Paul Hamlyn Foundation
Paul Hamlyn Foundation is one of the largest independent grant-makers in the UK. Our vision is a just society in which everyone, especially young people, can realise their full potential and enjoy fulfilling and creative lives. Our mission is to be an effective and independent funder, using all our resources to create opportunities and support social change. We partner with inspiring organisations and individuals to make sure that people facing disadvantage are at the heart of leading change and designing solutions to overcome inequality.
Overview
Total reviews: 6
Median 44 hours
Latest Reviews
Sep 5, 2024
applied in 2024
Not fully understanding the criteria before applying probably the reason for rejection
Strong EOI with an innovative combination of youth and outdoors
What is your relationship with the funder for this experience?
Applied and not funded
If you were funded tell us the outcome
What year was this experience?
2024
How would you rate this funder's accessibility?
Average
How successfully do you think this funder is accomplishing its goals as a funder?
Excellent
Amazing support once given
Tell us one thing that this funder does really well
As above
How was your relationship overall with the funder?
Average
If you believe the contents of this review are inappropriate please contact us via email.
Apr 3, 2024
applied in 2024
Do not apply if you're a smaller organisation.
What is your relationship with the funder for this experience?
Applied and not funded
If you were funded tell us the outcome
What year was this experience?
2024
How would you rate this funder's accessibility?
Average
How successfully do you think this funder is accomplishing its goals as a funder?
Average
Tell us one thing that this funder does really well
fund the arts and arts education
If you had one piece of advice to give to this funder (about grantmaking or anything else), what would it be?
support smaller, grassroots organisation. Provide tools to enable them to be funding ready. Further support for black led organisations and those supporting marginalised communities.
How was your relationship overall with the funder?
Poor
If you believe the contents of this review are inappropriate please contact us via email.
Feb 12, 2024
applied in 2024
I think i would tell them that unless they are a large organisation funding structural work at a national level - they should not waste their time.
This organisation takes a very long time to respond and seems to have refocused its funding away from individual benefit to people to more "structural" work - without really being clear about that in the guidance.
What is your relationship with the funder for this experience?
Applied and not funded
If you were funded tell us the outcome
What year was this experience?
2024
How would you rate this funder's accessibility?
Poor
There was very long periods of delay with little or no communication.
How successfully do you think this funder is accomplishing its goals as a funder?
Poor
There is a large diference between the guidance and the feedback as to how decisions are being made.
Tell us one thing that this funder does really well
It does provide large amounts of funding to certain reciepients
If you had one piece of advice to give to this funder (about grantmaking or anything else), what would it be?
I think the focus should be on faster turnarounds and a guidance which is clearer on what will not be funded.
At present the guidances seems to raise false hope.
If they only want to fund structural work then they need to say that more clearly.
How was your relationship overall with the funder?
Poor
Is there anything else that's be useful for others to know to understand this funder?
They are mostly interested in funding larger scale "structural change"
If you believe the contents of this review are inappropriate please contact us via email.
Jan 23, 2024
applied in 2023
Read everything thoroughly, twice or even three times before committing anything to paper. Make sure that you fully understand what the question is asking for and be sure of how to answer. I felt it was quite difficult to get across how our organisation interacts with the communities we work within, mainly because of the broad range of our audience - any child or family who has a barrier to accessing live performance due to disability, social isolation, or financial constraints.
Pros
Positive leader in the field
Culturally sensitive
Responsive
Cons
What is your relationship with the funder for this experience?
Applied and not funded
If you were funded tell us the outcome
What year was this experience?
2023
How would you rate this funder's accessibility?
Average
I felt that the wording of the questions were at times overly complex, which can make it difficult to understand what is being asked for.
I didn't feel the options to describe our organisation were appropriate for us and left me feeling that I hadn't represented our broad and complex audience well enough.
How successfully do you think this funder is accomplishing its goals as a funder?
Average
Tell us one thing that this funder does really well
That they take the time to offer feedback on the application is good. Not many take the time to do that. Although, the feedback given was pretty generic and probably used over and over for many of the organisations refused funding.
If you had one piece of advice to give to this funder (about grantmaking or anything else), what would it be?
The website comes across as very highbrow and complex and, I would say, just a bit over bearing. If it could be made to look and feel a bit more approachable and less daunting that would be a good thing.
How was your relationship overall with the funder?
Average
If you believe the contents of this review are inappropriate please contact us via email.
Reply from Paul Hamlyn Foundation
Feb 6, 2024
Thank you so much for leaving a review, and we really appreciate your feedback on the application process and our website. We are redesigning our website and reviewing the wording we use to make the application process more accessible, so your feedback is very helpful, and we’ve passed it on to our team.
Jan 11, 2024
applied in 2024
Firstly, we absolutely adore all that Paul Hamlyn stands for and what they wish to achieve in the world but, sadly, I think I might advise a colleague to think twice about applying. As a funder, they are clearly oversubscribed and hence having to reject applications according to criteria that are potentially subjective rather than clearer outcomes based criteria. We are a highly experienced grants team yet we found there appears to be a disconnect between the complexity of the organisational questions being asked on the application in stage 1 (and the relatively little amount of space to describe the project itself) and then the resulting feedback that seems to have unrealistic expectations of what was reasonably possible within their word count. We felt most of the feedback did not seem to correspond with our understanding of the reality of the application. Many of those areas could very easily have been responded to given the chance. Eg saying a 60% disabled led organisation had not demonstrated it was "inclusive" when the application form had extensively set out how we were. Or saying we didn't articulate how we learn and share when we did so extensively. As such, we found some of the feedback slightly perplexing.
They did, however, say they were oversubscribed and needing to turn down even strong applications so that part felt understandable and honest. So I might prepare a colleague to be very realistic about their chances of potential success.
Pros
Positive leader in the field
Risk taker
Insightful
Friendly
Understands nonprofits and issues
Openminded
Responsive
Cons
What is your relationship with the funder for this experience?
Applied and not funded
If you were funded tell us the outcome
What year was this experience?
2024
How would you rate this funder's accessibility?
Average
Not easy to pick up the phone to this funder or find a way to create a relationship of any sort at the outset. We can see they have a need to stem demand but wonder if enabling more contact or online webinars would be more effective at heading off applications at the pass.
The organisational questions and specific project related questions seem a bit mixed up together in terms of the proposal itself. Complex language and concepts that are difficult to objectively measure. Many of the inclusion related organisational questions are also left to the application form itself and so there was a risk of having to repeat oneself for fear that the info on the application might get divorced from the actual proposal.
How successfully do you think this funder is accomplishing its goals as a funder?
Excellent
Huge admirer of this funder that aligns so strongly with our mission but it does feel like one of those funder unicorns that may be too out of reach! Shame as would love to work with them as we hear great things about them if you can get through the door...
Tell us one thing that this funder does really well
The Paul Hamlyn Foundation leads the funding sector with compassion and focus. Inspiring.
If you had one piece of advice to give to this funder (about grantmaking or anything else), what would it be?
This funder articulates its purpose strongly. It possibly feels too out of reach and may be overly ambitious in the way its application procedures work in potentially inadvertently excluding strong, inclusive organisations. We wonder if the large rate of requests for initial calls of over 700 shows a desire for greater initial clarity.
How was your relationship overall with the funder?
Excellent
Is there anything else that's be useful for others to know to understand this funder?
When we actually spoke to someone they were incredibly helpful and apologetic about any delays etc Very human touch and clearly a very compassionate team of people who understand the difficulties of having to wait for bid results etc
Thank you for the short but sweet interaction!
If you believe the contents of this review are inappropriate please contact us via email.
Reply from Paul Hamlyn Foundation
Feb 6, 2024
Thank you so much for taking the time to respond. We appreciate your thoughtful feedback on our application process. This is so helpful and we’re always looking to make improvements – we will share your comments with the team.
Sep 5, 2024
applied in 2024
Not fully understanding the criteria before applying probably the reason for rejection
Strong EOI with an innovative combination of youth and outdoors
What is your relationship with the funder for this experience?
Applied and not funded
If you were funded tell us the outcome
What year was this experience?
2024
How would you rate this funder's accessibility?
Average
How successfully do you think this funder is accomplishing its goals as a funder?
Excellent
Amazing support once given
Tell us one thing that this funder does really well
As above
How was your relationship overall with the funder?
Average
Apr 3, 2024
applied in 2024
Do not apply if you're a smaller organisation.
What is your relationship with the funder for this experience?
Applied and not funded
If you were funded tell us the outcome
What year was this experience?
2024
How would you rate this funder's accessibility?
Average
How successfully do you think this funder is accomplishing its goals as a funder?
Average
Tell us one thing that this funder does really well
fund the arts and arts education
If you had one piece of advice to give to this funder (about grantmaking or anything else), what would it be?
support smaller, grassroots organisation. Provide tools to enable them to be funding ready. Further support for black led organisations and those supporting marginalised communities.
How was your relationship overall with the funder?
Poor
Feb 12, 2024
applied in 2024
I think i would tell them that unless they are a large organisation funding structural work at a national level - they should not waste their time.
This organisation takes a very long time to respond and seems to have refocused its funding away from individual benefit to people to more "structural" work - without really being clear about that in the guidance.
What is your relationship with the funder for this experience?
Applied and not funded
If you were funded tell us the outcome
What year was this experience?
2024
How would you rate this funder's accessibility?
Poor
There was very long periods of delay with little or no communication.
How successfully do you think this funder is accomplishing its goals as a funder?
Poor
There is a large diference between the guidance and the feedback as to how decisions are being made.
Tell us one thing that this funder does really well
It does provide large amounts of funding to certain reciepients
If you had one piece of advice to give to this funder (about grantmaking or anything else), what would it be?
I think the focus should be on faster turnarounds and a guidance which is clearer on what will not be funded. At present the guidances seems to raise false hope. If they only want to fund structural work then they need to say that more clearly.
How was your relationship overall with the funder?
Poor
Is there anything else that's be useful for others to know to understand this funder?
They are mostly interested in funding larger scale "structural change"
Jan 23, 2024
applied in 2023
Read everything thoroughly, twice or even three times before committing anything to paper. Make sure that you fully understand what the question is asking for and be sure of how to answer. I felt it was quite difficult to get across how our organisation interacts with the communities we work within, mainly because of the broad range of our audience - any child or family who has a barrier to accessing live performance due to disability, social isolation, or financial constraints.
Pros
Positive leader in the field
Culturally sensitive
Responsive
Cons
Pros
Cons
What is your relationship with the funder for this experience?
Applied and not funded
If you were funded tell us the outcome
What year was this experience?
2023
How would you rate this funder's accessibility?
Average
I felt that the wording of the questions were at times overly complex, which can make it difficult to understand what is being asked for. I didn't feel the options to describe our organisation were appropriate for us and left me feeling that I hadn't represented our broad and complex audience well enough.
How successfully do you think this funder is accomplishing its goals as a funder?
Average
Tell us one thing that this funder does really well
That they take the time to offer feedback on the application is good. Not many take the time to do that. Although, the feedback given was pretty generic and probably used over and over for many of the organisations refused funding.
If you had one piece of advice to give to this funder (about grantmaking or anything else), what would it be?
The website comes across as very highbrow and complex and, I would say, just a bit over bearing. If it could be made to look and feel a bit more approachable and less daunting that would be a good thing.
How was your relationship overall with the funder?
Average
Reply from Paul Hamlyn Foundation
Feb 6, 2024
Thank you so much for leaving a review, and we really appreciate your feedback on the application process and our website. We are redesigning our website and reviewing the wording we use to make the application process more accessible, so your feedback is very helpful, and we’ve passed it on to our team.
Jan 11, 2024
applied in 2024
Firstly, we absolutely adore all that Paul Hamlyn stands for and what they wish to achieve in the world but, sadly, I think I might advise a colleague to think twice about applying. As a funder, they are clearly oversubscribed and hence having to reject applications according to criteria that are potentially subjective rather than clearer outcomes based criteria. We are a highly experienced grants team yet we found there appears to be a disconnect between the complexity of the organisational questions being asked on the application in stage 1 (and the relatively little amount of space to describe the project itself) and then the resulting feedback that seems to have unrealistic expectations of what was reasonably possible within their word count. We felt most of the feedback did not seem to correspond with our understanding of the reality of the application. Many of those areas could very easily have been responded to given the chance. Eg saying a 60% disabled led organisation had not demonstrated it was "inclusive" when the application form had extensively set out how we were. Or saying we didn't articulate how we learn and share when we did so extensively. As such, we found some of the feedback slightly perplexing.
They did, however, say they were oversubscribed and needing to turn down even strong applications so that part felt understandable and honest. So I might prepare a colleague to be very realistic about their chances of potential success.
Pros
Positive leader in the field
Risk taker
Insightful
Friendly
Understands nonprofits and issues
Openminded
Responsive
Cons
Pros
Cons
What is your relationship with the funder for this experience?
Applied and not funded
If you were funded tell us the outcome
What year was this experience?
2024
How would you rate this funder's accessibility?
Average
Not easy to pick up the phone to this funder or find a way to create a relationship of any sort at the outset. We can see they have a need to stem demand but wonder if enabling more contact or online webinars would be more effective at heading off applications at the pass. The organisational questions and specific project related questions seem a bit mixed up together in terms of the proposal itself. Complex language and concepts that are difficult to objectively measure. Many of the inclusion related organisational questions are also left to the application form itself and so there was a risk of having to repeat oneself for fear that the info on the application might get divorced from the actual proposal.
How successfully do you think this funder is accomplishing its goals as a funder?
Excellent
Huge admirer of this funder that aligns so strongly with our mission but it does feel like one of those funder unicorns that may be too out of reach! Shame as would love to work with them as we hear great things about them if you can get through the door...
Tell us one thing that this funder does really well
The Paul Hamlyn Foundation leads the funding sector with compassion and focus. Inspiring.
If you had one piece of advice to give to this funder (about grantmaking or anything else), what would it be?
This funder articulates its purpose strongly. It possibly feels too out of reach and may be overly ambitious in the way its application procedures work in potentially inadvertently excluding strong, inclusive organisations. We wonder if the large rate of requests for initial calls of over 700 shows a desire for greater initial clarity.
How was your relationship overall with the funder?
Excellent
Is there anything else that's be useful for others to know to understand this funder?
When we actually spoke to someone they were incredibly helpful and apologetic about any delays etc Very human touch and clearly a very compassionate team of people who understand the difficulties of having to wait for bid results etc Thank you for the short but sweet interaction!
Reply from Paul Hamlyn Foundation
Feb 6, 2024
Thank you so much for taking the time to respond. We appreciate your thoughtful feedback on our application process. This is so helpful and we’re always looking to make improvements – we will share your comments with the team.