Standing out with confidence

Last week, I was pleased to speak about leadership at the Somerset VCSE Forum. The day was about innovation and collaboration for charity leaders. I wanted to address the loss of confidence that I see and feel in the sector. I understand why this is. The negative press about charities and charity CEOs; and the rising demand for support amidst the fall in funding, all mean it is tough to lead a charity right now. It’s easy to feel fearful rather than confident.

Firstly, we have to remember that funders don’t really do anything. Funders will have a mission, such as to end poverty or improve the lives of care leavers or promote justice, but they need charities to deliver that for them. So, what any funder is looking for is an organisation that is good at what they do and is going to survive long enough to deliver, not just this year, but in the future.

There are a number of frameworks that set out what good looks like. For example, NPC’s guide “what makes a good charity” covers these 4 areas: purpose, impact practice, people and finance and operations (see link below).  Or quality frameworks like PQASSO are used as the measure of what good is. But all funders will have different ways of trying to assess ‘what is good’ when making decisions about allocating funding.

But because of increased competition for funding, there can easily be two groups seeking funding and looking equally good – both fit the criteria, serve a local need, have all their policies in place, have a business plan, a committed group of Trustees, and can report on their outcomes. So what happens now? Who stands out?

One difference is confidence.

Remember that charities are the experts. Yes, funders have an overview of what is going on – but they don’t have lived experience of delivery. A charity will know the local area, can listen to what people are saying, know what works and what doesn’t. Funders need to be told about your area of expertise.

So it is better for a confident charity to tell a funder: “we work with 50 clients because we have found that (given the complexity of their needs and the intensity of our work) that is the maximum caseload staff can manage. If we support more than that, then quality suffers and the outcomes are not as good.” Rather than the charity that lacks confidence, trying to please a funder by expanding numbers. Seeking direction from a funder is a common issue where so much rides on securing funding. I often meet charities that ask “would it look better if we helped more people?” when what I need to be told is why they do what they do and why this makes them ‘good’. 

http://www.thinknpc.org/publications/good-charity/

Emma Beeston Consultancy advises funders and philanthropists on giving strategies and processes; researching and scoping options; selecting causes and charities; assessments and impact monitoring. www.emmabeeston.co.uk ; emma@emmabeeston.co.uk; @emmabeeston01

Place-based funding: is everything in its place?

At a recent meeting, it was striking how the majority of the funders that attended introduced themselves as a ‘place-based’ funder. It seems that this term, that has been kicking around for several years, is now taking centre stage.

What does it mean?

For a really good summary, I suggest you take a look at IVAR’s briefing paper. They define place-based funding as:

“targeted investment in defined geographic areas. This is usually a package of support – for example: multiple grants; particularly large investments; grants and additional funding plus activity (capacity building, networking, influencing activity) – within a defined place.”

I also like this description from US blogger Janis Foster Richardson: “A place-based funder has an intimate tie to a particular place that you can find on a map, and is focusing their work in that place with the people who live there …They may work on one problem or issue at a time, but do so with respect for local history and culture, a commitment to identifying and mobilising local assets, and an interest in building local capacity to weather the next storm.” which tries to get to the difference between a geographic limit and an approach that is deeply focused on place.

Being ‘place-based’ sounds like a good and necessary thing: a way to get funding into areas where there are no organisations ready and able to seek grants; to provide a narrow focus so that in depth work can be done in a defined area; to listen to, involve and build relationships with local people. It’s emphasis on collaboration certainly acknowledges the messiness of real life and how social change comes through different people and forces interacting rather than one organisation competing with another for funding.

Whilst I like the ethos behind it, I am still wrestling with a few questions:

How is seeking to assist people in a place, any different from supporting a community? Is ‘place-based’ just another way of describing good old community development, which seems to have fallen out of favour?

Does it only apply to urban areas where boundaries are easily defined and people more readily gathered together? And if it does include rural areas, how big does a place become: the whole of Wiltshire or Scotland?

If everyone becomes a ‘place-based funder’, then what happens to communities of interest? And who will help the various ‘places’ to connect up to bring about systemic and social change when it is needed at a regional or national level?

What happens to these ‘places’ when the next trend comes along? I don’t wish to be cynical but I am old enough to have seen a few swings of the pendulum from local to central, universal to targeted and back again. How long will place-based funders stay in one place? When will things be sufficiently better to move to the next place? And will there be a lasting legacy when they do move on?

http://www.janisfoster.com/2009/08/wanting-more-from-place-based.html

Emma Beeston Consultancy advises funders and philanthropists on giving strategies and processes; researching and scoping options; selecting causes and charities; assessments and impact monitoring. www.emmabeeston.co.uk ; emma@emmabeeston.co.uk; @emmabeeston01