potential of institutional funding
TRANSCRIPT
UK Institutional Funding Potential
or
How to make more out of less…
Lysa Ralph, Head of Programme Funding
What we will cover…
> Definitions, purpose, methodology
> Key trends, academic discourse
> Results and benchmarking
> Findings from external consultations
> Recommendations
> Questions & sharing your approach
Definitions
> Institutional Funding (IF) = funding from governmental donors and those with similar behaviour and requirements e.g. Comic Relief and Big Lottery Fund
> Grants and contracts, UK (central, devolved & local government) and European Commission
Purpose: terms of reference
> Establish the size of the Institutional Funding
market and the British Red Cross’ position
> Learn from our own and others’ success and
failure
> Identify best practice in the sector
> Identify routes in, trends, risks and
opportunities towards diversification and growth
of IF income
Methodology
1. Desktop benchmarking, 41 charities, selected as
comparators, within top 50 income
> Together, they accounted for 13% (£1.5bn) of the
£11.9bn public funding to charities 2010
> Income 2006-2011 analysed
> Divided into three groups: mainly IF, mainly
‘other’, equal mixture of funding
2. Qualitative surveys with nine organisations
3. Internal consultations
> Shift away from grants to contracts:
> 2001 grants worth £4.6 billion, contracts £3.8 billion
> By 2008, grants worth £3.7 billion, £9.1 billion worth of
contracts
> Development of full cost recovery principles to account
for ‘hidden’ costs
> Increase in ‘payment by results’; Social Return on
Investment / Social Impact Bonds
> Polarisation of the sector, consortia development
> Need to evidence outcomes / impact
> Increase in competition
> Over dependency on the state
Trends and academic discourse
Trends and discourse
> Variation in government: spending on health and education in
devolved gov’ts higher than England:
> Wales 8% reduction in revenue
> Scotland and Northern Ireland 7% (2011-15)
> Compares to UK central gov’t cuts of 19%, local authority cuts
26%
> Lottery has followed a totally different trajectory, ticket sales
highest ever in 2011, Olympics cash coming back in. Higher
spend in 2011, set to continue
> European Commission’s proposed budget for 2014-2020 is
€1,025 billion, a 5% increase on the last cycle
Topline results
> Despite the cuts, Institutional funding to charities increase of 4%
> Current UK government following trend since 2001, where state
funding to the voluntary sector far outpaced general growth in
government spending
> ……………….………………….………no British Red Cross
Institutional Funding - Top 10 Charities
External surveys - participants
Grateful thanks to:
Action for Children, Alzheimer’s Society, Age UK,
Centrepoint, Mencap, National Trust, The Princess
Royal Trust for Carers (now the Carer’s Trust) , Scope
and University College London (UCL)
……………………………who took part in our survey
External survey: findings & recommendations
> Invest in programmatic infrastructures, build an
evidence base
> Value for money / SROI modelling
> Involvement of beneficiaries at all levels
> Develop a partnership culture and strong governance
> Hone your offer
> Added value, don’t forget those ‘in kind’ inputs
External survey: key findings
> Most comparators joined up Trusts & ‘Statutory’
> Join up between policy, advocacy and fundraising
> Engagement plans for Institutional donors
> Integrate funding with service planning, tactical
funding planning
> Select only the strongest fit programmes with
measurable changes for beneficiaries
> Clear roles and responsibilities between teams and
management of expectations
Other tips…
> Assessors / advice line: make friends, use their advice during
application development, ask questions
> Budgeting: NVCO’s historical ‘Compact’ with government on
full cost recovery– try & include match
> ‘Best practice?’: e.g. for Lottery £300k+ grants - ‘needy’
project, strong project design responding to need / experience /
partnerships
> Triumph and disaster: treat failures as a learning opportunity,
assessment reports , talking to others
> Programme cycle approach: invest in fundraiser’s skills /
knowledge in this area, spend time shadowing service
colleagues
> Balance: avoid over reliance on one source of funding
Logframe
Narrative Summary
Objectively Verifiable Indicators
Means of Verification / evidence
Assumptions /Risks
Goal = Lottery outcomes
Project aim Outcome SMART targets
Outcomes Outputs
Activities Inputs
Costs
Aim
Outcomes
Activities
Lottery
planning
triangle
Working out the
donor’s system
Questions… sharing your approach??
Training courses
BOND – project planning using a logical framework /
impact assessment etc
Charities Evaluation Services – developing your own
indicators and outcomes
Donor workshops …others?
Lysa Ralph
020 7877 7094