Our mission We are committed to bringing real improvements to communities and the lives of people most in need.

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Our mission We are committed to bringing real improvements to communities and the lives of people most in need."

Transcription

1 What you told us

2 Our equality principles Promoting accessibility; valuing cultural diversity; promoting participation; promoting equality of opportunity; promoting inclusive communities; reducing disadvantage and exclusion. Please visit our website for more information. Our mission We are committed to bringing real improvements to communities and the lives of people most in need. Our values We have identified seven values that underpin our work: fairness; accessibility; strategic focus; involving people; innovation; enabling; additional to government. The Big Lottery Fund is committed to valuing diversity and promoting equality of opportunity, both as a grantmaker and employer. The Big Lottery Fund will aim to adopt an inclusive approach to ensure grant applicants and recipients, stakeholders, job applicants and employees are treated fairly. Accessibility Please contact us to discuss any specific communication needs you may have. We care about the environment The Big Lottery Fund seeks to minimise its negative environmental impact and only uses proper sustainable resources. Stock code BIG-WYTU Further copies available from: enquiries@biglotteryfund.org.uk Phone Textphone Our website Photography: Felice Ayling and Caroline Mardon. Big Lottery Fund, June 29 2

3 Contents Introduction 4 The Big thinking consultation 5 Who responded to the survey? 6 What you told us 8 What you told us in England 21 What you told us in Scotland 27 What you told us in Wales 36 What you told us in Northern Ireland 44 3

4 Introduction I am delighted to introduce the report from the Big Lottery Fund (BIG) consultation on our strategic direction for the next six years. What You Told us provides a summary of the responses to our consultation which we carried out across the UK from November 28 to February 29. This was the largest consultation ever carried out by a Lottery distributor, reflecting our position as a body that delivers around half of all Lottery funding to communities across the UK. We were very pleased with the response rate: 3,446 people filled in our survey, the majority online. But we were also able to involve more than 3, people through events in England, Wales, Scotland and N Ireland, and a further 8, through web forums, online videos, social networking sites and activities on our website. This has provided us with a fantastic opportunity to get feedback and input in developing the Big Lottery Fund s strategy for delivering around 2.8 billion of funding from The consultation gave us useful insights across a range of issues for BIG as a funder and the detail described in this report is proving invaluable to us. These are the main messages that emerged: You told us it was important that our funding should go to those most in need. You gave broad support for our using the themes of transitions and isolation in helping us to address need. But you also confirmed the importance of BIG s providing accessible funding that can reach all sections of the UK. You signalled very strong support for BIG s extending its financial undertaking to the voluntary and community sector beyond 212. You felt involving voluntary and community sector partners was an effective way of improving collaborative working between organisations and sectors. We were keen to find out how you thought we should improve our customer focus. You supported a range of ways in which BIG could do more than simply give out grants, particularly favouring early support for organisations considering applying for funding. You supported ways of BIG s being a more intelligent funder, endorsing the move we made following our consultation in 24/5 towards grants of up to five years. You were clear BIG should not be afraid to take risks across some if its funding, encouraging bold and innovative ideas. You were keen to see us involve the public in deciding locally on grant funding. In addition to your responses to broad questions about all our funding, we also asked you about our strategic direction in England, Wales, N Ireland and Scotland. You have given us valuable insights which will inform our plans for funding in each of these countries over the next six years. We are publishing our Strategic Framework for together with this report on our consultation. This, of course, is just the start. We will need your continuing support and interest as we develop our programmes, which we intend to do at UK and country level over the coming year. We will keep all those who responded in touch with developments, but please also look out for updates on our website Thank you once again for your interest in what BIG does over the next six years. Meeting so many passionate and committed people during the consultation was an inspiration, and I am confident that, working with you, we will ensure that BIG can make a real difference to communities and the lives of people most in need. Sir Clive Booth Chair, Big Lottery Fund June 29 4

5 The Big thinking consultation Big thinking was launched on 17 November 28 at an open meeting of Big Lottery Fund s Board. The consultation closed on 27 February 29. The key component of the consultation was the Big thinking questionnaire. The questionnaire consisted of 1 BIG questions the answers to which would influence our work across the UK. Supplementary questions reflected the individual priorities of England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. The questionnaire could be completed online via the Big thinking website or in hard copy. In total we received 3,446 responses, 3,313 of which were submitted online. In addition to the consultation questionnaire, events and meetings, large and small, were held across the UK. As well as hosting the questionnaire the Big thinking website was a forum for people to contribute their opinions. Peter Wanless, our Chief Executive, wrote a blog in which he reflected on the events he had attended and other users were invited to comment on his blog postings. Our Chair, Sir Clive Booth, hosted a live webchat where he answered questions about the consultation. A discussion board was set up to encourage debate on issues raised through the consultation and we used social networking sites including Facebook and Twitter to ensure that the consultation was accessible to all. The analysis presented here is based upon the formal responses to the questionnaire and feedback from consultation-related events and meetings. Information gathered through the various website activities and written responses was also fed into the analysis (instances where this material is drawn on are noted in the text). Where relevant, we have broken down responses by the country or sector that organisations and individuals say they are from. The size of England means we had a proportionately higher level of response from that country, and therefore responses will naturally be skewed in that direction. This has made it all the more important to highlight where other countries have differed in their responses, and we do this consistently throughout. 5

6 Who responded to the survey? We asked a series of questions to find out who had responded to the survey. These questions were not compulsory so the resulting picture is based on completed responses only. Figure 1: Sector 25 Number Figure 1 shows that seventy per cent of respondents who completed these initial questions about their profile were from the voluntary and community sector. 5 Individual Voluntary and community Private Public Other Sector Figure 2: Prior funding 2 Number 15 1 Fifty two per cent had received funding from us, twenty five per cent had not, and five per cent didn t know whether they had or hadn t (Figure 2). 5 Yes No Don t know In receipt of prior funding 6

7 Figure 3: Organisation size 2 Number Small Medium Large Size of organisation Forty eight per cent of respondents were based in small organisations with fewer than 15 members of staff (Figure 3). Nineteen per cent of respondents were from medium-sized organisations (between 16 and 1 staff members) and fourteen per cent from large organisations with more than 1 staff members. Figure 4: Country The profile of respondents across the four countries was broadly the same. However a higher proportion of UK-wide respondents were based in large organisations than those respondents in the four countries. Number Respondents were asked which country they or their organisation worked in. Seventy five per cent of respondents said England, twelve per cent Scotland, three per cent Wales, and two per cent Northern Ireland. Eight per cent represented UK-wide organisations 1 (Figure 4). 5 Northern Scotland Wales England UK-wide Ireland Country where respondent/organisation works 1 Due to a technical difficulty with the Big thinking website, the UK-wide category was added midway through the consultation period. 7

8 What you told us This section presents the findings for each of the 1 UK questions. The first question was about themes that could be used as starting points for our funding. Question 1.1 Do you agree that the theme of transitions provides a useful starting point for our funding? 3 25 Question 1.2 Do you agree that the theme of isolation provides a useful starting point for our funding? 3 25 Number 2 15 Number Yes No No opinion Yes No No opinion There was strong support for both isolation (eighty one per cent agreement) and transitions (seventy five per cent agreement) as themes to be used as starting points for funding. Respondents in Northern Ireland were most likely to agree with both themes. Private sector respondents agreed less with the theme of transitions than those from other sectors. 8 Although the survey findings suggest firm support for isolation and transitions, the feedback we heard at some of the consultation events was not as clear-cut. While there was considerable support for both themes, a number of participants felt that they were too broad or vague to operate as hard-edged filters for funding. People questioned how the themes would be defined and translated in practice. It was suggested that more positively worded outcomes, especially in relation to Isolation, would be preferable. Similar concerns about the broad nature of the themes and the need for clearer definition were raised in some of the written responses.

9 Question 1.3 Are there other themes you would suggest? We also asked whether there were other themes you felt we should consider. The most popular extra suggestion was community cohesion and building stronger communities. One respondent said that the focus should be on helping different groups of people to get along better together. Another described it as rebuilding the community putting the unity back into community. Others talked about the need to maintain and improve the social environment. The second most frequently mentioned theme was environmental issues and climate change. Sustainable development was prominent in responses, in terms of safeguarding the future of our surroundings and encouraging behaviour change towards a low carbon lifestyle and reducing energy consumption. Parks and green spaces were mentioned here, as were energy efficiency and recycling. Other themes that were well supported were mental health and physical fitness, equality of opportunity and addressing inequalities. Children and young people were the most commonly mentioned beneficiary groups identified by respondents. Responses often focused on providing activities or opportunities for children and young people and on the needs of particular groups, for example children in care or those with behavioural problems. The needs of older people were also recognised by respondents but to a lesser degree. Aside from themes and beneficiary groups, many respondents expressed a preference for open funding, where local communities and organisations define for themselves the difference they want to make. Attendees favoured the theme of participation, which in this case broadly encompassed the concepts of inclusion, empowerment and engagement. Environmental issues were popular as were poverty and disadvantage, preventative work focusing on root causes, and rural issues. As in the survey responses, children and young people were the most commonly identified beneficiary groups, followed by older people. 9

10 Question 2.1 Do you agree we should have a greater focus in our funding to benefit those most in need? Number Important funding goes to in need Balance about right No opinion Sixty per cent of respondents agreed that it is important that funding goes to those most in need. Thirty seven per cent of respondents felt that the balance is about right as it is. Voluntary and community sector respondents were most likely to agree that funding should go to those most in need. There were also country differences, with Northern Ireland and UK-wide respondents showing higher levels of agreement with funding those most in need than elsewhere. Question 2.2 Tell us if you think BIG should have a different focus. This open question was designed to explore views about whether BIG should concentrate its efforts on a different principle to that of need. There was significant support for BIG s focus to remain on those most in need. This is apparent both in terms of respondents expressing their agreement with need and the lack of a clear and consistent alternative focus. However, there was considerable discussion of how to define those most in need. Several notable concerns were raised about need as a guiding principle to the exclusion of all other considerations. The most common issue was the challenge of defining need; and the requirement to do this carefully. Many respondents were concerned about inflexibility that could result from defining need based on geographical areas or statistical indicators of need, such as the Index of Multiple Deprivation. Using blunt measures was felt to prioritise economic or financial needs over other needs, and to create an artificial distinction between those who are deemed to be in need and those who are not. The issue of recognising and responding to changing needs, particularly in the current economic climate, was also raised. Other respondents questioned who defines need. Many said that BIG shouldn t be prescriptive but instead allow communities to define their own needs through open funding; they welcomed the flexibility that BIG had previously shown in seeking out areas which national funding formulas tended to pass by. Some respondents were concerned that an unsophisticated approach could lead to rural areas and rural deprivation being neglected. A similar view was expressed in relation to pockets of deprivation in better off areas. Other respondents felt that a narrow focus on need would mean an emphasis on immediate and obvious need at the expense of more subtle and longer-term need. One common view was that a sole focus on most in need would mean that preventative or creative projects directed towards other at risk target groups would be excluded. Two key arguments were used to support a wider focus. First, it was argued that those whose needs do not seem to be as great might be neglected by other funders. Secondly, some respondents felt that the whole community should benefit from Lottery funding to reflect the fact that Lottery tickets are not only bought by those most in need. There were some cautionary notes raised about the principle of additionality. Some respondents felt that it was important to fund services that are not provided elsewhere and that those most in need should be looked after by the Government. 1 A similar picture emerged here. Participants were particularly concerned about the rigid application of statistics and geographical boundaries as indicators of need. There were, however, good levels of support for focusing on those most in need.

11 Question 3.1 How can BIG best help build lasting partnerships and networks that support communities and people most in need? Number Six per cent of respondents gave their own suggestions about partnership working. The most frequently mentioned point was that partnerships should not be forced or insisted upon lest they result in unequal alliances. Others said that partnerships are not always the best way of working. Many respondents focused on practical ways of building collaborative working, for example suggesting that BIG provides infrastructure support and encourages and facilitates networking between organisations. Others were keen that BIG should participate in and strengthen existing partnerships and networks rather than creating new ones. 5 Insist on partnerships VCS with each other VCS with others Other No opinion The two most popular options were to support voluntary and community sector organisations to build alliances with each other (thirty nine per cent agreement), and to build alliances with other sectors (thirty seven per cent agreement) 2. Although there were some differences in the order of the top two options across sectors and countries, they remained the clear choice of most respondents. Insisting on partnerships received twelve per cent support overall and was most strongly supported by public and private sector respondents, and by large organisations. 2 Respondents were asked to select two answers to this question. Responses have been summed to produce an overall total for each answer option. Although participants were not asked to select answers at the events, broadly similar views were expressed at consultation events. Many participants saw a role for BIG in brokering and facilitating partnerships, including funding their development and encouraging and empowering voluntary and community organisations to be involved. Some participants felt that sharing lessons and learning from partnership working was important while others cautioned against requiring or forcing organisations to work in partnership. 11

12 Question 3.2 How can we get better at engaging with the private sector? This open question sought to explore opinions about how BIG could engage more effectively with the private sector. We were interested to know whether respondents felt there was potential for more collaboration and mutual learning here. Many respondents interpreted this question broadly and envisaged wider and stronger links between the voluntary and the private sectors. Four main themes emerged from the responses: concerns about engagement, ways in which BIG and others could work with the private sector, an acknowledgement of the groundwork that would be needed to make this happen, and a recognition of the types of contribution that the private sector could make. The most common theme was concern. Some respondents questioned why BIG wanted to explore closer links with the private sector. Others felt that we should concentrate on the voluntary and community sector; they were worried that working with the private sector would mean funding being diverted. Some suggested that more engagement would be difficult in the current economic climate. Some respondents mis-interpreted this question to be about funding the private sector and expressed disagreement with that. There were many suggestions about how we could become more engaged with the private sector. The most frequent was for BIG to act as a broker between voluntary and community sector and private sector organisations, and to be the driver of improved links. One respondent envisaged that BIG s role would be to hold events specifically for the private sector invite them to see how BIG funded projects impact on their work showcase funded projects and their specific relevance to the private sector. Others suggested giving advice and support about how to engage with the private sector, arranging joint meetings, and managing a database of potential private sector partners. A second commonly suggested idea was for us to offer visible economic or financial benefits or incentives to private sector organisations to encourage partnership working. These included contributions to companies corporate social responsibility agendas and branding opportunities. Respondents highlighted the need for partnerships to be mutually beneficial for all involved. Specific suggestions for better engagement between BIG and the private sector included offering joint or match-funding opportunities. Some respondents saw this as giving a route for the private sector to make donations to the voluntary and community sector. Another suggestion was to develop funding programmes that would encourage applications from partnerships between private sector organisations and other sectors. The idea of mutually beneficial partnerships was underpinned by a recognition of the groundwork that would be needed to encourage private sector engagement. Many survey respondents felt there was a need to raise awareness and promote the benefits of the voluntary and community sector and the work it does. Although the financial contribution that the private sector could make was widely acknowledged, there was a strong recognition of the non-financial resources that the private sector could also offer, including training, apprenticeships, mentoring, volunteering and giving advice on issues such as publicity, business planning and project management. At the events similar views were expressed. In addition, participants felt that learning from working with the private sector was important, particularly from existing partnerships. 12

13 Question 3.3 Are there opportunities for joint funding that BIG should take up? Many respondents interpreted the question broadly in relation to the local funding environment and gave answers that referred specifically to joint funding for projects, rather than for BIG. For example, some respondents saw a role for BIG working with local partners. Others talked about BIG encouraging joint applications or having match-funding requirements in place. Most respondents supported BIG using a joint funding approach. The four most frequently mentioned opportunities were with the private sector, central Government and third sector organisations and funders. Some respondents thought that private sector organisations could make a financial contribution towards a particular funding stream, while others suggested a more targeted approach, by identifying organisations working in the same area or on the same issue. Many respondents recognised the potential of non-financial as well as financial resources from the private sector. Where central Government sources were discussed, this was mainly in relation to funders of the voluntary and community sector, including the Department for International Development and the Office of the Third Sector. People who talked about funding from the voluntary and community sector tended to mention larger, national organisations rather than small ones. Many respondents identified specific sources of joint funding or areas in which they believed joint funding would be beneficial. The most popular suggestions of specific sources were European funding, particularly the European Social Fund and the LEADER programme, and Local Authorities, including opportunities arising from Local Area Agreements and Local Strategic Partnerships. Comic Relief was frequently mentioned in relation to international funding. Health and education were the preferred areas for joint funding; potential partners identified included Primary Care Trusts and extended schools. Respondents were keen for BIG to explore joint working with other funders, particularly improving our understanding of the funding environment, sharing knowledge and working more closely with other funders. Highlighted benefits of joint funding included streamlining of application processes and reducing bureaucracy, the possibility of pre-matching or pooling funding streams thereby removing the need for applicants to source match funding individually, and the potential for enhancing impact in terms of project sustainability and greater efficacy in achieving outcomes. Participants emphasised that joint funding must be straightforward and accessible to all. 13

14 Number Question 4 After 212, when our sixty seventy per cent undertaking ends, should we continue to guarantee a percentage of our funding goes to the voluntary and community sector? There was strong support for continuing the sixty seventy per cent voluntary and community sector undertaking. Eighty four per cent of respondents supported it, fifteen per cent did not. The great majority of voluntary and community sector respondents supported the undertaking. There was majority support in individuals and those identifying as other, although the public and private sectors were less in agreement. There were also differences in the levels of support between organisations and between different countries. For example, small and medium-sized organisations showed higher levels of agreement than large organisations. And across the countries, there was slightly less support in Wales and Scotland than elsewhere. 5 Funding should go to the organisation in the best position to deliver the project outcomes whichever sector they are from BIG should extend its undertaking to the voluntary and community sector beyond 212 No opinion 14 There was substantial support for continuing the voluntary and community sector undertaking; some participants felt that the percentage contribution should be higher than sixty - seventy per cent. Many argued that voluntary and community sector organisations are best placed to deliver outcomes effectively and offer value for money. The impact of reducing the level of the undertaking was discussed. It was felt that this would weaken the voluntary and community sector and that if it were to happen, partnering with voluntary organisations should be made compulsory. This question proved to be a popular topic for debate in the webchat, and as above, there was strong support for the undertaking.

15 Question 5 Over and above giving out grants, what would make BIG a better funder in the way we work? More pre-application support, such as talking through ideas, explaining funding available, development grants, guides on matters such as effective project management More specialist support and advice for grant holders relevant to the issue or sector in which a grant has been made More suport for grant holders in areas such as project management, financial planning, awareness-raising and engagement, evaluation and sustainability More activity to build networks of grant holders to help share learning BIG developing a more visible profile in debates on social issues, using our learning and the learning of our grant holders and partners Continue to offer existing levels of support to applicants and grant holders Other No opinion The most popular options were more pre-application support (thirty two per cent agreement) and more support for grant holders in areas such as project management, financial planning, awareness-raising and engagement, evaluation and sustainability (eighteen per cent agreement) 2. Of the other options, learning networks received eleven per cent support, and all the remaining options had less than ten per cent support. The result was repeated across the countries with one exception: BIG raising its profile rather than offering project management support received more support from UK-wide respondents. Respondents were free to make their own suggestions about ways of achieving better funding in the Other category and seven per cent did so. The clear message here was that BIG should not seek to create new mechanisms of giving support but should instead make full use of the existing support mechanisms that are available by establishing better links, delegating work or giving funding to these agencies. Other points made were that application and monitoring processes should be simplified and that more accessible support and skills development for applicants and grant holders was required. 2 Respondents were asked to select two answers to this question. Responses have been summed to produce an overall total for each answer option. Participants at events expressed strong support for BIG giving more support to applicants and grant holders. There was an emphasis on localised support, both in terms of increased contact with BIG staff and BIG funding for local development or funding advisors. In particular participants sought more support around issues such as project management and financial planning. A desire for clarity was expressed in relation to monitoring requirements as well as application criteria. Pre-application support was a common theme in terms of BIG giving more advice and better communication throughout the application process, including feedback to failed applicants. Others focussed on sustainability and continuation of projects after BIG funding ends. Participants identified signposting to other available funding streams and help in establishing relationships with potential future funders as important factors in achieving sustainability. The issue of being a better funder provoked debate in both the online discussion board and the blog and generated some new ideas. One suggestion was a fast track application fund to allow organisations quick access to funding for urgently needed projects. 15

16 Number Question 6 Should we aim to fund fewer projects, but fund for a longer period? Or have we got the balance about right? There was clear support for the current balance of funding being about right (sixty seven per cent agreement). Although there were similar levels of support for funding fewer projects for longer (fourteen per cent) and funding more projects for a shorter period (thirteen per cent), differences in the levels of support for these options were apparent between groups of respondents. Funding more projects for a shorter period was more popular with those who hadn t received funding from BIG than with those who had, and with small organisations compared to large organisations. 5 Fewer projects for longer Currant balance about right More projects for shorter period No opinion 16 Although there was good support for the current balance of funding being about right, the picture was mixed. Many participants recognised the value of awarding funding for five years or longer in terms of increasing stability of projects and allowing sufficient time to achieve outcomes. The ability afforded by five-year funding to demonstrate a track record that could be used in the pursuit of continuation funding was also noted. Others felt that longer term funding should not be guaranteed but be dependent on certain factors, including whether interim outcomes had been achieved. Many participants talked about having flexibility in funding, including flexibility around the end date of the grant. Factors that can influence the timing of a grant award were discussed. At the beginning of a grant for example, there is the possibility of delays in terms of securing match funding and starting delivery of services. At the end of the grant too, the availability of continuation funding from other sources is often a critical factor. The issues raised by this question could perhaps be summed up by one webchat contributor who wrote while there are excellent organisations doing some great work that deserve support, how much of a right should any organisation have of ongoing support beyond the lifetime of the original project?

17 Number Question 7 Do you think BIG should take more risks with its funding to promote innovative solutions? Three-quarters of respondents agreed that BIG should take more risks to promote innovative solutions in a proportion of its work. Fourteen per cent of respondents felt that more risks should be taken across all of BIG s work, and nine per cent agreed that BIG should concentrate only on what is known to work. Large organisations were more likely than small organisations to agree that BIG should take more risks to promote innovative solutions. There were, however, differences between country respondents. Those in Northern Ireland were least likely to agree that BIG should take more risks, whereas Welsh respondents and those in UK-wide organisations had the highest levels of agreement with this statement. Yes, in a proportion of its work Yes, across all of its work No, it should concentrate only on what is known to work No opinion People talked about ways in which to mitigate risk and made the point that innovation does not always have to be risky. Several participants suggested a closer monitoring and evaluation regime for innovative projects than for other projects. Other suggestions about how to mitigate risk included sharing knowledge about what works and what doesn t, and giving more project management support. Participants discussed ways to reach and fund more innovative projects. In this case, giving more support and clearer guidelines about BIG s application requirements and widening access to reach projects or organisations that find it difficult to access Lottery funding were both felt to be important issues. Finally, there was a recognition that innovation should not be funded simply for the sake of it, particularly if this meant that established projects lost out. As one respondent who had experience of receiving funding from an innovation pot said: Once projects became successful they were no longer innovative and could not get any further funding. Several people who submitted written responses to the consultation also made this point. There was an appetite for BIG to take risks and fund innovative projects. Some participants suggested ring fencing funds for innovative projects, whilst others were keen for BIG to take more risks in what we fund, including causes that have proven to be controversial in the past. 17

18 Question 8 Are there areas beyond those described in Big thinking, where you think it is important to operate at a UK level, rather than at a country level? This open question was intended to explore opinions about UK-wide funding, beyond existing commitments such as our international programme. Currently, approximately ten per cent of our funding is managed at the UK level. Overall, respondents were clearly supportive of maintaining UK-wide funding. The strongest argument made in favour of UK funding was that it encourages cross-country collaborations and a consistency of approach. Many respondents felt that a UK-wide approach was crucial where experiences or outcomes were the same across the UK, or where issues had UK-wide significance. Others felt that UK funding should be employed when organisations had a UKwide scope or where beneficiaries were located across countries. One frequently quoted example was that of projects offering support and advice by telephone helplines or websites. A further application of UKwide funding was identified in relation to the roll-out of successful small-scale or pilot projects. Respondents also agreed with the idea of a mix of UK-wide and country level funding; most agreed that the current balance of ten per cent of funding being managed at the UK level was about right. Although overall disagreement with UK-wide funding was low, some said that funding should only be allocated at the country, regional or local level. In terms of areas to be funded at the UK level, funding for international projects received by far the greatest amount of support, something BIG has committed to continuing. Linked to this was a common feeling that there was a lack of awareness of BIG s funding of international projects. Besides international funding, respondents suggested a diverse range of issues to be funded at the UK level. The most frequently mentioned issues were the environment and climate change. Other common themes were equality of opportunity, health, including mental health and obesity, poverty and deprivation, and capacity building. 18 At the events there was a similar level of agreement with UK-wide funding. However, there was a greater emphasis on the local context being acknowledged within UK-wide funding, both in terms of local knowledge and local participation being specified in programme requirements and generally encouraged. Some participants felt that UK funding could be biased towards larger organisations.

19 Number Question 9 Which ways of increasing public involvement do you think would work best for BIG? Public membership of decision-making committees Online surveys/forums Local decision-making panels Public voting on projects via television, radio or the internet The two most popular ways of increasing public involvement were local decision-making panels (twenty two per cent support) and public membership of decision-making committees (eighteen per cent support) 2. Of the other options, public involvement in projects received fourteen per cent support and a mix of all options, thirteen per cent. The remaining answer options all received less than ten per cent support. Citizens panels or juries More public involvemet in the development of projects Mix of all of the above Other No opinion There was variation in the results across the countries. Scottish and English respondents chose the same two options as the overall result. Although local decision-making panels were the most popular choice in Wales, the two second choices, public committee membership and public involvement in projects, attracted the same level of support. The preferred second choice in Northern Ireland was a mix of all the options although the first choice was again local decision-making committees. For UKwide respondents, public membership of committees was the most strongly supported option, with online surveys the second choice. Seven per cent of respondents offered their own suggestions about increasing public involvement in the Other category. The most frequently mentioned method was local consultation and involvement in decision-making. A variety of ways of achieving this were suggested including commissioning local organisations to consult in their own areas and setting up local panels both to advise and make decisions on local priorities. Other respondents identified the need to promote and advertise successful projects through the media and Lottery outlets. Not all forms of public involvement were supported however, and particular concerns were expressed about public voting. Some respondents felt that unpopular projects were unlikely to be awarded funding through this method unless carefully managed. 2 Respondents were asked to select two answers to this question. Responses have been summed to produce an overall total for each answer option. A similar picture emerged from the consultation events. The most common theme was for decision-making to be devolved to local areas where both grassroots organisations and the community could be consulted. There was also the desire for BIG to fund organisations to consult more effectively. As above, some participants had concerns about public voting and the bias that this may bring. The popularity of local decision-making panels was confirmed by one of the postcard votes on the Big thinking website. Half of the 1,361 people who answered the question about public involvement chose local decision-making panels out of four options that were offered. 19

20 Question 1 BIG is not restricted to distributing Lottery money alone. Are there other sources of funding that BIG would be the right organisation to manage, either on its own or in partnership? This open question was designed to explore ideas about sources of funding other than National Lottery funding that BIG might be best placed to distribute. The most frequently mentioned source of non- Lottery funding was from central Government. Although some Government departments were specifically named, including the Department of Health and the Department for Communities and Local Government, most respondents did not identify a particular source. Many respondents mentioned BIG distributing funds from dormant accounts and most were in favour of BIG doing so. A number of other sources were suggested. These included European funding, partnerships with other funders of the voluntary and community sector, Local Authorities and private sector funding. Some respondents identified a management role for BIG in co-ordinating and managing one single access point for grants to the voluntary and community sector from a number of different funders. The majority of respondents were in favour of BIG distributing non-lottery funding. They recognised that BIG has the necessary capacity and infrastructure to manage a range of funding programmes. Some respondents stressed the importance of BIG working in partnership; others felt that BIG management would mean improved access for applicants and more efficient grant-making. As one respondent said, The experience that BIG has in the assessment and support of projects makes it better placed to deliver funding on behalf of central and local government. Some respondents disagreed with BIG distributing non-lottery funding. They suggested that BIG should concentrate on distributing Lottery money effectively rather than taking on additional funding. Some felt that there was a risk of monopolisation that would reduce the number of funding streams available to organisations. As one respondent put it, BIG is great, but it s big enough. Others felt that BIG needed to improve its distribution of Lottery funding, including reducing the bureaucracy involved in Lottery applications, before considering non-lottery funding. There were also some concerns about BIG s ability to maintain its independence and the risk of political interference in how grants are made. 2 Participants at events raised a similar range of issues, including BIG management of non-lottery funding increasing the efficiency of grant-making. In addition, there was an emphasis on partnership working as participants were keen for BIG to make links with relevant organisations and align funding programmes with those of other organisations. Some concerns were expressed around BIG losing its focus as a result of distributing non-lottery funding, and this was often linked to the desire for any additional funding to fit clearly within its mission.

21 What you told us in England Number There were 2,83 responses to the England consultation questions in our online survey, of which 2,577 respondents were based in England. Of the English respondents, the majority (sixty nine per cent) were from the voluntary and community sector. Eighteen per cent of respondents were individuals, ten per cent were from the public sector and one per cent were from the private sector. Fifty one per cent had received funding from BIG or its predecessors and half were based in small organisations with fewer than fifteen members of staff. As Figure 1 shows, the English respondents were fairly evenly spread across the England regions. However when compared to population, responses from the East Midlands and North East regions were notably high South West South East London East of England East Midlands Region West Midlands Yorkshire and the Humber North East North West A diverse group of stakeholders was invited to a workshop in each England region and an average of 7 people attended each event. Delegates were able to contribute to the discussion of the Big thinking questions by inputting comments using table top technology. Comments were then relayed back to the audience during the summary sessions. This method of facilitation allowed everyone who attended to put forward their views and enabled us to capture all the responses made. Smaller round table events were also held with key stakeholders in each region. We were particularly interested to hear views on where we could make most impact and what styles of working we should adopt to achieve most impact. We looked at the type of programmes we had run in England since 24 and set out a list of proposed outcomes we would like to achieve between We also wanted respondents to consider how we could work in new or improved ways to make dealings with us as productive as possible. The questions we asked in the online survey and the discussions we prompted at the regional meetings were framed with these thoughts in mind. 21

22 Number Question 1.1 Do you agree that we should develop tighter outcomes for all but our smallest grants? Question 1.2 Are the changes listed the right ones? These are: XXHelping those who are isolated and are facing transitions at particularly critical points in their lives XXSupporting approaches that address the needs of people with complex and inter-related problems XXHelping communities to feel more empowered by enabling people to participate in local activities XXPromoting better links within communities to foster cohesion XXPromoting activities that are economically, socially and environmentally sustainable 25 Yes No No opinion 2 Half of respondents agreed with tighter outcomes for all but our smallest grants and forty two per cent disagreed. Public sector respondents were most likely to agree with tighter outcomes compared to other sectors. Voluntary and community sector respondents were the most likely to disagree with tighter outcomes across the sectors. Number Yes No No opinion There was seventy five per cent agreement with the changes listed being the right ones; eleven per cent of respondents disagreed with the changes suggested. Across the sectors, levels of agreement were highest in public sector and voluntary and community sector respondents. Although agreement rates were reasonably consistent across the England regions, respondents in the West Midlands showed the greatest support and South West respondents the lowest levels of support for the suggested changes. 22 Although there was a good level of agreement with the suggested outcomes and the breadth of opportunity they offered, feedback from the events suggests a less clear-cut picture. Many participants wanted clarity about what was meant by the changes and asked questions about how they would be used, particularly in making decisions about grant awards and whether all the priorities would need to be met. Others felt that they were too broad and vague and that further definition and simplification were required. There was also a general feeling that communities should have the ability to decide what their own priorities and needs are.

23 Question 1.3 Using evidence from your own experience, are there other changes we should prioritise? The diverse range of responses to this question can be grouped into four main categories, namely funding distribution, funding themes, beneficiary groups, and outcomes. The key issues that emerged from the survey responses fall into the categories of funding themes and beneficiary groups. In terms of themes, building capacity in the voluntary and community sector was the most frequently mentioned. Not only did this include strengthening and building the skills of frontline organisations but also supporting the supporters by investing in infrastructure organisations that help frontline organisations to develop and manage projects. Other prominent funding themes were health and the environment, in particular, climate change. Respondents referred to a number of healthrelated issues including mental health, disability, and well-being. Regarding the environment, like the first consultation question, this theme embraced the notion of sustainable development. As one respondent noted, funding should enable people to make lasting improvements to their local environment. Considering beneficiary groups, children and young people and communities in need were the most frequently mentioned. Those who felt that children and young people should be a priority suggested that specific, positive activities for children and young people should be provided, and that engagement of young people in their communities should be encouraged. Respondents who identified communities in need defined these in a variety of ways, referring to disadvantage, deprivation, and poverty as well as communities that are excluded and geographically isolated. Smaller numbers of respondents focused on outcomes and funding distribution. However promoting and improving community cohesion was the most commonly mentioned outcome. This included creating better links between communities and greater community integration as well as helping people to feel more empowered and raising levels of participation. Regarding funding distribution, many respondents identified project sustainability after BIG funding ends as a key issue, and this was often discussed in terms of funding projects for longer. There was also a desire for simpler and less bureaucratic processes, especially in relation to application processes. A similar range of issues was discussed at the events, although funding distribution was not as prominent as in the survey responses. Participants focused particularly on the outcome of promoting community cohesion but capacity building and the environment also featured in discussions. In addition to these issues, the need to fund preventative work was also recognised. 23

24 Number Question 2.1 BIG in England proposes to fund projects in three ways open funding, community funding and targeted funding. Do you agree with this proposal? Yes No opinion The majority of respondents (sixty two per cent) were in favour of the proposed funding framework. Fourteen per cent of respondents disagreed with the funding proposals. Across the sectors, public sector respondents were the most likely to agree, whereas private sector respondents were the least likely to agree. Survey respondents were then asked: Please give the reasons for your answer. It is clear that the key reason why the funding framework was endorsed by survey respondents is because it offers a mix of funding approaches. There were substantial levels of support for the mixture of funding proposed by BIG and this was expressed in a number of different ways. By far the most popular reason was that a mix of funding offers the widest range of funding options and will provide funding for different kinds of organisations and projects which suit[s] the different needs of communities. Many participants felt that the combination of different funding approaches would allow greater access to funding, both in terms of those able to apply for funds and those who may benefit from the funding. As one respondent said, It gives the broadest access to funding. Another felt that it would enable BIG to reach more individuals and groups and deliver greater benefit. Other reasons for supporting a mix of funding were that it allows flexibility in meeting 24 No needs, it provides a good balance between strategic and open funding, and finally, that dividing funds between approaches is a fairer way of distributing funds. These arguments can perhaps be best summed up by one respondent who said: This approach will support the widest variety of projects helping local projects and communities while at the same time tackling bigger issues strategically. In addition to the high levels of support for the funding framework, many respondents emphasised the importance of open funding. Respondents identified the benefits of open funding as allowing local groups to use their local knowledge to meet needs, and giving access to funding for small groups and others who may be at a disadvantage when seeking funding. Respondents were generally supportive of community funding. Some questioned how this type of funding would work in practice, in particular how effective using geographical areas would be in meeting needs, and how communities of interest would be included. One respondent described it as making sure community funding is aimed at the right communities and needs. Others recognised the benefits of getting organisations working together and creating new partnerships. A good level of support for targeted funding was in evidence, predominantly due to the fact that this type of funding can be used to deal with specific issues on a large scale and in a strategic and consistent way with a lasting legacy. Examples of issues where this was felt to be beneficial were the environment and poverty. As one respondent said, Targeting funding allows a concerted effort to be made to deal with systemic and widespread issues. Concerns about targeted funding were mainly around additionality and the risk that funding could be used to achieve government outcomes rather than issues identified from the ground up. Others felt that targeted funding was not responsive or sensitive enough to local needs.

Guidelines: Comic Relief Local Communities Core Strength Grant

Guidelines: Comic Relief Local Communities Core Strength Grant Guidelines: Comic Relief Local Communities Core Strength Grant Who are Quartet Community Foundation? Quartet Community Foundation manages funding on behalf of individuals, companies, charitable trusts

More information

Big Lottery Fund Research. Community Sport: evaluation update

Big Lottery Fund Research. Community Sport: evaluation update Big Lottery Fund Research Community Sport: evaluation update Healthy Families Stock code BIG-HFI ISSN (Print) 1744-4756 ISSN (Online) 1744-4764 Stock code BIG-ComSpEval Print??? ISSN 1744-4756 (print)

More information

Discussion paper on the Voluntary Sector Investment Programme

Discussion paper on the Voluntary Sector Investment Programme Discussion paper on the Voluntary Sector Investment Programme Overview As important partners in addressing health inequalities and improving health and well-being outcomes, the Department of Health, Public

More information

Supervising pharmacist independent

Supervising pharmacist independent Supervising pharmacist independent prescribers in training Summary of responses to the discussion paper Introduction 1. Two of the General Pharmaceutical Council s core activities are setting standards

More information

Comic Relief Core Strength Local Communities Fund

Comic Relief Core Strength Local Communities Fund Introduction Comic Relief Core Strength Local Communities Fund EECF is pleased to announce the launch of the Core Strength Local Communities Fund for 2017/18. This 12-month programme is responding to the

More information

Wolfson Foundation. Strategy,

Wolfson Foundation. Strategy, Wolfson Foundation Strategy, 2017-2019 WOLFSON FOUNDATION THREE YEAR STRATEGY 04 THE WOLFSON FOUNDATION Strategy, 2017-2019 The traditions of the Wolfson Foundation, I think, are valuable for all of us.

More information

Challenge Fund 2018 Music

Challenge Fund 2018 Music 1 Challenge Fund 2018 Music This funding opportunity is open only to applications for projects working with people in one of the following locations: North Wales The North West of England (north of Greater

More information

National review of domiciliary care in Wales. Wrexham County Borough Council

National review of domiciliary care in Wales. Wrexham County Borough Council National review of domiciliary care in Wales Wrexham County Borough Council July 2016 Mae r ddogfen yma hefyd ar gael yn Gymraeg. This document is also available in Welsh. Crown copyright 2016 WG29253

More information

English devolution deals

English devolution deals Report by the Comptroller and Auditor General Department for Communities and Local Government and HM Treasury English devolution deals HC 948 SESSION 2015-16 20 APRIL 2016 4 Key facts English devolution

More information

NATIONAL LOTTERY CHARITIES BOARD England. Mapping grants to deprived communities

NATIONAL LOTTERY CHARITIES BOARD England. Mapping grants to deprived communities NATIONAL LOTTERY CHARITIES BOARD England Mapping grants to deprived communities JANUARY 2000 Mapping grants to deprived communities 2 Introduction This paper summarises the findings from a research project

More information

Should you have any queries regarding the consultation please

Should you have any queries regarding the consultation please November 2007 Dear Colleague The future of pre-registration nursing education As NMC President and also a nurse registrant, I am delighted to have the opportunity to invite you to respond to this important

More information

Targeted Regeneration Investment. Guidance for local authorities and delivery partners

Targeted Regeneration Investment. Guidance for local authorities and delivery partners Targeted Regeneration Investment Guidance for local authorities and delivery partners 20 October 2017 0 Contents Page Executive Summary 2 Introduction 3 Prosperity for All 5 Programme aims and objectives

More information

DSC response to DCMS consultation on changes to the National Lottery Shares

DSC response to DCMS consultation on changes to the National Lottery Shares DSC response to DCMS consultation on changes to the National Lottery Shares August 2010 Jay Kennedy Head of Policy Directory of Social Change 24 Stephenson Way London NW1 2DP Tel: 020 7391 4800 www.dsc.org.uk

More information

Appointment of Big Lottery Fund s Scotland Committee members. Information Pack

Appointment of Big Lottery Fund s Scotland Committee members. Information Pack Appointment of Big Lottery Fund s Scotland Committee members Information Pack Thank you for your interest in the Big Lottery Fund. We are looking to appoint three members to our Scotland Committee. This

More information

Fitness for Purpose Review of Health and Social Care Qualifications in Northern Ireland

Fitness for Purpose Review of Health and Social Care Qualifications in Northern Ireland + Fitness for Purpose Review of Health and Social Care Qualifications in Northern Ireland November 2016 Contents Introduction 3 Background 3 Survey Methodology 4 Responses 5 Overview and Analysis of Responses

More information

Increasing employment rates for ethnic minorities

Increasing employment rates for ethnic minorities Department for Work and Pensions Increasing employment rates for ethnic minorities REPORT BY THE COMPTROLLER AND AUDITOR GENERAL HC 206 Session 2007-2008 1 February 2008 SummARy Closing the employment

More information

State of Maternity Services Report 2018 England

State of Maternity Services Report 2018 England State of Maternity Services Report 218 England Promoting Supporting Influencing #soms218 2 The Royal College of Midwives Executive summary The RCM s annual State of Maternity Services Report provides an

More information

Final Report ALL IRELAND. Palliative Care Senior Nurses Network

Final Report ALL IRELAND. Palliative Care Senior Nurses Network Final Report ALL IRELAND Palliative Care Senior Nurses Network May 2016 FINAL REPORT Phase II All Ireland Palliative Care Senior Nurse Network Nursing Leadership Impacting Policy and Practice 1 Rationale

More information

Grants made by the National Lottery Charities Board

Grants made by the National Lottery Charities Board Report by the Comptroller and Auditor General National Lottery Charities Board Grants made by the National Lottery Charities Board HC 378 Session 1999-2000 6 April 2000 Report by the Comptroller and Auditor

More information

Welsh Government Response to the Report of the National Assembly for Wales Public Accounts Committee Report on Unscheduled Care: Committee Report

Welsh Government Response to the Report of the National Assembly for Wales Public Accounts Committee Report on Unscheduled Care: Committee Report Welsh Government Response to the Report of the National Assembly for Wales Public Accounts Committee Report on Unscheduled Care: Committee Report We welcome the findings of the report and offer the following

More information

Knowledge and Skills for. Government response to the Consultation on the Knowledge and Skills Statement for. Social Workers in Adult Services

Knowledge and Skills for. Government response to the Consultation on the Knowledge and Skills Statement for. Social Workers in Adult Services Knowledge and Skills for Social Workers in Adult Services Government response to the Consultation on the Knowledge and Skills Statement for Social Workers in Adult Services March 2015 Title: Government

More information

Good afternoon everyone, and thank you for staying on for the afternoon session.

Good afternoon everyone, and thank you for staying on for the afternoon session. WRAP s UK Annual Conference 2013 - Dr Liz Goodwin review of the year speech Introduction Good afternoon everyone, and thank you for staying on for the afternoon session. And thank you Peter for those comments.

More information

The House of Lords Select Committee on Charities

The House of Lords Select Committee on Charities DSC submission of evidence to The House of Lords Select Committee on Charities September 2016 Ciaran Price Policy Officer Directory of Social Change 352 Holloway Road London N7 6PA cprice@dsc.org.uk 1

More information

Primary Care Workforce Survey Scotland 2017

Primary Care Workforce Survey Scotland 2017 Primary Care Workforce Survey Scotland 2017 A Survey of Scottish General Practices and General Practice Out of Hours Services Publication date 06 March 2018 An Official Statistics publication for Scotland

More information

Creating sporting opportunities in every community. Funding sport in the community

Creating sporting opportunities in every community. Funding sport in the community Creating sporting opportunities in every community Funding sport in the community Contents 1 Sport England's funding will help create a world-leading community sport system 2 1.1 Introduction 2 1.2 Sport

More information

- L E A R N I N G SHARING THE BEST BITS FROM THE COMMUNITIES

- L E A R N I N G SHARING THE BEST BITS FROM THE COMMUNITIES - L E A R N I N G SHARING THE BEST BITS FROM THE COMMUNITIES 1 C O NTA C T D E TA I LS Lily O Flynn, Senior Programmes Manager loflynn@ukcommunityfoundations.org 0207 841 4380 Registered office Unit 1.04

More information

British Medical Association National survey of GPs The future of General Practice 2015

British Medical Association National survey of GPs The future of General Practice 2015 British Medical Association National survey of GPs The future of General Practice 2015 Extract of Findings December February 2015 A report by ICM on behalf of the BMA Creston House, 10 Great Pulteney Street,

More information

Frequently Asked Questions. Families Fund. Supporting families to be active together

Frequently Asked Questions. Families Fund. Supporting families to be active together Frequently Asked Questions Families Fund Supporting families to be active together July 2017 Contents Eligibility and governance 3 Definitions and audience 3 The process 4 Investment and partnership funding

More information

- the proposed development process for Community Health Partnerships. - arrangements to begin to establish a Service Redesign Committee

- the proposed development process for Community Health Partnerships. - arrangements to begin to establish a Service Redesign Committee Greater Glasgow NHS Board Board Meeting Tuesday 20 th May 2003 Board Paper No. 2003/33 DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY CARE CHIEF EXECUTIVE WHITE PAPER PARTNERSHIP FOR CARE Recommendation: The NHS Board

More information

Future of Respite (Short Breaks) Services for Children with Disabilities

Future of Respite (Short Breaks) Services for Children with Disabilities Future of Respite (Short Breaks) Services for Children with Disabilities Consultation Feedback Report 2014 Foreword from the Director of Children s Services Within the Northern Trust area we know that

More information

Our next phase of regulation A more targeted, responsive and collaborative approach

Our next phase of regulation A more targeted, responsive and collaborative approach Consultation Our next phase of regulation A more targeted, responsive and collaborative approach Cross-sector and NHS trusts December 2016 Contents Foreword...3 Introduction...4 1. Regulating new models

More information

Programme guide for Round 6 (November 2017)

Programme guide for Round 6 (November 2017) Programme guide for Round 6 (November 2017) 1 Publication code: BBO1A(2) Further copies available from: Email general.enquiries@biglotteryfund.org.uk Phone 0345 4 10 20 30 Text Relay 18001 plus 0845 4

More information

Nottingham s Creative Industry Ecology SURVEY REPORT. June Peter Totterdill, Dimitra Gkiontsi and Maria Sousa

Nottingham s Creative Industry Ecology SURVEY REPORT. June Peter Totterdill, Dimitra Gkiontsi and Maria Sousa Nottingham s Creative Industry Ecology SURVEY REPORT June 2015 Peter Totterdill, Dimitra Gkiontsi and Maria Sousa 54-56 High Pavement, The Lace Market, Nottingham NG1 1HW INTRODUCTION This report presents

More information

The Growth Fund Guidance

The Growth Fund Guidance The Growth Fund Guidance A programme developed in partnership between Big Lottery Fund, Big Society Capital, Access the Foundation for Social Investment Guidance What s it all about? The social investment

More information

Evaluation of the devolved Apprenticeship Grant for Employers (AGE) programme in Leeds City Region: Executive Summary

Evaluation of the devolved Apprenticeship Grant for Employers (AGE) programme in Leeds City Region: Executive Summary Evaluation of the devolved Apprenticeship Grant for Employers (AGE) programme in Leeds City Region: Executive Summary Background to the AGE programme Since August 2015, the LEP has managed the Apprenticeship

More information

NHS GRAMPIAN. Clinical Strategy

NHS GRAMPIAN. Clinical Strategy NHS GRAMPIAN Clinical Strategy Board Meeting 02/06/2016 Open Session Item 9.1 1. Actions Recommended The Board is asked to: 1. Note the progress with the engagement process for the development of the clinical

More information

Consultation on developing our approach to regulating registered pharmacies

Consultation on developing our approach to regulating registered pharmacies Consultation on developing our approach to regulating registered pharmacies May 2018 The text of this document (but not the logo and branding) may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium,

More information

Great Expectations: The Evolving Landscape of Technology in Meetings 1

Great Expectations: The Evolving Landscape of Technology in Meetings 1 Great Expectations: The Evolving Landscape of Technology in Meetings The Evolving Landscape of Technology in Meetings 1 2 The Evolving Landscape of Technology in Meetings Methodology American Express Meetings

More information

The future of careers work in schools in England First supplementary paper

The future of careers work in schools in England First supplementary paper The future of careers work in schools in England First supplementary paper David Andrews July 2013 Introduction In March 2013 I self-published a discussion paper 1 on future options for careers work in

More information

Public Health Skills and Career Framework Multidisciplinary/multi-agency/multi-professional. April 2008 (updated March 2009)

Public Health Skills and Career Framework Multidisciplinary/multi-agency/multi-professional. April 2008 (updated March 2009) Public Health Skills and Multidisciplinary/multi-agency/multi-professional April 2008 (updated March 2009) Welcome to the Public Health Skills and I am delighted to launch the UK-wide Public Health Skills

More information

Social Enterprise. Taking the Pulse of the Small Charity Sector. Income. Maximising Assets. Resilience. Mission. Based. Innovation. Economy.

Social Enterprise. Taking the Pulse of the Small Charity Sector. Income. Maximising Assets. Resilience. Mission. Based. Innovation. Economy. Mixed Income Economy Innovation Assets Mission Based Maximising Assets Social Enterprise Not-for-profit Income Sustainability Resilience Taking the Pulse of the Small Charity Sector September to November

More information

Care home services for older people

Care home services for older people Care home services for older people Procurement strategy - engagement report September 2017 1 CONTENTS: 1. Introduction.... 3 2. Language... 3 3. Survey analysis... 4 a) People living in care homes....

More information

TAMESIDE & GLOSSOP SYSTEM WIDE SELF CARE PROGRAMME

TAMESIDE & GLOSSOP SYSTEM WIDE SELF CARE PROGRAMME Report to: HEALTH AND WELLBEING BOARD Date: 8 March 2018 Executive Member / Reporting Officer: Subject: Report Summary: Recommendations: Links to Health and Wellbeing Strategy: Policy Implications: Chris

More information

The views of public health teams working in local authorities Year 1. February 2014

The views of public health teams working in local authorities Year 1. February 2014 The views of public health teams working in local authorities Year 1 February 2014 Foreword One of the Royal Society for Public Health s key priorities is to support the public health workforce in its

More information

Prepared for: Science and Technology Facilities Council. Public Engagement Awards: Recipient Feedback Survey Report. February 2016

Prepared for: Science and Technology Facilities Council. Public Engagement Awards: Recipient Feedback Survey Report. February 2016 Prepared for: Science and Technology Facilities Council Public Engagement Awards: Recipient Feedback Survey Report February 2016 STFC Grants Scheme Recipient Feedback Report APRIL 2016 Page 1 1. Introduction...

More information

Workforce intelligence publication Individual employers and personal assistants July 2017

Workforce intelligence publication Individual employers and personal assistants July 2017 Workforce intelligence publication Individual employers and personal assistants July 2017 Source: National Minimum Data Set for Social Care (NMDS-SC) and new Skills for Care survey research. This report

More information

GIN Programme Evaluation Report Wave 1

GIN Programme Evaluation Report Wave 1 GIN Programme Evaluation Report Wave 1 Prepared by: Libby Thomson Project Lead Nurse, National GIN Project January 2009 1 This report is an evaluation of the progress of the GIN programme. The programme

More information

Innovation Monitor. Insights into innovation and R&D in Ireland 2017/2018

Innovation Monitor. Insights into innovation and R&D in Ireland 2017/2018 Innovation Monitor Insights into innovation and R&D in Ireland 2017/2018 2 Contents Page Executive summary 2 Key findings 3 The innovators 4 Innovation culture 6 Funding & incentives 8 What influences

More information

UK GIVING 2012/13. an update. March Registered charity number

UK GIVING 2012/13. an update. March Registered charity number UK GIVING 2012/13 an update March 2014 Registered charity number 268369 Contents UK Giving 2012/13 an update... 3 Key findings 4 Detailed findings 2012/13 5 Conclusion 9 Looking back 11 Moving forward

More information

Explanatory Memorandum to the Mental Health (Secondary Mental Health Services) (Wales) Order 2012

Explanatory Memorandum to the Mental Health (Secondary Mental Health Services) (Wales) Order 2012 Explanatory Memorandum to the Mental Health (Secondary Mental Health Services) (Wales) Order 2012 This Explanatory Memorandum has been prepared by the Department for Health, Social Services and Children

More information

Creative Scotland Scottish Enterprise Creative Industries Partnership Agreement monitoring group. October Background

Creative Scotland Scottish Enterprise Creative Industries Partnership Agreement monitoring group. October Background Creative Scotland Scottish Enterprise Creative Industries Partnership Agreement monitoring group October 2017 Background This report provides an update on the work undertaken in the context of the Partnership

More information

OUR UNDERWRITERS. We extend our appreciation to the underwriters for their invaluable support.

OUR UNDERWRITERS. We extend our appreciation to the underwriters for their invaluable support. OUR UNDERWRITERS We extend our appreciation to the underwriters for their invaluable support. 2 OUR ADVOCATES We extend our appreciation to the following organizations and businesses for their generous

More information

Welsh Language Scheme

Welsh Language Scheme Welsh Language Scheme 1. Introduction This scheme sets out how Big Lottery Fund will give effect to the principle established by the Welsh Language Act 1993 that, in providing services to the public in

More information

The Regional Arts Lottery Programme An evaluation

The Regional Arts Lottery Programme An evaluation Arts Council England research report 32 The Regional Arts Lottery Programme Research report 32 August 2003 The Regional Arts Lottery Programme An evaluation Annabel Jackson and Graham Devlin, Annabel Jackson

More information

The information needs of nurses Summary report of an RCN survey

The information needs of nurses Summary report of an RCN survey The information needs of nurses Summary report of an RCN survey The information needs of nurses: Summary report of an RCN survey Published by the Royal College of Nursing, 20 Cavendish Square, London,W1G

More information

Strategic Plan

Strategic Plan Strategic Plan 2018-2021. 1 1. Introduction The British Gas Energy Trust (BGET), which incorporates the Scottish Gas Energy Trust, is an independent Charitable Trust established in 2004 and funded solely

More information

Big Lottery Fund. New Opportunities Fund Annual Report 2003/2004

Big Lottery Fund. New Opportunities Fund Annual Report 2003/2004 Big Lottery Fund New Opportunities Fund Annual Report 2003/2004 August, 2004 Code Design Big Lottery Fund, 2004 Graphicsi.com Print Copies Further copies are available by telephoning: 0845 4 10 20 30 quoting

More information

5. Integrated Care Research and Learning

5. Integrated Care Research and Learning 5. Integrated Care Research and Learning 5.1 Introduction In outlining the overall policy underpinning the reform programme, Future Health emphasises important research and learning from the international

More information

New foundations: the future of NHS trust providers

New foundations: the future of NHS trust providers RCN Policy Unit Policy Briefing 05/2010 New foundations: the future of NHS trust providers April 2010 Royal College of Nursing 20 Cavendish Square London W1G 0RN Telephone 020 7647 3754 Fax 020 7647 3498

More information

Evaluation of the Research Grants Programme

Evaluation of the Research Grants Programme Evaluation of the Research Grants Programme Final Report February 2011 Evaluation of the Research Grants Programme Final Report Katharine McKenna and Nicola Smith About Ecorys At Ecorys we aim to deliver

More information

Contents. September-December 2016

Contents. September-December 2016 Healthwatch Luton Seldom Heard Report Contents Who we are... Why the Seldom Heard?... Our findings... Seldom Heard at a glance... What difference does it make?... Provider responses... Contact us... 3

More information

Guy s and St. Thomas Healthcare Alliance. Five-year strategy

Guy s and St. Thomas Healthcare Alliance. Five-year strategy Guy s and St. Thomas Healthcare Alliance Five-year strategy 2018-2023 Contents Contents... 2 Strategic context... 3 The current environment... 3 National response... 3 The Guy s and St Thomas Healthcare

More information

Health and Social Care White Paper (Our health, our care, our say: a new direction for community services): Implications for Local Government

Health and Social Care White Paper (Our health, our care, our say: a new direction for community services): Implications for Local Government Published 02/06 Health and Social Care White Paper (Our health, our care, our say: a new direction for community services): Implications for Local Government The Health and Social Care White Paper signals

More information

COMMUNITY AND DEMENTIA FUNDING 2017 to 2020

COMMUNITY AND DEMENTIA FUNDING 2017 to 2020 COMMUNITY AND DEMENTIA FUNDING 2017 to 2020 Life Changes Trust GUIDANCE FOR APPLICANTS Options 1 and 2: Three Year Funding October 2016 Please read this guidance carefully before completing your application.

More information

National Health Promotion in Hospitals Audit

National Health Promotion in Hospitals Audit National Health Promotion in Hospitals Audit Acute & Specialist Trusts Final Report 2012 www.nhphaudit.org This report was compiled and written by: Mr Steven Knuckey, NHPHA Lead Ms Katherine Lewis, NHPHA

More information

Supporting information for implementing NMC standards for pre-registration nursing education

Supporting information for implementing NMC standards for pre-registration nursing education Supporting information for implementing NMC standards for pre-registration nursing education Nursing and Midwifery Council March 2011 Page 1 of 69 Contents Introduction... 4 Aim... 5 Status of this information...

More information

National findings from the 2013 Inpatients survey

National findings from the 2013 Inpatients survey National findings from the 2013 Inpatients survey Introduction This report details the key findings from the 2013 survey of adult inpatient services. This is the eleventh survey and involved 156 acute

More information

Ufi aims to be a catalyst for change, and all of our projects ultimately need to be selfsustaining.

Ufi aims to be a catalyst for change, and all of our projects ultimately need to be selfsustaining. FAQs Manufacturing Skills Fund Updated 24 10 16 Funding Is there a requirement for match funding / client contribution? Will Ufi fund the total cost? There is no formal requirement for match funding. As

More information

National Patient Safety Foundation at the AMA

National Patient Safety Foundation at the AMA National Patient Safety Foundation at the AMA National Patient Safety Foundation at the AMA Public Opinion of Patient Safety Issues Research Findings Prepared for: National Patient Safety Foundation at

More information

DAVENTRY VOLUNTEER CENTRE. Business Plan

DAVENTRY VOLUNTEER CENTRE. Business Plan DAVENTRY VOLUNTEER CENTRE Business Plan 2018-2021 Business Plan 2018-2021 a) Introduction: Daventry Voluntary Centre is the accredited Volunteer Centre for the Daventry District of Northamptonshire. This

More information

7 th May Paper Title Natural Resource Management - Partnership Project Funding Paper Reference: NRW B B 29.15

7 th May Paper Title Natural Resource Management - Partnership Project Funding Paper Reference: NRW B B 29.15 Board Paper 7 th May 2015 Paper Title Natural Resource Management - Partnership Project Funding - 201516 Paper Reference: NRW B B 29.15 Paper Prepared By: Rhian Jardine, Head of Sustainable Communities,

More information

LymeForward Health and Wellbeing Group

LymeForward Health and Wellbeing Group LymeForward Health and Wellbeing Group Proposals for improvement in provision of local health, care and support services January 2018 Life is really simple, but we insist on making it complicated. Confucius

More information

Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform Committee. Draft Budget Written submission from Scottish Natural Heritage

Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform Committee. Draft Budget Written submission from Scottish Natural Heritage Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform Committee Draft Budget 2018-19 Written submission from Scottish Natural Heritage Scrutiny of Scottish Government Draft Budget 2018-19: Scottish Natural Heritage

More information

FUNDRAISING SUPPORT FOR SMALLER CHARITIES

FUNDRAISING SUPPORT FOR SMALLER CHARITIES FUNDRAISING SUPPORT FOR SMALLER CHARITIES Excellent fundraising for a better world Recommendations: We believe that more support and focus is needed to help smaller charities to fundraise. To help achieve

More information

Developing. National Service Frameworks

Developing. National Service Frameworks Developing National Service Frameworks A guide for policy colleagues developing National Service Frameworks for Healthcare services in Wales 1 Background 1. National Service Frameworks (NSF) were originally

More information

Workforce Development Fund

Workforce Development Fund Workforce Development Fund 2018 19 Partnership application form guidance January 2018 (v1.0) Contents Introduction... 2 The application process and timetable... 2 Qualifications and learning programmes

More information

Consultant Radiographers Education and CPD 2013

Consultant Radiographers Education and CPD 2013 Consultant Radiographers Education and CPD 2013 Consultant Radiographers Education and Continuing Professional Development Background Although consultant radiographer posts are relatively new to the National

More information

State of the sector report Voluntary Community Charity

State of the sector report Voluntary Community Charity State of the sector report 2016 Voluntary Community Charity "If our hopes of building a better and safer world are to become more than wishful thinking, we will need the engagement of volunteers more than

More information

Funding guidelines. April 2015 March Supporting positive change in communities

Funding guidelines. April 2015 March Supporting positive change in communities Funding guidelines April 2015 March 2016 Supporting positive change in communities Tudor makes grants to smaller community-led groups which are supporting people at the margins of society. Tudor s trustees

More information

GEM UK: Northern Ireland Summary 2008

GEM UK: Northern Ireland Summary 2008 1 GEM : Northern Ireland Summary 2008 Professor Mark Hart Economics and Strategy Group Aston Business School Aston University Aston Triangle Birmingham B4 7ET e-mail: mark.hart@aston.ac.uk 2 The Global

More information

Great Place Scheme. Grants between 100,000 and 500,000 Guidance for applicants in Wales

Great Place Scheme. Grants between 100,000 and 500,000 Guidance for applicants in Wales Great Place Scheme Grants between 100,000 and 500,000 Guidance for applicants in Wales Contents Summary of key information Section one - introduction Section two - purpose of the Great Place Scheme Section

More information

Programme Guidance Round One

Programme Guidance Round One Programme Guidance Round One Rosa is pleased to launch the grant programmes for Round One of the Justice and Equality Fund: Programme One: Advice and Support Programme Two: Now s the Time Programme Three:

More information

Promoting remote use of e-journals by RCN members across the UK and abroad

Promoting remote use of e-journals by RCN members across the UK and abroad Promoting remote use of e-journals by RCN members across the UK and abroad Paper given at the UKSG seminar ER: promoting and managing electronic resources without the trauma, November 2002 The Royal College

More information

Guidance for applicants The below is a summary of key information. Please see section three for full eligibility criteria.

Guidance for applicants The below is a summary of key information. Please see section three for full eligibility criteria. Ambition for Excellence Guidance for applicants The below is a summary of key information. Please see section three for full eligibility criteria. Summary of key information What is the focus of the fund?

More information

Guidance Notes. Guidance Notes 1

Guidance Notes. Guidance Notes 1 Guidance Notes Guidance Notes 1 Scottish Land Fund Programme Guide Further copies available from: Email: advicescotland@biglotteryfund.org.uk Phone: 0300 123 7110 Our website: www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/slf

More information

Evaluation of the Links Worker Programme in Deep End general practices in Glasgow

Evaluation of the Links Worker Programme in Deep End general practices in Glasgow Evaluation of the Links Worker Programme in Deep End general practices in Glasgow Interim report May 2016 We are happy to consider requests for other languages or formats. Please contact 0131 314 5300

More information

Business Plan Lancashire: The Place for Growth.

Business Plan Lancashire: The Place for Growth. Business Plan 2017-2020 Lancashire: The Place for Growth www.lancashirelep.co.uk Introduction This document begins to set out the priorities for the LEP s programme of work over the next three years. It

More information

Models of Support in the Teacher Induction Scheme in Scotland: The Views of Head Teachers and Supporters

Models of Support in the Teacher Induction Scheme in Scotland: The Views of Head Teachers and Supporters Models of Support in the Teacher Induction Scheme in Scotland: The Views of Head Teachers and Supporters Ron Clarke, Ian Matheson and Patricia Morris The General Teaching Council for Scotland, U.K. Dean

More information

LEARNING FROM THE VANGUARDS:

LEARNING FROM THE VANGUARDS: LEARNING FROM THE VANGUARDS: STAFF AT THE HEART OF NEW CARE MODELS This briefing looks at what the vanguards set out to achieve when it comes to involving and engaging staff in the new care models. It

More information

Voluntary and Community Sector [VCS] Commissioning Framework

Voluntary and Community Sector [VCS] Commissioning Framework Appendix A Voluntary and Community Sector [VCS] Commissioning Framework 2013-2016 Contents 1.0 Introduction 2.0 Background 3.0 What is Commissioning 4.0 Current approach 5.0 The case for change 6.0 Way

More information

SECTION 16: EXTERNAL RELATIONSHIPS AND FUNDING

SECTION 16: EXTERNAL RELATIONSHIPS AND FUNDING SECTION 16: EXTERNAL RELATIONSHIPS AND FUNDING 16.1 Introduction 16.2 Principles 16.3 Mandatory Referrals 16.4 Practices Part A: Funding from BBC Commercial Services, the Open University and Co-Productions

More information

Funding guidelines. Supporting positive change in communities

Funding guidelines. Supporting positive change in communities Funding guidelines Supporting positive change in communities April 2018 March 2019 Tudor makes grants to smaller community-led groups that support people at the margins of society. Tudor s trustees are

More information

PROJECT: KENSINGTON, CHELSEA AND WESTMINSTER

PROJECT: KENSINGTON, CHELSEA AND WESTMINSTER PROJECT: KENSINGTON, CHELSEA AND WESTMINSTER Working closely with community organisations, an experienced team from Kensington, Chelsea and Westminster has improved access to primary care services for

More information

Homecare Support Support Service Care at Home 152a Lower Granton Road Edinburgh EH5 1EY

Homecare Support Support Service Care at Home 152a Lower Granton Road Edinburgh EH5 1EY Homecare Support Support Service Care at Home 152a Lower Granton Road Edinburgh EH5 1EY Type of inspection: Unannounced Inspection completed on: 19 December 2014 Contents Page No Summary 3 1 About the

More information

Guidance on implementing the principles of peer review

Guidance on implementing the principles of peer review Guidance on implementing the principles of peer review MAY 2016 Principles of peer review Peer review is the best way for health and medical research charities to decide what research to fund. Done properly,

More information

Quality Management in Pharmacy Pre-registration Training: Current Practice

Quality Management in Pharmacy Pre-registration Training: Current Practice Pharmacy Education, 2013; 13 (1): 82-86 Quality Management in Pharmacy Pre-registration Training: Current Practice ELIZABETH MILLS 1*, ALISON BLENKINSOPP 2, PATRICIA BLACK 3 1 Postgraduate Academic Course

More information

Response: Accept in principle

Response: Accept in principle Response by the Welsh Assembly Government to the Report of the European and External Affairs Committee: European Year for Combating Poverty and Social Exclusion Recommendation 1. The Welsh Government to

More information

Health and Social Care Select Committee report Integrated care: organisations, partnerships and systems

Health and Social Care Select Committee report Integrated care: organisations, partnerships and systems 11 June 2018 Health and Social Care Select Committee report Integrated care: organisations, partnerships and systems The Health and Social Care Select Committee (the Committee) has published the report

More information

Strengthening Communities Funding Guidelines

Strengthening Communities Funding Guidelines Strengthening Communities Funding Guidelines Introduction The Henry Smith Charity is one of the largest independent grant making trusts in the UK, distributing over 30m each year. These funding guidelines

More information

HERITAGE LOTTERY FUND CONSULTATION 2018

HERITAGE LOTTERY FUND CONSULTATION 2018 HERITAGE LOTTERY FUND CONSULTATION 2018 1 Welcome! It s time to speak out! The Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) wants your views on the future of National Lottery funding for heritage. We re consulting on how

More information