On 3rd October 2022 we hosted an event to share our learning from the last five years of our funding practice. We received some great questions from the audience at this event which we've answered here.
12 October 2022
Will Lloyds Bank Foundation remain committed to the 'development' of small but vital charities, and do you think you have this programme nailed?
Yes, we remain committed to helping charities strengthen and build their organisational resilience. We believe that our capacity building support is most effective for smaller charities with an annual income between £25,000 and £500,000 who also have the staff team to invest their time. Our Regional Managers will continue to work closely with charities to tailor the support available to their specific requirements. Our organisational development programme has been highly valued by charity partners, but we continue to learn from their feedback and shape new offers around their changing needs. It's always a work in progress!
How important is it for charities to receive advice and support that is grounded in their local sector (ie. CVSs) versus specialist national consultants?
We consider that it is important, although there is room for both depending on the type of support that is required. As part of our network of consultants delivering capacity building support for the charities we partner with, we have both local consultants and national partners – because there is value in a mixed approach.
How did Lloyds Banking Group staff volunteers support your charity partners?
Yes, since 2014 we have built a partnership with Lloyds Banking Group, designing and delivering a range of skills based volunteering opportunities that enable our charity partners to access the skills, experience, and perspectives of the Group's colleagues. You can learn more about these here.
What are the key reasons why your development support has been less beneficial for Black, Asian and minority ethnic lead charities?
Difficult to say definitively and it is something that we need to continue to explore. A likely reason is capacity to engage in the support, we know that Black, Asian and minority ethnic-led organisations at the lower end of our income bracket identified that less progress had been made than those with more resource.
To address some of this we have recruited more diverse local consultants to deliver our capacity building support for charities.
Which criteria and processes specifically were disadvantaging black and minority ethnic charities?
Some elements of our due diligence process, such as judgements around risk in governance and long-term planning, were disadvantaging Black and minority ethnic led charities. These charities tended to be at the smaller end of our eligible income bracket and consequently had fewer established processes in place. We also found that our overall criteria, focussing on the majority of a charity’s work being around a specific funding theme such as homelessness or domestic abuse did not align with a high volume of Black and minority ethnic led charities which may deliver these services within a broader community context. We adapted our criteria and introduced the Racial Equity theme in response to this.
The Foundation moved from equality to equity, but are you thinking about moving towards justice? If so, what does that look like?
We have focussed on racial equity by continuing to support organisation that deliver direct services within Black and minority ethnic communities which have been historically underserved. Through our infrastructure funding and influencing work we will continue to support organisations tackling racial injustice and advocating for systemic change.
"Proactive rather than reactive", how will you identify charities you think should be supported?
We are currently going through a co-production process with small charities to establish better ways to do this. It will involve more outreach and support 'pre application' and more accessible ways to submit applications. This is likely to also involve working with partners to identify potential charities from within their networks to encourage charities to apply and address any barriers to application that they identify.
Will the Foundation remain focused on charities where at least 50% of the work is based on the LBF priorities?
We are looking to remove this 50% criteria, however, our criteria will still require applicants to show that they provide in depth and person centred support to address the theme that they are applying under. We will be open for our first funding programme at the end of November, you can sign up to our email here to hear about our new funding programme when it opens.
Any thoughts on consideration of 'charity' status to improve access to grants for "by and for" led organisaitons?
Our funding is currently only open to organisations with charity status. We know that there are other kinds of organisations that deliver significant social value, such as Community Interest Companies (CIC), and we partner with some of these through our People and Communities work. We have very high demand for funding from charities so need to be aware that broadening the eligibility criteria will mean more organisations applying for funding and so a lower proportion that can be successful. However, we will continue to review our criteria throughout the course of the strategy to ensure it is meeting the needs of the communities we are seeking to support.
How much traction do you think the Foundation's progressive ways of working with charities is gaining traction with other UK funders?
We work closely with other funders, and we believe that there is progress in the sector. Others, such as ACF and IVAR - through their Open and Trusting grantmakers - do a great job in supporting funders to improve their practices.
How will support for collaboration sit alongside existing collaboration, partnership working already happening in a place / sector?
We are not looking for new collaborations - we want to work with existing ones and we imagine some will be at the start and want support to move forward, others will be further along and want support to take things to the next level - whatever that manes for them.
When you supporting small charities in areas do you encourage them to network with each other / fund them to attend local network meetings?
Our Regional Managers work within their areas to bring together peer networks of organisations based on areas of common interest and share their knowledge of other relevant organisations and networks. As our funding is unrestricted, they are free to use the funding to support peer networking if they choose to.
What has been your take way in terms of governance from collaborating with Funders on a programmes in locality?
The governance structure for LocalMotion - 6 funders working together in 6 communities - has been developed over time. We have been really careful to ensure the 6 communities are part of that governance and we are still learning what that means - as funders we recognise the power we have and so we are being mindful of that, taking a steer form the local people as to how they think that should work. Alongside that the funders meet regularly as a group, as do they communities as well as alongside each other.
In the 6 places the Foundation are doing this work - is there a strong local infrastructure org? If not, why not? If there is, why aren't they leading?
There are a mix of local infrastructure organisations in the six places. One has a regional organisation but not a local one, another has had its CVS close shortly before we began this work (a new one is now being developed after a CVS in a neighbouring area was commissioned to provide support). Where we are working with a strong local infrastructure organisation, they are a key partner and we have funded the role of Local Implementation Lead that is based at their organisation. In each place, we have adapted to what the context is both in terms of presence or otherwise of a local infrastructure organisation, and the perspectives of people working in those areas about where the Local Implementation Lead role should sit. The key principles have been working with the context, and then being led by what people from those places think will work best in their context.
