an email decision-making process for a rapid response to grant requests as and when required.
We endeavour to notify successful applicants and make grant payments within a week of the approval decision.

Be open:

We respond promptly to every grant applicant and always provide feedback on why any application has been unsuccessful.
In future we will include information in our enewsletter on application success rates.

Enable flexibility:

We are happy to consider giving core funding and unrestricted grants to provide flexibility to funded charities.

Communicate with purpose:

We aim to develop personal connections with grant recipients so they can feel comfortable approaching us with any issues.

Be proportionate:

We have a simple monitoring form which provides us with the information we require and enables the grant recipient to critically review the funded work, making the process useful for both parties.

Don’t waste time:

Our website provides clear information on our funding priorities and exclusions and we have a short quiz to enable organisations to quickly check their eligibility before completing an application form. We also offer the opportunity to discuss any queries with our Grants Officer before applying.

Ask the relevant questions:

We have a 2 stage process, collecting more detailed information such as safeguarding policies from applicants once they have been shortlisted as a potential fit with our criteria and priorities rather than at the beginning of the process.

We regularly review our application forms to ensure that we only collect information that we use to make funding decisions or improve our practice. The length of our form was greatly reduced in 2019 and we developed an even more streamlined version for our grantees to use for grant extension requests during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Accept risk:

During 2020 we streamlined our re-application and reporting approach in recognition of the impact that the pandemic was having on our grantees. We are now reviewing our approach to risk management during our assessment process and seeking to ensure it is proportionate and reasonable in relation to the context within which organisations are operating and the support we may provide.

Act with urgency:

We are transparent about the time it takes us to make funding decisions, and have made improvements to our processes to speed this up (we now consider first stage applications at each of our quarterly trustee meetings instead of twice a year). We keep our grant-making processes under regular review and seek to make improvements where we can.

Be open:

We offer feedback to all applicants rejected at the second stage of our assessment process. We plan to publish the most common reasons for rejection at stage one on our website during 2021.

We publish all our grants as open source data and make them available on the 360Giving website, enabling applicants to see the type of organisations/projects that have been awarded funding

Enable flexibility:

Trustees usually award unrestricted funding. Where restricted grants are made, we seek to keep these as flexible as possible e.g. towards a broad area of work rather than a specific salaried post or activity cost. We also aim to be as flexible as possible in respect of monitoring and reapplication deadlines and encourage grantees to get in touch with us if they think that a deadline is unrealistic for them to achieve or if they find they are unable to meet it due to other urgent priorities.

Communicate with purpose:

Our website includes information about our reporting requirements and approach to learning, and this is reconfirmed in our offer letters to successful applicants. We seek positive and meaningful relationships with grantees, and are sensitive to the impact of any requests for additional contact with us.

Be proportionate:

In 2019 we greatly reduced the length of our monitoring form and during 2020 we introduced light-touch reporting in recognition of the impact that the pandemic was having on our grantees. We are now reviewing our ongoing approach to ensure it is proportionate, meaningful and reasonable in relation to the context within which organisations are operating, as well as the level and type of funding we provide.

Don’t waste time:

We will regularly review our funding priorities so that we are clear about what we fund and will be open and transparent about all our requirements and exclusions.

Ask the relevant questions:

We use a two-stage process. We aim to support a high percentage of applications at stage 2, so stage 1 is all about the key questions that most strongly influence our funding decisions.
We take responsibility for checking information on applicants from publicly held records where information is not supplied (e.g Charity Commission, Companies House).

Accept risk:

We recognise that organisations have been severely affected by the pandemic and will approach applications in a positive and sympathetic manner. We will review and discuss with Trustees ‘what good looks like’ in relation to reserve levels, diversity of funding and financial projections so that decisions are taken in light of this information. We will be honest and open in our communications with applicants.

Act with urgency:

We publish our timetables on our website and make clear how long decision-making takes.
We aim to make initial response to applications within 14 working days, either asking for more information or indicating we are unable proceed with an application. We aim to keep organisations informed at each stage of the process and will communicate issues which impact on the progress of an application.

Be open:

We will always give open and honest detailed feedback when requested.
We analyse every year the success rate and reasons for rejection and will review how we can be more transparent. We will commit to reviewing how we communicate the reasons for rejection with applicants.
We will review options for data-sharing.

Enable flexibility:

The Foundation has always been committed towards supporting the essential operating costs of an organisation or group, not just direct project costs. Every year a high percentage of our funding goes towards the core costs of organisations.

Communicate with purpose:

The Foundation is realistic and clear about the relationship with organisations. We encourage organisations to raise concerns or issues which may affect the delivery of its work or spending of the grant. The Foundation commits to being flexible with organisations that enables the grant to be spent.

Be proportionate:

The Foundation understands that any reporting should be consummate with the level of grant awarded. Our grant funding is modest and therefore we require only a short report and accounts at the end of the grant or to enable the release of the next instalment. This is communicated with all applicants.

Don’t waste time:

We have simple eligibility criteria and a short online application process, which should take 20 minutes to complete. We ask for funding idea (200 words max), contact information, and last year’s income and expenditure (so we have an immediate idea of the size of the organisation). Due to Covid and our temporarily reduced resources, we have paused our application system, and instead, we are using our network to identify grant opportunities.

Ask the relevant questions:

As above, our application form consists of minimal number of questions. We arrange a visit for applicants we are interested in (following a monthly Trustee review). We conduct our own due diligence on those applicants before we meet. Our meeting lasts one hour (max.) at their premises. We let them lead the conversation, but we ask further questions from our due diligence review.

Accept risk:

We have a clear understanding of the current environment in which charitable organisations are working and take this into consideration with all working practices. Typically, our grant may only be 5% to 15% of an organisation’s annual running costs; therefore, we do not perceive any real risk in our grant-giving.

Act with urgency:

As a small, family-run trust, we are able to keep our processes & administration to an absolute minimum. We review applications monthly. Declined applicants are informed immediately. Applicants we visit are put forward to quarterly Trustee decision meetings. Whilst we do have a standard timetable in relation to applications, we are equally able to respond quickly to urgent requests (sometimes in one or two days).

Be open:

We give feedback upon request to declined online applicants. As the information they provide has been minimal, feedback is rarely requested as little time has been spent applying, and there is little feedback we can give. We are fully open and transparent with the (very occasional) applicants who are unsuccessful post-visit/meeting.

Enable flexibility:

We encourage applicants to request the funding they want; unrestricted, core, project or capital. We have no preference. The majority of our grants are now for core costs, with an increasing number being issued as “unrestricted”. Throughout the current pandemic, we have been flexible regarding the usage of funds and responded positively to all requests for a change of use for the funding issued, prompted by our communications.

Communicate with purpose:

Trustees develop working relationships with grantees. We offer multi-year grants (up to 3 years) and longer-term relationships (+3 years).

Be proportionate:

Our annual grantee progress reports consist of only a few general questions. We always make it clear that grantees can use their own preferred reporting methods or only need to submit brief responses. We do not request detailed information with regard to outcomes.

Don’t waste time:

We have introduced introduction calls with small groups of prospective grantees and run between 3 and 5 every funding round. It is an opportunity to (virtually) meet staff and other organisations working in a similar area. We explain, in detail, everything about our funding – the process, the criteria, the strategy, the funding amount, etc. We also ask for a three-to-four sentence “elevator pitch” to make sure we are providing every organisation with an honest reflection about how our criteria fit with their work.

Ask the relevant questions:

Our proposal form is relatively short and we are meeting (in person or virtually) with the staff delivering the work to make sure we can ask what we need if it’s not already covered in the proposal. We have a Grants Committee with rotating membership, depending on expertise, to make sure staff recommendations are reviewed by an expert panel – and we are working hard to make lived experience, as well as children’s voices, a core element.

Accept risk:

We are working with other funders to rethink reserves positions and have changed our own policy to more of an ‘it depends’ stance – we have funded organisations with three weeks of reserves and some with twelve months. The key question is always what makes sense in the context of the organisation and whether the organisation has active plans to get to where they want to be.

Act with urgency:

Our timetable is clearly set out via the introductory calls, regular reminders, and social media/the website. We try to be as understanding as possible when life comes in between and will go out of our way where this is fair to other prospective grantees. Decisions on finalised proposals are reached within a month.

Be open:

Success rates are published in our annual report. We provide individualised feedback on every proposal, including offers to work with our Associates where organisations find it helpful, e.g. to rework a delivery plan or new volunteering scheme. We allow resubmissions at subsequent funding rounds.

Enable flexibility:

We are moving towards funding that is as unrestricted as possible – given our funding focus, this means any and all expenditure relating to work with Early Years children, whether core, strategic or project-based.

Communicate with purpose:

We emphasise that we don’t expect reporting for accountability but are interested in supporting organisational self-improvement. Our goal is to have an open and honest relationship that is focused on support, whether things are going well or – even more importantly – when they are not. This is a journey, and we are just a few steps down the road, so we look forward to learning from our grantees and peers.

Be proportionate:

Our terms and conditions are clear and concise, and we our priority for evaluation is organisational improvement. We have worked with the Dartington Service Design Lab and co-productively with our grantees to review our practices and are currently working on a new way of reporting in 2021. We are flexible and understanding with reporting deadlines and always offer a personal conversation to hear how everyone is doing. Micro-grants we awarded during the pandemic did not have any reporting requirement

Don’t waste time:

Website details for our annual Small Grants programme are clear, including timelines. Contact details are provided for the organisation to ask questions if uncertain/seeking clarity. Exclusions are listed. We will be transparent with the organisations we approach for our Major Grants scheme, so they are fully aware of the process, including timescales, application requirements etc. We use an Expression of Interest format for the first stage in order to limit the time spent on the process for the organisations involved. The second stage is simple, straightforward and proportionate to the grant we seek to award.

Ask the relevant questions:

We ask a range of questions that are proportionate to the size of the grant. For Small Grants (£2k), the application form is not more than 3 pages and can be answered using an organisation’s previously created application templates. If we seek clarity, we will go to the organisation. Our Major Grant process is new (2021) and will require testing and critiquing by third parties. If our forms are proving cumbersome or disproportionate to the size of the grant, we will modify them. We always ask awardees how our processes/their interaction with the Haberdashers’ Company might be improved in our evaluation process.

Accept risk:

We understand that charities live in an uncertain world. We will ask them to liaise with us if their circumstances change, and work together to minimise risk both for them and the Haberdashers, and especially for the communities and individuals they work with.
We ask for safeguarding documents, but will be seeking to gain clarity how we understand and use these, beyond a tick-boxing exercise.

Act with urgency:

We set clear timetables for the application process, including when they will hear the outcomes of our decision-making. We stick rigidly to those deadlines. They are not long or drawn out, and in most instances, an organisation will only have to wait a matter of weeks from their application submission to funding out the funding decision.

Be open:

We will share the number of applicants and success rates for our Small Grants programme on the website. We will work harder to share solid reasons for declining an application.

Enable flexibility:

We trust organisations to spend our grant well. We will be increasingly looking to award unrestricted grants, but offer considerable flexibility within our restricted grant-making. We are a flexible funder who works with organisations should they need to change direction (cf Covid-19), or if outcomes are looking likely to differ from the original intent. We are a small grant-maker so able to build relationships with those we support, and are proud that we can respond to their changing circumstances (within the broad boundaries of our focus and geographical areas).

Communicate with purpose:

We hope to offer more than a simple financial transaction for our awardees. There is a huge amount of professional talent in the Company, and this can be shared with our awardees. We have a network of members who can support our chosen organisations beyond the grant – with targeted expertise, mentoring, networking and creative solutions. We reward our chosen charities with enjoyable social events that are usually outside the scope of their daily work in the charity sector. We are not afraid for our awardees to challenge our processes.

Be proportionate:

We trust the organisations we support, and our reporting is proportionate to the size of grants awarded. Often an organisation can cut and paste its report to us from their reporting template. It shouldn’t add to their administrative workload. We would work with an organisation should they come to us to say they are struggling with reporting – and find a way to make it work for us both.

Don’t waste time:

We will continue to ensure that our funding criteria and priorities are clearly presented on our website, and will review this information on a quarterly basis to take account of any learning from each funding round. We will continue to provide potential applicants with the opportunity to seek clarification pre-application. We will update our website on a quarterly basis with details on average grant amount and success rates so that applicants enter the process with realistic expectations.

Ask the relevant questions:

We will maintain our two stage process. A succinct application form is followed by a telephone assessment to ensure that all applicants are given a fair hearing and have the opportunity to sell their project and address any project / organisation specific queries. We will keep our requirements for supporting documentation under review to ensure that we avoid duplication and unnecessary requests. We will continue to seek applicant feedback on our processes and will make relevant improvements where possible.

Accept risk:

We will continue to provide upfront grants to facilitate cashflow for successful applicants. We will continue to provide applicants with the opportunity to explain how they are managing and mitigating any risks we have identified. We will continue to recognise the financial challenges facing charities. We will not reject applications on the basis of low reserves or financial year deficits if the applicant can offer us reasonable reassurance of their ongoing viability and forward planning.

Act with urgency:

We will continue to adhere to a quarterly decision-making cycle, whereby applicants will not wait more than 4 months from submission to decision. We will continue to issue letters of offer within 24 hours of panel funding decisions.

Be open:

We will continue to publish details of all successful applications on a quarterly basis via 360 Giving. We will continue to provide all unsuccessful applicants with the opportunity to discuss the reasons for rejection, with a view to increasing their future chances. We will revise our standard unsuccessful letter to ensure that it includes more project-specific feedback.

Enable flexibility:

We will continue to provide applicants with the opportunity to apply for funding to cover core costs/overheads/salaries. We will continue to provide applicants with the opportunity to seek recurring funding. We will amend our processes and timeframes as necessary to take account of changing circumstances and priorities, such as the Covid-19 pandemic.

Communicate with purpose:

We will continue our endeavours to build personal relationships and maintain open communication channels throughout the assessment, project delivery and monitoring stages, whereby all applicants feel empowered to raise queries or concerns. We will continue to give consideration to all reasonable re-profiling or project extension requests, and will continue to recognise the need to respond positively to unforeseen challenges.

Be proportionate:

We will continue to take a trusting and light touch approach to project monitoring and will seek applicant feedback on our reporting requirements. We will continue to ensure that any financial audits are commensurate with the level of funding awarded and will continue to audit on a 25% sample basis.

Don’t waste time:

• We offer conversations with potential applicants to discuss their ideas.
• We offer to review draft applications.
• We give clear feedback on why we have, or have not, supported an application.
• We use a ‘Funder Plus’ model to offer support and development assistance to grantees and applicants.

Ask the relevant questions:

• Our application form asks only those questions we believe to be essential.
• We seek additional information only when we need to.
• We supplement our knowledge through public sources (e.g. Charity Commission, Companies House, applicant website / social media).
• A sample of applications are then reviewed by an Advisory Group of people with lived experience of living on low incomes.
• We will seek feedback regarding the design of our current application form and redesign accordingly.

Accept risk:

• We are reviewing how we assess risk, moving towards an understanding an applicant’s financial literacy and planning. We take a broad view of risk and consider financial; safeguarding/health and safety; reputation, and the potential of success balanced against the need to innovate.
• We are exploring how a ‘strengths-based’ assessment could work, looking at characteristics such as resilience and forward-thinking.
• We ask applicants how they will deliver their work, but do not request detailed activity plans.
• We give clear feedback on why we have, or have not, supported an application.
• We will review our funding guidelines to ensure our overall approach to assessment, including risk, is clearly explained.

Act with urgency:

• We commit to making decisions within published timescales.
• We communicate decisions to applicants within 24 hours of decisions being made, including feedback on why we have, or have not, supported an application.
• We respond to requests to vary grant conditions as quickly as possible.

Be open:

• We publish records of our decisions through 360 Giving.
• We give feedback to all applicants, including successful grantees.
• We review our grant-making practice annually.

Enable flexibility:

• We will consider requests for core operating costs as well as project funding.
• We will respond constructively to any requests to vary delivery, timescales etc.
• We use a ‘Funder Plus’ model to offer support and development assistance to grantees and applicants.

Communicate with purpose:

• We encourage grantees to talk with us to build mutual understanding.
• We set out clear expectations regarding reporting at an early stage in the process.
• We visit a sample of funded organisations to learn about the work.
• We actively involve ourselves in the life of the VCS (Voluntary and Community Sector) in York, where our grants are made.

Be proportionate:

• We ask for a single brief report at the completion of a grant.
• Our reporting is designed as a learning exercise for grantees and us as a funder.
• Each report is reviewed by a member of the decision-making committee, and feedback is shared with the grantee.
• All reports are reflected on during our annual review of grant-making practice.

Don’t waste time:

We have clear funding priorities and organisational criteria written on our website. We regularly review our funding decisions; if there are any decisions/considerations that have a wider impact on future applications, we update our website guidance to ensure consistency.

Ask the relevant questions:

We use a 2-stage process. The first stage is a telephone call, and then we only ask for written applications from a) projects that closely fit our criteria and b) request a maximum of twice as many applications as we can afford to fund. That way, the funding round is competitive, but written applicants have a reasonable chance of getting funding (1 in 2 chance).

Accept risk:

We aim to have a mixed portfolio of organisation types – large/medium/small and well-established/new. We also support organisations to access capacity building to help with potential organisational issues.

Act with urgency:

Our decisions are based around Grant Committee meetings, and so we give clear deadlines on when decisions will be made on our website so that organisations can plan accordingly.

Be open:

We give specific feedback to rejected project proposals at both stages of our application process (verbal expression and written application).

Enable flexibility:

We do not give unrestricted funding as most of our charitable funding is restricted to particular groups (e.g. under 30 Lambeth residents) and so need to ensure that funding is spent on these groups. However, we encourage organisations to apply for full cost recovery as part of the application. For multi-year grants we aim to be responsive and flexible, and for organisations to amend outputs/outcomes in light of changed circumstances or project learning.

Communicate with purpose:

We have clear grant conditions with a pro forma published on our website so that prospective grantees can review these ahead of time. We aim to visit all our large grantees.

Be proportionate:

We only request a single annual narrative/financial report, and this is simply reporting back on planned outputs/outcomes. We automatically send reminders one month before the report is due with links to the form and details about the agreed outputs/outcomes to make report completion easier.

Don’t waste time:

We encourage prospective applicants to discuss their work with us informally before completing an application. We will provide initial feedback to all applicants in line with our published guidance and offer the opportunity to revise applications before they are formally considered to ensure that applicants provide the best possible case for support.

Ask the relevant questions:

We use a clear 3-stage process, restricting the information required at the initial stage to the minimum necessary for trustees to make a decision as to whether an application has sufficient merit for further consideration. At subsequent stages, we will use publicly-available information for our due diligence consideration wherever possible.

Accept risk:

Trustees have published a clear Risk Appetite Statement that states clearly the Foundation’s expectations with partners. We understand that the pandemic has significantly shifted expectations in this respect and will always discuss openly with applicants any concerns and will take a pragmatic approach to risk in the light of these discussions.

Act with urgency:

Decisions on our small grants are usually made in significantly less than 30 days. For major partnership applications, we will communicate clearly the likely timescales for trustee consideration. We will, however, always expedite our normal processes where there is a clear case for greater urgency.

Be open:

We provide detailed written feedback to applicants - always offering the opportunity for feedback discussions to help applicants better understand why we have been unable to support them and how they might improve their chances of success.

Enable flexibility:

We recognise the importance of strong operational and governance arrangements and will always seek to provide for such reasonable costs to underpin project costs.

Communicate with purpose:

We will agree on clear expectations and timelines through our grant agreements, including deliverables, milestones and reporting arrangements, to provide as much certainty as possible from the outset. We will discuss progress with you in person on at least a quarterly basis, including the opportunities to add extra value to your work.

Be proportionate:

We have developed a clear and straightforward reporting methodology for all partnerships, recommending standard assessment tools wherever possible. We will agree on reporting arrangements upfront with you and will apply our standard approach flexibly.

Don’t waste time:

Before the opening of a new round of a programme, if there has been a previous round, the LCF team review common reasons for rejection and consider whether there are any amendments required to the application form and/or criteria to deter any ineligible applicants/proposed projects from these findings. We are reviewing more widely how we can be clearer with our standard eligibility across LCF programmes. Where capacity allows, we invite applicants to speak with staff (either through questions at a ‘meet the funder’ event, or 1-2-1s), to talk through ideas prior to submitting an application.

Ask the relevant questions:

Only necessary information is asked within our application forms. Multiple points of review and testing of the application form are conducted before an online application form goes live.

Accept risk:

We have introduced a financial projection template to seek further information on applicants’ financial position at the time of application as we are aware that organisations are likely to be in a more financially precarious position than prior to the pandemic. LCF will take this into consideration in assessment and decision making.

Act with urgency:

During deployment of our emergency funds, at one stage we were able to make payments to successful applicants in an average of 4.3days of their application being received on the LCRF portal. This turnaround time was made possible through partnership work and a number of digital and process efficiencies introduced – out of necessity due to our remote working and elements specifically incorporated to deliver the Emergency Funding programme via the LCRF partnership. Our team are working to identify which elements of the new processes introduced will transfer to our business-as-usual processes and developing new processes to support this to improve our overall processes. We publish our timelines of when applicants will receive decisions as part of our funding guidelines. We have piloted – and will be reviewing – how we can alert organisations who are not taken forward to the shortlisting stage, earlier.

Be open:

We have published all our Emergency Fund grant-making on 360Giving and are working on the processes to enable the publication of all our funds over the next 12 months. We have collected the application data submitted via LCRF and are using this to better inform our continuing grant-making on future waves of LCRF funding. We have used this information to identify priority areas in which we have not committed as much funding towards.

Enable flexibility:

Wherever our donor directed funding allows, we are able to support grantees in granting project variations/extensions. In attracting new donors, we use the evidence collected within our Voices on the Frontline (2019) report and knowledge of grassroots groups to make the case to direct funding towards core costs. Where there is project funding, we endeavour to support an element of contribution towards core costs.

Communicate with purpose:

Whenever possible, we outline the expectations of the monitoring within the Grant Agreement right at the beginning of the funding relationship so funded groups are clear as to what the requirements in connection with their grant are. The template for the monitoring form is ordinarily in place prior to the Grant Agreement being sent to grantees, so they are able to see the form they will be asked to complete and ensure they have the systems in place to undertake the required data collection. We try to establish a clear and transparent relationship with our grantees – encouraging them to get in touch with any questions or concerns throughout the project. We particularly emphasise being open with ourselves to allow us to assist as much as we are able.

Be proportionate:

The only questions we ask within our monitoring are those we use for the purposes of feeding back to our donors and/or reporting on our impact more widely. All the information provided by grantees is reviewed by our team – we have a target to review reports within 2 weeks of their receipt – and data is used to feedback to our internal and external stakeholders, to improve our understanding of needs in London and for our business development team to use in seeking new donors. We commit to keeping our reporting proportionate, noting that for some funds there may be specific monitoring requested from the donors (particularly when we are distributing public funds).

Don’t waste time:

We provide clear guidelines for all grants and are reviewing them to ensure they don’t create unnecessary effort. We also work closely with London Community Foundation, using a shared application process that allows applicants to apply to several funds with a single application.

Ask the relevant questions:

We only ask questions that fall into three categories:

1. Needed in order to make an effective decision 2. Needed in order to manage risk 3. Needed in order to track our grants’ impact.

We will work with grantees to ensure they can provide useful feedback on our processes.

Accept risk:

We typically work with small organisations, so we have no expectations of strong finances, sustainability, etc. and work to ensure that applications and reporting processes are proportionate to the level of funding requested. We are reviewing our requirements for our micro-grants to see if we can reduce the amount of compliance documentation further.

Act with urgency:

We currently respond to applications within six weeks of the closing date. We will consider a) how we can shorten that period and b) whether we should have more funding rounds annually or a rolling programme.

Be open:

We provide groups with individual feedback on unsuccessful applications and will, for the coming grant year, publicise success rates and other useful data to inform applicants. We also work with unsuccessful groups to help improve subsequent applications.

Enable flexibility:

We provide flexibility wherever possible to groups when they need to make adjustments to their work. We responded flexibly to the Covid-19 crisis and 1) added our funding to the London Funders Covid-19 funding and 2) where possible amended existing small grants to be Covid-19 responsive. We will consider how we can move more of our spend to unrestricted grants.

Communicate with purpose:

We provide clear guidance to groups and individuals on our expectations from them. We typically provide groups with some support, when needed, on implementing their activities. We will improve our communication of what organisations can expect of us.

Be proportionate:

We have always been committed to proportionate reporting. We are currently reviewing our approach to monitoring and evaluation and may make changes to our reporting requirements in line with this review – including feedback from previous applicants, grantees and London Community Foundation.

Don’t waste time:

We hold webinars and live Q&A sessions on the fund and make these accessible and open. We answer application queries promptly. After each funding round, we review all rejected applications, and review our guidelines and process, looking at ways we can learn from and improve our clarity and consistency in future rounds.

Ask the relevant questions:

We take responsibility for compiling information on applicants from publicly held records (e.g. accounts from Charity Commission). We limit our questions so that they provide assurances that the applicant 1) will be able to manage the grant efficiently and effectively; and 2) will be reaching out to our target group(s) and mission. We will seek to improve the accessibility of our application processes and review participatory grant-making approaches to improve access.

Accept risk:

We will make intelligent decisions on risks we can bear as a funder, not work only from formulae/algorithms. We will discuss concerns we have about risk openly with applicants during the assessment process and not make assumptions about the applicants understanding of, or ability to manage, the risks the organisation faces. We will understand that risks can be reduced by supporting core costs rather than project based costs.

Act with urgency:

We will publish and stick to our timetables. We will make and communicate decisions as quickly as possible. We will operate flexibility when working with our Trustees and use delegated grant-making authority where appropriate to meet the needs of applicants.

Be open:

Wherever possible we will provide specific rejection reasons and areas to improve future applications.

Enable flexibility:

We contribute towards the essential operating costs of an organisation, not just to direct project costs. We recognise that things change and we are open to organisations reallocating funding where appropriate and in the best interests of the organisation and beneficiaries.

Communicate with purpose:

When we make a grant, we jointly agree the expectations for the relationship including agreeing payment schedules and reports. We work together to decide how projects will be monitored and, if we are co-funding, we operate flexibility on format and timescales. We provide free accredited training and licenses for organisations on the Outcomes Star methodology.

Be proportionate:

We will look to increase our cooperation with other funders to increase the impact of our joint grant-making. We will aim to reduce duplicate monitoring processes for grantees.

Don’t waste time:

Our website was entirely reworked in 2019 with the aim of being ever-more transparent about our funding programmes, and continues to be reviewed with each funding round. Eligibility and timetables are straightforward to find in every case. We also attempt to communicate clearly on social media. The staff team endeavours to be friendly and approachable in answering any queries on the phone and via email that are not obvious from our published guidance. We are also committed to undertake external reviews of all applicants to get their feedback on all aspects of our application process – alongside a commitment to acting (where possible) on any feedback. Lastly, we look for opportunities to make funding available in partnership with other organisations – and Wolfson has a long track-record of these partnership funding programmes. This helps ensure that applicants and our grant-making can benefit from specialist expertise and, in many cases, reduce the number of applications necessary for an organisation/individual.

Ask the relevant questions:

We are committed to a two-stage process. Our stage one application is a simple web-based form focused on assessing the eligibility of an application and its potential for funding. Applicants are only asked to prepare a full, detailed application at stage two if this threshold has been passed. Over the past five years across all of our programmes, at least 80% of stage two applicants received funding. We review our questions and application guidance with each funding round to ensure that we only ask for information that is relevant and reasonable.

Accept risk:

We continually review our processes and recognise that there is always a level of ‘risk’ for a funder (and indeed a risk in being too demanding in what we ask, or too cautious in what we fund).

Act with urgency:

Our funding timetables are published clearly. As a funder of major capital projects (average grant size is about £100,000), we inevitably have a slightly longer than average timetable. We continue to review how we can speed these up, and how ‘rapid response’ awards might continue to work in the future.

Be open:

Our grants data is published on 360Giving after each funding round. During the stage two application process we give applicants the opportunity to respond to comments or questions raised by external expert reviewers. We provide written feedback at stage one to all applicants. At stage two we offer all unsuccessful applicants a telephone interview to discuss the reasons for not being able to fund. We are looking at the possibility of providing statistical analysis of success rates across each of our funding programmes.

Enable flexibility:

Our current Strategic Framework (2020-24) states “we aim to be a listening, responsive and open organisation, supported by an office that provides high standards of support to applicants.” We are a specialist capital funder, particularly of educational organisations, – but during 2020 (in response to Covid-19) moved a significant proportion of funding to unrestricted funding. Our most recent applicant survey indicated that there is a strong ongoing need for (and desire for) national funding supporting capital infrastructure in the sectors in which we work. We will continue to listen and adapt accordingly.

Communicate with purpose:

Our grant conditions are published online as well as provided to grantees at the point an award is made. We attempt to keep any conditions light-touch. We will continue to ask about both grant conditions and reporting requirements in our independent applicant survey. In the (hopefully unlikely) event of a significant problem, we have a formal complaints process. We emphasise our aim to have high-quality relationships at the heart of what we do and, in doing so, to break down perceived power dynamics.

Be proportionate:

Our reporting requirements are published online. Organisations can submit their brief progress reports through an online form, and we have relaxed our usual requirements on the majority of grants awarded in the run-up to and since the start of the pandemic.

Don’t waste time:

We will continue publishing information on our grants through our website and our specialist advice forum. We will continue replying to funding queries timely and effectively. We will continue providing feedback to rejected applications and where possible, give them alternative funding sources to apply to. We will continue to be clear and concise in our messaging about our grants through social media and other publications. We will do our utmost to make decisions as quickly as possible. We will review our grants forms to shorten the application process.

Ask the relevant questions:

We will only ask questions about the information that we do not have. We will continue using the information that already exists through regulatory bodies. We will get feedback about our application process from organisations to review our forms regularly.

Accept risk:

In partnership with organisations, we will continue taking calculated risks to invest in pilot projects that can be rolled out widely. We will continue supporting organisations that face emergency issues to help them sustain their services.

Act with urgency:

We will continue making quick decisions on our emergency ‘keep the doors open’ applications. We will hold conversations with organisations that need emergency funding to get the information we need to speed the process. We will review our decision-making process for our small grants to make quicker decisions.

Be open:

We will continue providing feedback to organisations that are rejected. We will publish our grants information online. We will continue sharing information, lessons learned and good practice with organisations and funders.

Enable flexibility:

We will continue providing over 80% of our grants as unrestricted/core grants. We will continue to be flexible with our small grants and encourage organisations to have open, trusted conversations with us when their needs change.

Act with urgency:

Covid grants panels are held weekly with outcomes no more than a week from the Panel meeting.

Be open:

We are very clear with groups on chances of success and the amount of funding available.

Enable flexibility:

We enabled grants awarded pre-covid to be flexed and adapted in the spirit of the original award.

Don’t waste time:

• We make time to talk to applicants who have submitted a promising initial enquiry and explore the fit between their work and our priorities.
• We keep our approach and our materials simple.
• We publish our priorities, requirements and exclusions on our website.

Ask the relevant questions:

We use a 2-stage process, and we keep each stage simple. The first stage is just a 4 paragraph email. The second stage is free-flowing text (no set boxes or templates), which we ask covers a handful of key areas. We also make use of publicly available annual reports and accounts.

Accept risk:

We are comfortable accepting a reasonable level of carefully considered risk. For instance, we have supported a number of new start-up organisations. We generally aim to help grantees build stronger organisations, not deliver specific outputs.

Act with urgency:

• We accept applications at any time and take them to one of the three decision-making board meetings throughout the year.
• We get back to applicants within a week of board meetings.
• We reply quickly to emails and make time to talk to applicants.
• We aim to provide substantial replies to all reports we receive within one month of receiving them and achieve this over 95% of the time.

Be open:

• We provide feedback to applicants, including substantial reasons for rejections where a full application has been put to the board of trustees.
• We publish our grants data using the 360giving standard.

Enable flexibility:

• We provide most of our grants for core costs (subject to charitable purposes).
• We agree on 2 or 3 high-level outcomes with grantees.
• We do not micro-manage at the level of activities or detailed budgets, and we do not expect reports at this level.
• We respond quickly to requests to change the use of our grants, with a preference to agree on the changes.

Communicate with purpose:

• We sign a simple Memorandum of Understanding with our grantees. It sets out our main expectations, e.g. around reporting and safeguarding. We invite comments on it and are happy to make amendments before grantees sign it.
• We aim to build supportive personal relationships with key leaders in grantee organisations, recognising how busy they are and how tough their jobs are.
• We ask for annual feedback from grantees about their experience of working with us and publish the results on our website.

Be proportionate:

We keep our reporting light touch, asking for a few pages after 6 or 12 months. We do not require set templates but ask grantees to cover a handful of key issues that outline progress to date and the reasons for any changes to the original plan.

Don’t waste time:

We will explain our funding priorities clearly; we will be open and transparent about all our requirements and exclusions.

Ask the relevant questions:

We will only collect information that we must have to make funding decisions; we will test our application forms rigorously to make sure our questions are clear and do not overlap.

Accept risk:

We will be realistic about how much assurance applicants can reasonably give us; we will clearly explain how we assess risk when we make our funding decisions.

Act with urgency:

We will seek to work at a pace that meets the needs of applicants; we will publish and stick to our timetables; we will make our decisions as quickly as possible.

Be open:

We will give feedback; we will analyse and publish success rates and reasons for rejection; we will share our data.

Enable flexibility:

We will enable flexible responses to changing priorities and needs – we will give unrestricted funding; if we can’t, we will make our funding as flexible as possible.

Communicate with purpose:

We will be clear about our relationship from the start – we will be realistic about time commitments; we will ensure that our contact is positive and purposeful.

Be proportionate:

We will use light touch reporting and application forms – we will ensure that our formal requirements are well understood, proportionate and meaningful.

Don’t waste time:

We will publish, and share via social media & our website, a simple guide outlining timescales to help applicants plan when to submit grant applications. We will publish a step-by-step guide explaining eligibility and the process of applying for a grant. We will take part in ‘meet the funder’ workshops and seminars in partnership with local infrastructure bodies and councils.

Ask the relevant questions:

We will offer two proportionate application processes. A simpler process for small grants (£3,499 and under) and one for large grants (£3,500 and over). We will increase the threshold for large grants and therefore simplify more applications. Last year we increased the threshold from £2,499 to £3,499. We will increase the average grant size from £2,500 to £4,000 by 2022.

Accept risk:

We have removed rules about the maximum number of grants a grantee can concurrently hold. We have increased the number of unrestricted, core funding grants awarded.

Act with urgency:

We publish all fund application timescales. We publish a simple guide to these timescales, and wherever possible, we stick to these commitments. For our Covid response fund and future urgent response funding, we developed a new process that enabled applications to be turned around in less than 2 weeks.

Be open:

We will publish a summary of the proportion of successful applications and a breakdown of reasons for rejection on our website and in our annual reports. We publish grants data via 360 Giving.

Enable flexibility:

We are flexible about changes to project timescales and budget variances, especially in light of the pandemic. We are increasing the number & value of multi-year grant awards and increasing the average value of grants awarded.

Communicate with purpose:

When we award a grant, expectations for both the grantee and us will be clearly set out in mutually agreed terms and conditions. We will visit larger funded projects via a volunteer visitor programme to observe and discuss the project. This will provide the grantee with an opportunity to safely raise challenges and learning in their grant.

Be proportionate:

We clearly set out expectations for reporting and monitoring. We are constantly reviewing the level of reporting required and will focus on making the requirements proportionate to the grant size and risk. We will introduce further opportunities for automated reminders requesting reports and develop our online processes to accept more and simpler reporting online.

Ask the relevant questions:

Shift EOI (Expression of Interest)and standard application forms to reduce burden on teams.

Accept risk:

Actively bring this into conversations with award holders to hold risk and uncertainty, and provide support for organisations in navigation.

Don’t waste time:

Our team is available to respond to enquiries, assess essential eligibility and provide application guidance and support for our programmes. We strongly encourage potential applicants to contact us to ascertain their fundamental eligibility before completing an application. We will publish programme guides and application documents that are independently reviewed for clarity and consistency.

Ask the relevant questions:

We will only ask questions of applicants that help us to ascertain the heritage value, potential social benefits (including environmental impact), organisational capacity and financial/commercial position (where relevant) of projects. These answers help us to make funding decisions. Some questions may also generate data we are required to report back to our funders, and we will make clear to applicants where this is the case.

Accept risk:

As a primarily early-stage grant funder and loan provider, we have for many years operated an explicit policy of embracing a reasonable degree of risk. We seek, through providing advice, to help mitigate the key risks we perceive in projects we support and plan within our own projections for a degree of failure. We are committed to learning from projects that don’t work out as planned within our sector and more broadly.

Act with urgency:

Our grant application deadlines, and decision and payment timetables are published on our website. We are committed to sticking to both decision-making and payment timetables as far as possible. In line with our own Scheme of Delegation, we consider smaller grant applications on a monthly rolling basis, which allows us to confirm a grant decision within six weeks of application deadlines. Larger grants and loans are awarded on a rolling quarterly basis. Where essential to capitalise on limited-term opportunities, we will aim to expedite decisions. Additional funding opportunities that may arise will be communicated and decided on as rapidly as possible.

Be open:

We aim to provide honest, thoughtful and pragmatic feedback to unsuccessful applicants and offer follow-up conversations in the hope that projects will find greater success in future funding rounds or with other funders. We participate in 360 Giving and publish lists of awards, as well as common reasons for rejection on our website.

Enable flexibility:

We are primarily a project-level funder – this is inherent in the nature of funding we receive from our funders – but we appreciate that organisations need stability to deliver on complex multi-year projects. We will therefore be responsive to changing project needs and flexible about amendments to Approved Purposes and terms, in the spirit of the grants and loans we award. This includes considering extending grant periods or negotiating loan repayment holidays. We are able to maximise our flexibility when organisations communicate clearly and openly with us at all stages. Where appropriate and agreed with our funders, we will consider contributions to essential operating costs, capacity building and external fees for sector memberships.

Communicate with purpose:

We are transparent and open to discussion from the start around expectations on timescales and the commitment involved. Where applicants or projects we support feel we have been insufficiently clear or responsive to need, the contact details of our Senior Management Team are available online.

Be proportionate:

We have rationalised the evaluation of all our programmes, including limiting the frequency and length of data collection exercises, and ensuring that only necessary data is requested for reporting and claiming of grants and loans. Where we are required by our own funders to gather reporting data, we will make this clear to our grant and loan holders.

Don’t waste time:

We will strengthen our pre-application communications with potential applicants to ensure that there is a good fit between their organisation and our priorities and budgets. This will help potential applicants to not waste time in making applications that have a high chance of being unsuccessful.

Ask the relevant questions:

Review our application form, monitoring form and application process to ensure they only ask for information we will specifically use in our processes. We will introduce grantee feedback on their experience with The Shears Foundation.

Accept risk:

We already accept risk by being a core funder but will look further at how we balance the necessary due diligence with risk.

Act with urgency:

We will ensure that we always stick to our published timescales when dealing with grants and will always make a decision & payment in 10 days for approved Emergency Grants.

Be open:

We will review the information on our website, and we will further encourage conversations with unsuccessful applicants.

Enable flexibility:

We will continue to offer a rapid turnaround, emergency grants with less due diligence

Communicate with purpose:

We will be introducing a system in 2021/22 where all potential applicants need to contact us for a pre-application conversation. We will introduce regular telephone / online catch-ups with grant recipients.

Be proportionate:

Our monitoring form is already relatively light touch, and we ask groups to set their own three objectives and measure the impact of the grant against these. We will continue to review this.

Don’t waste time:

We will continue to reflect on our processes after each round of funding, and in particular, we will analyse rejected applications to see if there are patterns/unwritten rules. We will also continue to ensure that we publish how much funding is available and the number of grants we anticipate making.

Ask the relevant questions:

We will continue to only request information that we will use in assessment and monitoring. We continue to seek applications processes and build this into our future work.

Accept risk:

We are committed to funding small grassroots organisations and work with our assessors to deepen their understanding of the challenges faced by small organisations and what good looks like.

Act with urgency:

We always factor the timetabling needs of our applicants into our planning (such as school holidays), delivering funding as quickly as we can within our resources and often bringing in extra resources to enable this.

Be open:

We always give feedback and will include common reasons for rejection in How to Apply materials where possible. We are transparent about our resources and how that may impact the funding process.

Enable flexibility:

We encourage applicants to ask for what they need in terms of costs. For example, we fund core work; we understand high staff costs are sometimes necessary, and costs are required for supporting staff.

Communicate with purpose:

We consider the different audiences that we communicate with and send tailored newsletters to our grantees and donors. We try hard not to bombard grantees and applicants with information they don't need.

Be proportionate:

Our application and monitoring requirements are proportionate to the grants we deliver. We listen to the feedback our applicants give us to ensure this remains the case.

Don’t waste time:

We are a proactive, relationship-based funder, and we use our networks and research to identify funding and partnership opportunities. We provide feedback after each conversation, including being open and transparent about our priorities and requirements.

Ask the relevant questions:

We complete our own research and due diligence so we can have informed and relevant discussions with any organisation. Our preference is always to visit organisations to better appreciate their activities.

Accept risk:

We explain clearly how we assess risk, and Trustees consider each organisation based on its situation and circumstances.

Act with urgency:

As well as consideration at quarterly board meetings, Trustees review proposals on an ongoing basis in order to meet the needs of organisations (i.e. where a request is time-dependent/ more urgent).

Be open:

We give feedback to all unsuccessful applicants (including reasons for being unsuccessful), and we try to provide as much helpful guidance as possible.

Enable flexibility:

We consider each organisation and its needs on an individual basis, tailoring our support where possible. We understand that an organisation’s circumstances might change and will respond with consideration, working together to achieve the best outcome.

Communicate with purpose:

Outside of formal reporting, which we jointly agree with each organisation, we encourage organisations to get in touch whenever they need to and in whatever manner is most convenient. We take a collaborative approach, providing advice and guidance in addition to financial support.

Be proportionate:

We jointly agree on the reporting requirements with each organisation, trying to ensure they are proportionate to the grant. We use a combination of verbal updates and written reporting so we do not overburden organisations or create unnecessary work.

Don’t waste time:

We are keen to work in a relational way and encourage potential applicants to get in touch with us to discuss their ideas. For our open Health Grants programmes, we have an eligibility quiz at the start of our online application form. We publish detailed guidelines for each of our programmes, with clear funding priorities. For our Church Grants programme, we offer grants surgeries to discuss proposals, and we have introduced an online core information sheet, so that core information is only collected once, with churches updating this as required.

Ask the relevant questions:

We regularly review our application materials to ensure that we only ask for the information needed as part of the assessment process. For our multi-year Health Grants, we use a two-stage application process, asking for additional information for those being assessed at the second stage.

Accept risk:

We recognise the considerable pressure which many organisations are facing as a result of Covid-19, including on their reserves and financial resilience. We have taken this into account in assessing funding applications.

Act with urgency:

We publish and stick to our funding timetables. Funding decisions are communicated quickly to applicant organisations.

Be open:

We give initial feedback to all unsuccessful applicants about the reason(s) for the declination. Where possible, we will also give more detailed feedback if requested.

Enable flexibility:

We provide funding for overheads as part of our project and multi-year grants, although our charitable objects make unrestricted core funding difficult. We are happy to consider changes to a grant (for example, for its purpose or the timescale within which it can be delivered).

Communicate with purpose:

As a place-based funder, we work in a relational way and encourage organisations to contact us to discuss any challenges they are facing. Our grant agreements set out expectations of the relationship between us and the funded organisation.

Be proportionate:

Our reporting processes vary according to the size of the grant. We will accept joint reporting with other funders. For one of our individual grants fund, which is delivered through partner organisations, we ask for more detailed monitoring information. In this instance, partner organisations are given additional funding in recognition of the time that it takes to administer and report for these grants.

Enable flexibility:

We commit to enabling flexibility in both our funding and ongoing support for our charity partners, which we have stepped up further since the beginning of the pandemic in response.

Don’t waste time:

Surface and incorporate key applicant feedback into how we make and manage investments. We publish our strategy and ensure that our eligibility criteria and the guidance for each of our funding programmes are available on our website. We will deploy an eligibility checker to help people understand more clearly whether they are eligible or not. Ensure each funding programme will be accompanied by clearly (and in advance) advertised and accessible Q&A sessions to allow prospective applicants to ask any queries they might have. All Q&As will be captured and recorded in a live FAQs document available on the funding call website.

Ask the relevant questions:

Reform our two-stage application process to reduce/streamline the first stage, surfacing only the key information and essential documents required to make a decision, reducing the amount of time applicants are spending applying. Remove the need for detailed MEL (Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning) plan at the application stage - only funded partners will be asked to submit this. Remove the need for a detailed budget at the application stage- only funded partners will be asked to submit this. Only ask for full/detailed organisational info at Stage 2.

Accept risk:

Continue with the current level of light touch due diligence – seeing this as an opportunity to surface the information needed to provide support around safeguarding, financial management and governance – particularly in light of covid19 related challenges around fundraising, which needs a more supportive approach to risk management. We will place focus on organisational resilience over organisational sustainability. This includes accepting that organisations might not have multi-year funding or diversified revenue streams guaranteed. Their reserves are there to be used, and that they have multiple scenario contingency plans in place to navigate turbulent operational and funding environments. We will be exploring self-assessment of risk by funded partners to ascertain a clearer picture of the operating context.

Act with urgency:

We will clearly publish the timelines for all funding programmes, including application windows, assessment windows and decision-making timelines. We will provide enough contingency within our scheduling to absorb challenges, and thus, reducing the need to change timelines. We will reduce the total amount of time taken from advertising an opportunity to making an investment.

Be open:

We already have a feedback process in place where we let unsuccessful applicants know why they haven’t been successful. We will commit to providing detailed feedback to those organisations that made it to the assessment stage of the process. We will publish funding decisions for each call in the same way we do information for a call launch. Alongside this, we will publish call-specific information such as common reasons why applications were not funded and trends across applications. We commit to carrying out a review of our grantmaking process to understand the diversity, equity and inclusiveness of our funding portfolio. We will continue to publish our grant information on 360 Giving and IATI (International Aid Transparency Initiative).

Enable flexibility:

We will extend a flexible funding offer to all UK funded partners at least until the end of 2021, allowing organisations to repurpose their funding (as long as compliant with their own charitable governance). We will continue to allow all funded partners to revise their budget and MEL plans each year to respond to changes and realities on the ground. We will continue signalling our support of core costs and full cost recovery, reinforcing this at multiple stages of the application stage.

Communicate with purpose:

We will continue to pay first instalments upfront at the beginning of our relationship. We notify successful applicants by phone and/or email before a formal offer letter is sent out. We will reiterate in our communication with funded partners that they are those closest to the issues, and we’ll acknowledge that expertise. We'll deliver less formal start-up workshops that include a greater focus on relationship building and connections within cohorts of funded partners. We will test out a new approach in our funding overview form to clarify expectations around the relationship between them and Comic Relief – giving space to the partner to make suggestions and pick from a range of options for how they want the relationship to be managed. We will be very clear and upfront in the call information so funded partners are aware of the source of funding, and instances where we don’t have full flexibility and cannot meet some of these commitments – e.g. in cases of contracts or co-funding partnerships.

Be proportionate:

We will continue to utilise three reporting levels, which are proportionate to the funding request, programme complexity and/or co-funder requirements. We will further streamline these reporting levels to remove unnecessary questions where possible. We will prioritise quality over quantity and clearly communicate what data we need and why/how we use it. We will continue using lighter touch annual reporting for all grantees who take up the offer of flexible funding during the covid19 pandemic.

Act with urgency:

We will seek to contact Trustees outside of scheduled meetings when their approval is needed for urgent action instead of waiting for the next scheduled meeting.

Be open:

We will continue to be open and transparent with our grantees and potential applicants on our funding position and imminent future plans.

Enable flexibility:

We will be flexible in our processes by offering more part-payments that may be required during a project lifecycle that helps organisations' manage their cash flow.

Communicate with purpose:

We will keep in regular contact with our grantees so we can support the delivery of their projects but trust them to come to us if they need advice or support.

Be proportionate:

We will work on keeping our reporting requirements proportionate to the size of the grant to reduce the administrative burden on our grantees. We will only seek to ask grantees for information that is relevant to establishing the impact that the grant is making. We will take into account the organisation's capacity when jointly deciding with them what information will be material and readily attainable for these purposes.

Ask the relevant questions:

We commissioned research into applicants’ experiences of our application process and have reviewed our application form as a result. Our monitoring processes have also become more streamlined, only collecting information that is proportionate and useful.

Communicate with purpose:

We adopted IVAR’s Funders Principles on Grant Reporting in 2020, which means we now follow best practice when communicating decisions to grantees.

Be open:

We co-ordinate a providers' forum to enable the sharing of ideas and best practice and to ensure that third sector organisations are aware of policy and strategy updates.

Enable flexibility:

During the pandemic, we spoke to the organisations that we fund, as well as contract management, to ask them to rethink their targets based on what could be done. Many chose to focus on their client's health and wellbeing (H&WB) rather than on more traditional outcomes. We are now looking at how to incorporate reporting on H&WB into our processes.

Act with urgency:

We will continue to provide a rolling programme of grant-making alongside other programmes so that voluntary community groups and smaller charities are able to access funds quickly.

Don’t waste time:

We do have a two stage process designed to cut out ideas early on before people spend too much time working on them if they are not in our priority areas. But we feel we could do better to explain what we are looking for on our website, check entries in funder directories are clear, and start publishing success rates. We will also reflect on themes that get rejected or approved and discuss them more on social media and our website.

Be proportionate:

We currently have quarterly reporting check-ins. We will review whether we feel this is still appropriate or too much - there is no set format for them, but it might still be too frequent for the grant holder.

Don’t waste time:

FS commits to • Continue to provide step by step fund guidance and eligibility criteria, including clear priorities, information about previous awards, FAQs and top tips for applicants. • Encourage enquiries and provide tailored support to applicants, dealing efficiently with your enquiry. • For larger applications, we will sometimes request an initial expression of interest and, only on the basis of that invite, a full application. • Where appropriate, use one to one assessment calls with applicants to gather further relevant information. • Harness technology to make application and grant management (e.g., online applications and monitoring reports) are as efficient as possible for all stakeholders.

Ask the relevant questions:

FS commits to • Ensuring we only ask applicants for information that is relevant to making a funding decision on their application and throughout the grant process. • Ensuring our guidance is easily accessible and written in plain English, avoiding the use of industry jargon. • Providing assessment reports to decision-makers that are clear, focused and only contain appropriate & relevant information. • Ensuring that we are proportionate in the monitoring information requested.

Accept risk:

FS commits to: • When considering risk, we will seek to understand the full context surrounding projects, for example, the negative impact of the pandemic on the financial position of many organisations. • Developing different approaches to fund distribution, ensuring that the risk to all our customers is balanced. • Continuing to trust grantees to deliver contracted projects. • Commit to continually reviewing our approach to risk.

Act with urgency:

FS commits to: • Continue to provide reasonable timescales for all award decisions and ensure both our deadlines and your expectations are met. • Ensuring adequate resource is available to enable timeliness and flexibility in grant-making and fund distribution. • Act with urgency when circumstances warrant [e.g., for specific emergency response funds]

Be open:

FS commits to: • Providing clear feedback on unsuccessful applications, which is practicable, specific and supportive. • Continue to provide transparency via our website on what to expect during our application processes, how we make decisions, and what we expect from grantees. • Publish all our awards on our website and 360Giving. • Continue to explore new ways to disseminate information on grants made and to evidence the impact of our funds. • Consider ways to involve third parties in reviewing our outward-facing communications and [grant making] practices.

Enable flexibility:

FS commits to: • Exploring opportunities for unrestricted grants with the many donors and panels we support, developing guidance and criteria for offering this. • Continue to respond positively to requests for flexibility in the use of grant awards where changes are reasonable given project circumstances and remain within the original grant purpose. • Explore steps that can be taken to guard against over-reliance on grant funding and encourage opportunities for self-generated income. Target grants to enable expansion of self-generated income where appropriate/ the opportunity exists. • Regularly monitor and review fund aims with donors and advisory panels to ensure purposes are still relevant to beneficiary communities. • Monitor impact in a way that captures longer term social and environmental change, as well as short term indicators. • Exploring alternative ways of distributing funds beyond open grant-making, tailored to local contexts and in partnership with donors, advisory panels or other stakeholders.

Communicate with purpose:

FS commits to: • Building relationships that are constructive and supportive. • Work towards aligning our grant and loan-making with our overall vision/mission and our environmental, social justice and ethical goals. • Engage with grantees about impact in a meaningful and supportive way, requesting information that is proportionate and will be used by the Foundation. • FS welcomes conversations with other funders about shared grant-making processes.

Be proportionate:

FS commits to: • Regular (annual) review of application materials and processes to ensure information requested is relevant and proportionate to the funding request. • Ensuring grant conditions are meaningful (i.e., actually manage risk), achievable, written in plain English and proportionate to the grant size and risk. • Support grantees in meeting those conditions, signposting them where possible to other sources of help.

Ask the relevant questions:

We review our application form for all finding programmes and make sure we only ask what we need to for the purposes of making a decision or gaining learning that will help us design better programmes in future.

Accept risk:

We regularly fund organisations offering support alongside to mitigate risk and do not penalise charities from future funding because they haven’t used a grant as they initially said they would.

Be proportionate:

We change our application forms and monitoring for funding programmes proportionate to the grant size and organisation size. For more information on Give Bradford, please visit: https://www.givebradford.org.uk/

Don’t waste time:

POP does not apply any narrowing criteria other than that of collaboration. Limited funds are managed by reducing the flow of applications before they are submitted. We provide full transparency on our transparency page: https://www.plymouthoctopus.org/transparency/

Ask the relevant questions:

We only ask 3 questions at submission (What do they want to do?; how will they work together?; and what support do they need from POP members?) and a further 1 question at the resubmission stage (what did they change as a result of the support?).

Accept risk:

Risk is inherent in this work. Our members rate the projects, and therefore the risk is measured by that process.

Act with urgency:

We are doing this now and invite other funders to do so.

Be open:

We plan to submit our funding to 360Giving - we need to iron out any 'double recording' with our own funders first. https://www.plymouthoctopus.org/transparency/

Enable flexibility:

We only give core funding. We do not require collaborations to have a fixed plan and instead allow them to use the funding as they need, how they need it.

Communicate with purpose:

This is perhaps our weakest area, and we are still defining exactly how we work with funded projects. We employ a Learning Champion role which aims to act as both a grants manager and learning guide. However, this role is still developing and requires further clarification.

Be proportionate:

We aim to be proportionate at the submission and award stages. We are aware the processes we use are new and require effort to engage. We aim to reduce this effort as far as possible. We have no reporting requirements. Instead, we aim that in their interaction with our Learning Champion role (see above), the funded projects benefit. The aim is to provide useful learning products back to the projects funded via this interaction, thereby turning the monitoring paradigm on its head.

Don’t waste time:

For open funds, we will ensure that clear, plain English guidance is published and we will be available for questions and clarifications. We will use a two-stage application system so ineligible applicants do not spend undue wasted time applying. When working with strategic partners on solicited applications, we will keep open communication with our Trustees to ensure that proposals are only progressed when they are likely to succeed.

Ask the relevant questions:

We will always keep our questions to the minimum needed to make a decision. We will act on feedback from current and former partners to ensure our application processes are straightforward and proportionate.

Accept risk:

We will work with our Trustees to agree an approach to risk ensuring we fund a range of organisations, including smaller grassroots groups that may inherently carry more risk. We accept that, even when things don’t go to plan, this represents a learning opportunity rather than ‘failure’. In our investments, we will seek to make further equity investments and interest-free loans to community organisations, accepting a meaningful share of risk alongside our partners.

Act with urgency:

We will seek to work at a pace that works for applicants. We will publish our timelines when announcing a fund and stick to them. We build strong relationships with our partners, so we can respond with urgency to any issues they may face.

Be open:

We will publish our approach to funding and be open about chances of success when we launch a fund. Funds will be as targeted as possible to reduce likelihood of high volumes. We will publish reasons for rejection and give more detailed feedback wherever possible. We share all of our funding data via 360 giving.

Enable flexibility:

We will work with partners, supporting them to respond flexibly as required on funded projects. We will seek to keep funding as flexible as possible and offer unrestricted funding where we can. When working in partnership with other funders, we will be clear about how we fund, and seek to influence others to also fund in flexible and responsive ways. We will set our expectations clearly at the beginning of partnerships and not be afraid to move away if we feel our approaches cannot align.

Communicate with purpose:

We will continue to be a relational funder and will invest time in building strong partnerships. We will trust our partners to know how best to deliver positive change in their area of expertise. We will make it clear to partners at the start of a funding relationship what they can expect of us, and what we will expect of them.

Be proportionate:

Our reporting will always be proportionate, and we will be clear with partners exactly what we hope to learn from each fund and what information we will need from them. We will always seek to make reporting light touch and accessible.

Don’t waste time:

Continue to give an immediate response about whether or not a charity should take the time to write and submit an application by asking every interested applicant to call or email our Trust Manager first, to briefly tell her about their organisation and what it needs funding for. In most cases, if they do apply, the Trust Manager will have a telephone call or a Zoom to ensure the applicant knows what the trustees are looking for and to discuss what the charity most needs funding for. We will also now accept all applications by email.

Ask the relevant questions:

Continue to keep our application form simple and fairly short, providing guidance at the top on what to include in their application. We will continue to update the application form every year, with the Trust Manager adapting it based on what the trustees currently feel most strongly about/want to know most about.

Accept risk:

Continue to support a range of charities with small grants – some of whom are really struggling financially and others that are in a very sound position. By continuing to talk and meet with the people running the organisation and discussing their financial and operational track record, we will continue to support some charities which on paper others may reject.

Act with urgency:

Continue to post on our website the dates for the next two meetings, guidelines on the best time to make initial contact, and make the grant payments by BACS within a couple of days of the trustees’ meeting being held. We will continue to approve grants at the trustee meetings, but if an applicant who we have a relationship with is in urgent need of funds, the Trust Manager will continue to put these forward to the trustees in between meetings.

Be open:

Continue to give constructive feedback by email to all applicants who weren’t successful. We will also continue to publish our Approved vs. Rejection figures in our Annual Analysis of Grant Making which is included in our Annual Accounts and available on our website and the Charity Commission. This also features a section on the most common reasons why an applicant hasn’t been successful.

Enable flexibility:

Continue to encourage charities to apply for any type of funding they need; be it core, project, capital, or a combination of costs, and unrestricted or restricted. We will also continue to allow a charity who has received a grant to change what this is spent on as long as they make the Trust Manager aware of this and tell her why this change has occurred and what it will be spent on.

Communicate with purpose:

Continue to be as approachable and helpful as possible, answering all queries as quickly as possible, whilst also communicating any reasons why the trustees may not approve a grant, and aiming to overcome these during the application process.

Be proportionate:

Continue to encourage grant holders to complete the simple Grant Impact Form which states the suggested time frame for return, but if they do not send this back it doesn’t mean they can’t apply again or won’t receive another grant.

Don’t waste time:

- Regular review of fund criteria to ensure clarity. - Regular review of rejected applications, picking up trends and addressing these in published support material. - Basic 'disqualifying' questions asked before access to online application forms given.

Ask the relevant questions:

- Regular review of application forms ensuring that only relevant questions that are directly relevant to fund criteria are asked. - Review of additional information required to take place and where documents can be accessed publicly this will be undertaken.

Accept risk:

- Clear information about acceptable reserve levels etc. to be shared with applicants. - Guidance given on how risk is assessed.

Act with urgency:

- Published timetables that are adhered to at all times. - Decision timeframes related to sizes of grants. - Trustee sub-committees and delegated authority used where appropriate.

Be open:

- Feedback given/offered to all applicants where possible. - Regular data published on our website showing success rates. - Case studies and grants given highlighted.

Enable flexibility:

- Ensure funds reflect the needs of the community, as well as objectives of Trust and offer the flexibility for grantees to approach us to change priorities if required. - Continue with Communities Fund which offers grants solely for core costs. Review the effectiveness of this fund and make changes as appropriate.

Communicate with purpose:

- Grant contracts reflect the expectations of both parties. - Open and honest communication, facilitated by a jointly shared community platform that also offers grantees ways to share information.

Be proportionate:

- Implementation of a light touch monitoring system that only collects relevant information/feedback that is useful to both parties.

Don’t waste time:

Our funding priorities, application forms and guidelines are published on our website. Applicants are encouraged to contact us if anything is unclear or to have a discussion about their work. Applicants are asked to complete an eligibility questionnaire before submitting an application to ensure criteria is met before spending time on the form.

Ask the relevant questions:

Our application form and questions were developed using feedback from applicants and grant holders. We ask all applicants for feedback. We have a continuous improvement approach and make changes so that our forms are easy to complete. We reviewed our Stage 2 assessment in 2019, challenging ourselves to ask questions that were critical to decision making and not just ‘nice to know’.

Accept risk:

We have a two-stage process and visit all applicants at Stage 2. If we identify risks and need additional information prior to, or after awarding a grant, we explain why this is needed. If trustees decide not to award a grant, we explain the reasons to applicants, and what they could do to give us assurance if they apply again (after a year).

Act with urgency:

We publish timescales on our website. We monitor how long it takes for applicants to get a decision and publish this data on our website in our Annual Grant making review. Applicants will get a decision about whether they have been invited to Stage 2 within 6-8 weeks. The end-to-end process can take up to six-months, but we have been trying new ways of working and aim to reduce this over the next few years.

Be open:

If an applicant is declined at Stage 1, they can request a call back through a form on our website. We will give feedback on the strengths and weaknesses of the application and the reasons it was not put through. If the trustees decide not to award a grant after an applicant has gone through our Stage 2 process, we will have a more in-depth conversation with them about the reasons why. We publish our success rates and reasons for rejection on our website in our Annual Grant making review.

Enable flexibility:

Applicants can choose to apply for running costs or project costs, whichever is best for the organisation. If the organisation is carrying out work which does not fit our eligibility, we encourage them to apply for project costs if the specific work they want us to fund does meet our eligibility. We fund tried and tested approaches. We want to support organisations to do what they do best, and we don’t expect them to have to package this up to look like new work or innovation. We’re flexible in our approach and understand that needs change and during the life of our relationship, which can be up to nine years, there may be adjustments to timescales and how the funds are used. This is OK with us.

Communicate with purpose:

At all stages of our application process, we will be clear about the next steps and the information we need. When we are arranging to visit an organisation, we’ll be flexible and offer options. We’ll be clear about the purpose of the visit, who needs to attend and how long it will take. Once an organisation has been awarded a grant, they will have an allocated Grants Manager who will explain what is needed to release the funds and what our reporting requirements are.

Be proportionate:

We only ask grant holders to report to us once a year. We designed a Progress Report template which is easy to complete and doesn’t have too many questions. We collect feedback on this and have made improvements as a result. We look forward to getting reports, we read all of them and give feedback each time. This is built into our processes, and we monitor to make sure it is done. We learn from what grant holders tell us and it informs our grant making.

Don’t waste time:

Develop guidelines bespoke to each programme and call, including light touch expressions of interest to limit time spent on initial applications.

Ask the relevant questions:

See above.

Accept risk:

We fund start up and early stage organisations in all our programmes, including designing funding mechanisms where groups are unregistered.

Act with urgency:

We devoted much of our funding in 2020 to the pandemic and continue to adapt our programmes to the context.

Be open:

Our organisational information, relevant policies and current funding are available publicly. Grants are published in a searchable format on our website and through 360 giving. We also submit grants data to relevant thematic research, for example the Global Resources Report.

Enable flexibility:

We increasingly provide explicitly flexible and core support, as well as meeting with grant-holders on a regular basis to understand if plans need to change.

Communicate with purpose:

We are a relational funder and aim to remain in close contact with grant-holders. This is both so we can offer flexibility in their funding and understand the fields we work in. We try to ensure this is proportionate and respectful of their time (which is often hard to achieve).

Be proportionate:

We operate a consistent system of annual monitoring and reporting in a written form, with an effort to ask for submissions proportionate to the value and complexity of the grant.

Be proportionate:

Many of the sports organsiations we support are small local clubs, run entirely by volunteers, and they seek very modest grants. We aim therefore to ask them, in both application and monitoring forms, only for the information we really need to make a decision and ensure due diligence. Larger organisations, with greater internal capacity, can request and receive larger grants, in which case, we will ask for more details to support their application. We also look for more in-depth monitoring. We think that is reasonable.