Internal learning
The Better Careers for Better Care funding programme is testing a new way of funding for the Foundation and as such we are committed to reflecting and learning throughout the journey. Below outlines the way in which the funding programme differs from our open grants programme, and our internal learning so far.
More strategic and directive in what we are seeking to fund
By being specific about our funding priorities and criteria for assessment, the vast majority of the bids we received were eligible for funding. We were deeply impressed by the quality of the bids and have reflected as a team that by being clearer about what we are likely to fund in all of our grant-making programmes, we will better support potential applicants to understand whether their work is a good fit for the Foundation’s funding and in their application to us. We are currently reviewing and updating our open grants application process and guidance with this at the forefront of our thinking.
Additionally, by being more focused in what we would fund through Better Careers for Better Care, we have learnt a huge amount about the transformative work going on across the adult social care sector. We feel confident that we can be even more specific about what we are likely to fund in any future funding rounds based on this learning.
Expression of Interest process and scoring system
The EOIs were scored by the Assessment Panel using the funding criteria. Guiding questions were agreed collectively by the panel to support consistency of thinking when scoring. While the EOI highlighted the criteria to applicants as the scoring system, it did not ask specific questions against each criterion. This made the scoring fairly complex for assessors and may have made writing the EOI more complicated than necessary for applicants. In future, a simplified system with questions in the EOI which reflect the scoring criteria could provide a more straight-forward and effective system for both assessors and applicants.
Open invitation to connect in the development of bids and feedback offered to those that were unsuccessful
The opportunity to meet with Holly, the Programme Development Lead was taken up by more than 40 organisations over the course of the nine weeks that the funding call was open. Following the funding call, feedback was given via email to each applicant, and follow-up calls took place with a quarter of unsuccessful applicants. These numbers indicate an appetite from grantees to engage with funders to understand their priorities and decision-making. Across all conversations, there was a keen desire to continue to engage and to create a community of practice bringing together people and organisations trying to do things differently within adult social care.
Removal of exclusions in terms of type of organisation
The removal of exclusions increased the range of organisations that connected with the Foundation and, importantly in the context of adult social care, included statutory bodies that are currently struggling to enable innovation due to financial constraints and restrictions. In order for the Foundation to contribute to positive social change in this area, it felt vital to exercise our freedom to fund where the commitment, energy and momentum to transform is, and where we can make most difference regardless of the organisation’s constitution. As part of the review of our open grants programme, we will be challenging ourselves to explore which exclusions we need to retain and why.
Assessment Panel including External Advisors
It was a privilege to benefit from the insight and expertise brought to the panel by the four External Advisors. The Advisors brought experience of and expertise in commissioning, delivering, advocating for, and drawing on social care services, and were involved not only in the decision-making on which bids to develop to full application, but also the framing and guidance provided to potential applicants. The supportive challenge provided by the Advisors greatly enhanced the design and communication of the grant-making process.
The variety of perspectives held by the Assessment Panel led to a fantastically informed and robust discussion of the shortlisted EOIs, and there was real excitement from the panel about the bids being moved forward to full application. For us at the Foundation, having the benefit of the External Advisors’ expertise and experience was invaluable in the decision-making process and gives us additional confidence in the work going forward. The External Advisors have kindly offered to stay engaged with the programme to provide further guidance and support as the grants are made and the work starts on the ground.
External evaluators supporting from the outset
Our external evaluator Bean Research was commissioned in September last year and was able to feed into the design and delivery of the funding call. Throughout this period, the Bean team also worked with the Assessment Panel to develop an Impact Framework for the programme which then supported the assessment of bids. Being able to articulate from the outset how we hope to measure impact across the grants supported the Assessment Panel’s discussions and improved our decision-making.
The Bean team has since been meeting with the partner applicants to develop specific evaluation plans for each grant which feed into the overarching Impact Framework. By working in this way, we hope to better understand the impact of the individual grants and the Better Careers for Better Care programme overall, how we can build greater impact and fund the most impactful change, and ultimately whether there is a strong case for the Foundation to continue to invest in this way and at this scale.