1 / 6

London Councils – review of grants commissioning process

London Councils – review of grants commissioning process. A presentation to the Grants Committee Mary Scott and Aoife Ni Luanaigh 14 January 2009. Aims and tasks. Make recommendations to improve the effectiveness of the commissioning process Review of grants database and background documents

violet
Download Presentation

London Councils – review of grants commissioning process

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. London Councils – review of grants commissioning process A presentation to the Grants Committee Mary Scott and Aoife Ni Luanaigh 14 January 2009

  2. Aims and tasks • Make recommendations to improve the effectiveness of the commissioning process • Review of grants database and background documents • Scoping consultations: • London Councils staff (officers; managers) • 2nd Tier organisations (sub-regional CVS; LCVS) • Borough grants officers • Elected members • Three tailored e-surveys of applicants launched 10 Dec • Four focus groups held with VCS

  3. Overview of findings Introduction of commissioning • Commissioning is more appropriate than open bidding • Some concerns about prioritisation process / numbers of priorities • Timescales very tight – no space for improving process • Additional staff training needed • Experience of open bidding/existing tools not fully used • Initial indications are of improved geographical balance Application stage • Shift to online system positive; deadlines appropriate • Need separate form for partnership bids • Outputs/outcomes focus appropriate but tends to benefit larger organisations with greater professional capacity Assessment stage • Clear scoring system – but too mechanistic? • Need to check applications across teams – are existing funded groups delivering? • Need more detailed assessment manual to ensure consistent scoring

  4. Areas for discussion • The principle of ensuring geographical spread should be clearly highlighted to VCS (a role for 2nd Tier organisations?) • Consider reducing the number of service areas so more funding in fewer service areas • Consider limiting number of organisations/partnerships funded per specification • Renegotiation of funding, once awarded ‘in principle’, is very difficult for VCS

  5. Improved collection of monitoring data is needed • Consider a pot of funding for emerging needs • Need to streamline application process • Need additional training for Grants Officers; changes to scoring; double-scoring

  6. Contact • Aoife Ni Luanaigh • Consultant • SQW Consulting • 0207 307 7140 • e. aniluanaigh@sqw.co.uk • w. www.sqw.co.uk

More Related