Shared Insights - garfieldweston.org

1 Initial lessons from the internal and external evaluations of the weston Anniversary Fund programmeShared Insights :Researched and written by: Dr. Beth Breeze, Centre for Philanthropy, University of Kent Clare Wilkinson, Garfield weston FoundationShared Insights 20192 Introduction by Philippa Charles, Director of the Garfield weston Foundation One of the Garfield weston Foundation principles is to be transparent and open and so I am delighted to introduce our Shared Insights report. This contains the key findings from the first phase of both the internal and external studies that were commissioned to evaluate the weston Anniversary Fund (WAF), which we ran in 2018 to mark our 60th anniversary. The later phases of this evaluation will help us to understand the impact of the WAF grants on their organisations and within their local communities, so we will have more findings to share in the future but are keen to share these initial results, particularly as they show the value of partnership working.

2 As our grant processes are open all year round, we have not run a one-off fund before, and are delighted to have awarded over 11 million to 156 well-run, sustainable organisations that are meeting a clear need with passion and commitment to their beneficiaries. All grantees completed the evaluation survey, as well as 26% of the unsuccessful applicants. We are very grateful for this feedback that will help to improve the processes for our regular grants programme. It gives me particular pleasure that the data shows we achieved a primary goal of attracting a large number of new applicants from across the country, and we are grateful to the many partners - including umbrella bodies, infrastructure groups, other charities and other funders - who helped by disseminating information about WAF. Whether or not applicants were successful in applying to this particular grants scheme we do not want to lose these new relationships. We are therefore exploring ways to keep in touch, for example by holding webinars on relevant topics such as ongoing capital needs and revenue support, with the goal of being helpful in assisting applicants to succeed in the future whether applying to us or to another funder.

3 I am aware of the debates surrounding the efficiency of current grant-making models. The findings presented in this report underline the need for all funders to be mindful of the pressures experienced by fund-seekers. I am proud that the weston Charter makes an explicit commitment to be respectful to applicants and to ensure that every application is considered with care by at least one Trustee. But there is always more that can be done to help relieve the stresses and strains of those running charities, and there are a number of clear and useful messages that we take away from this evaluation to strengthen the way we work. I am deeply encouraged by the determination of all the organisations that sought funding from the WAF. The applications clearly demonstrated the extent of need that exists across our country, and illustrated the great commitment of staff and volunteers to serve their communities. Whilst unsuccessful applicants were understandably disappointed with their outcome, I am heartened to learn that the vast majority were satisfied with the application process, that they intend to continue fundraising for their project (often using learning gained during the process of putting together the WAF application) and will apply again to the Foundation s regular funds.

4 We look forward to receiving those applications, and wish the WAF grantees every success in achieving the desired impact with their award. Philippa Charles Director May 2019 Garfield weston Foundation3 About the weston Anniversary Fund In 2018 the Garfield weston Foundation celebrated its 60th anniversary with a number of celebratory events, activities and grants including the weston Anniversary Fund (WAF). WAF offered grants worth between 30,000 - 150,000 to support the improvement of existing facilities, or the creation of new facilities, for local communities across the UK. In addition to the main goal of creating a tangible legacy in communities across the country, a key goal was to reach and support organisations that had not previously applied to the Foundation. Applications were open from 5 January to 30 June 2018. Over 2,300 applications were received, including 1,700 in the last three days before the deadline, with requests totalling 192 million.

5 Our systems were robust and held up even with the unprecedented volume of applications in the closing stage. All short-listed applicants requesting 50,000 or more had a visit or a FaceTime conversation with a member of the Grants Team. As a result of the volume and quality of applications, the Trustees decided to more than double the amount of funding available (originally 5 million), and approved 156 grants, totalling over 11 million. Successful applicants proposed many different projects but all Shared four common features: a demonstrable impact on the local community; n appropriate costs in relation to the benefit; n sensible business plans that could absorb additional revenue costs; and n clear leadership. nWhere did applications come from, and why? Applications were received from all parts of the UK. The three regions that received the largest number and value of grants in this programme the North West, East Midlands and Yorkshire & Humber have previously been amongst the least likely to apply and therefore be funded by the Foundation.

6 Small charities with limited fundraising expertise and resources were more likely to apply if they already knew the Foundation or if a trusted source (such as another charity or funder) encouraged them to apply. Social media was also useful in raising awareness and promoting applications. More than half (57%) of WAF applicants were new to the Foundation and 68% of WAF grantees were first-time applicants. Grantees with no prior experience of the Foundation were the most likely to have heard about the programme from a third party such as an umbrella group or an infrastructure body that encouraged them to apply. A third (35%) of grantees heard about the programme in this way compared to one in five (20%) of the unsuccessful applicants, indicating that voluntary sector intermediaries are well placed to steer good, new applicants towards funding. RegionAmount granted $( m)% of granted funds% of total applications% of WAF grantees% of all first-time applicantsNorth & Insights 20194 What kinds of projects applied and which were funded?

7 WAF applicants proposed a large range of different types of project that can be summarised in ten categories as follows: Three quarters of applications were made to fund plans that already existed, rather than to seek funding for a new idea in response to funding becoming available. These proportions were almost the same whether or not the application was ultimately successful: Category Description% of total WAF applications % of granted funds% of successful WAF grants Community centreImprovements to existing facilities typically to enable wider that typically work with one client group homeless toilets, increasing accessibility etc. to aid community to purchase a minibus or van to support community activity community transport Improvements to youth facilities with wider community benefit including schools if not MUGAs or hallImprovements to existing facilities typically to enable wider to existing playground or improvement to Multi Use Games Areas (MUGA) where wide community usage could be of premisesRequests to buy charity s building thus reducing their core costs & ensuring to uniformed groups facilities where they could demonstrate wider community (%)Unsuccessful applicants (%)A new idea2425An existing plan7675 Garfield weston Foundation5 Reflections on the application process A majority of respondents, whether successful or not in being funded, agreed that the application process was straightforward and that the guidance was clear.

8 *rounding means not all rows add up to 100% Smaller applicants (defined as those with an annual income under 50,000 and/or either entirely volunteer-run or with less than one full-time equivalent employee) were less likely to strongly agree that the application process was straightforward, and also less likely to report that having a deadline was helpful. When asked to rate their overall experience of the application process out of ten (where 10 = entirely satisfactory ) the average reply amongst grantees was and amongst unsuccessful applicants was Given the understandable likelihood that grantees will reflect more favourably on the process, this finding suggests that the application process was well run. Specific praise in relation to aspects of the application process include: the ability to fill the form in online over time rather than in one go, enabling facts to be checked and to get input from nother people; the existence of a deadline, which helped focus the effort of all stakeholders; and n the opportunity to upload a video and photos to illustrate the need and convey the extent of passion for the project.

9 N In-person visits and Facetime/Skype calls by the Foundation s Grants Team with short-listed organisations were widely appreciated. They created an opportunity for applicants to talk in detail about their project and why it mattered, to share information beyond what could be included in a written application, and enabled some potential beneficiaries to be involved in the conversation. As two different grantees explained: An unsuccessful applicant endorsed the use of visits and Facetime calls, encouraging the Foundation to move away from relying on desktop review as far as possible, because otherwise: it simply means that charities that are good at writing applications succeed . Grantees (G) or Unsuccessful (U)Agree (%)Neither agree nor disagree (%)Disagree (%)The guidance about how to apply was clear G9730U9244 The application process was straightforward G9910U9045 Having a deadline for submitting our application was were able to engage young people in the FaceTime conversation in a way that they might not have face to really enjoyed the opportunity to show somebody around our premises using Skype I ve never been asked by a potential funder to do this before.

10 I felt it was a chance to put the human side to our application which is often difficult to do on Insights 20196 Common challenges experienced by grantees and unsuccessful applicants Both grantees and unsuccessful applicants report the same three key challenges in making a WAF application: lack of time; n lack of capacity; and n lack of expertise. n Unsurprisingly, lack of time and capacity are most keenly felt in smaller and volunteer-run organisations, but all types of applicants felt the pressure. This was often exacerbated by the desire to involve a lot of different people (staff, volunteers, beneficiaries, community members and local stakeholders) who were not always readily available for contributing text and signing off the application. There were also delays with external partners, such as securing planning permission. Lack of expertise was primarily felt in relation to fundraising skills because many applications were written by volunteers and inexperienced fundraisers.