Location: 1 Plough Place, London, EC4A 1DE
EIN: 800
75%
25%
29 Hours
Median
81%
19%
85%
15%
2017 Deadlines:
Types of Grants Awarded:
Geographic Focus:
For Fiscal Year
Total Assets:
Total Grants:
Change in Assets FY :
Amount of Grants to Minnesota Nonprofits:
Largest Grant:
Smallest Grant:
Average Grant:
Grant Applicant - applied in 2018
This refers to the Digital Fund. Ensure you get a full breakdown of how the application process is structured and how the success factors are likely to be judged. Try and set up a main point of contact who you can talk to about the best approach for an application.
Difficult to work with, Bureaucratic
(Unknown)
Applied and not funded
2018
Bad
The first stage application process for the Digital Fund when it was first released at the end of 2018 lacked clarity and provided very little opportunity to describe what we wanted to achieve and why - with a word limit of 100 words and one main 'question' stating 'Tell us what your organisation does and what significant changes you've been thinking about'.
We had spent over 6 months researching our digital project (using funding from Big Lottery) with over 100 end users and 50 staff involved in shaping the idea to match the needs of the client group.
However, there was no opportunity to share this research or communicate with anyone about the best approach for application. We received a vague response stating we didn't fit the success criteria and that we wouldn't receive any further feedback.
Average
The process for applications being confirmed can be extremely slow (depending on the fund) and can leave organisations in a tricky place when looking at forecasts and budget setting. Be more transparent about when people will hear and then keep to those deadlines.
Provides significant sums of money to grantees allowing them to progress larger programmes and initiatives and take more positive risks.
2
Reviewer UK272 - Grant Applicant - applied in 2019
We applied for an Awards for All grant. Speak to tnl in advance and make sure that your bid meets the criteria. You will need addresses, telephone numbers and home addresses for two people, we used our bid writer and the Chair of Trustees. Make sure that you have the exact costings to make the project succeed. Take care to make sure that you are clear who will benefit and why.
"Gets" nonprofits and issues, Openminded, Responsive
(Unknown)
Current or former grantee
Funded for amount requested
2019
Good
Good
The turnaround from application to funding was really good at under two months and the full amount given,
Speed of assessment.
8
Grant Applicant - applied in 2019
The funder will meet with you to discuss your idea and the process. There is no application form and you need to provide lots of detail. The funder will answer your questions and you should utilise their knowledge.
Gives more than money, Insightful, Friendly, Builds relationships, Likes site visits, "Gets" nonprofits and issues, Openminded, Responsive
(Unknown)
Grant currently pending
2019
Good
Good
Previously had a negative experience that almost put us off applying again. Glad it didn't, this experience has been very positive with the funder being very supportive throughout the process.
Keep on doing this! To be able to have a relationship with a funder is so helpful and makes the process a lot easier.
Provides face to face meetings during the process so that a relationship is established.
40
Grant Applicant - applied in 2018
This will take up a huge amount of time depending on your grant manager. Ours was very slow coming back to us but when they did wanted a turn around of information in very short timeframes which caused us some real difficulties as we are a small team. The process took far longer than we were led to believe it would too. At stage 2 we submitted everything yet it didn't go to panel until 7 months later, was sat with grant manager which was incredibly frustrating. The outline also said we would get to meet the grant manager to discuss the application, this never happened. They were too busy to meet us which felt a huge disadvantage instead they did a telephone call which wasn't very helpful.
Difficult to work with
(Unknown)
Applied and not funded
2018
Bad
Average
It seems to depend on who you are allocated. Currently going through the process with a different grant manager and it is a very positive and different experience which I will also review
Look at consistency of your staff.
The feedback was a call too and left us not really sure about why we didn't get funded. The follow up letter was also vague which isn't helpful moving forward.
Provides feedback as you progress your application.
40
Grant Applicant - applied in 2019
Follow their guidance which is clear and straight forward.
Before you commence writing the application, phone them and speak to an adviser. They will listen and provide appropriate pointers to assist any application. They are easy to contact as well which is a bonus these days.
The application form is not over prescriptive like some charities forms.
Insightful, Friendly, Builds relationships, Openminded, Responsive
(Unknown)
Current or former grantee
Funded for amount requested
2019
Good
I believe the NLCF are learning how to respond and actively create a dialogue with those of us working as part of small voluntary groups (with less than £5k in the bank).
Good
More of its funding appears to be heading in the direction of small voluntary and community groups.
I can't think of anything, currently.
Listens attentively and acts on what it hears.
12
Grant Applicant - applied in 2019
We applied for a new part of the fund's work - the Digital Fund. I would go to any public events, tune into any webinars, and read the online notes from the team that run the Digital Fund. This is all new to the National Lottery Community Fund, and you might pick up clues in those public and open thoughts from their team.
Bureaucratic, Risk averse
(Unknown)
Applied and not funded
2019
Average
It's such a large organisation it's difficult for everyone to get one to one attention but for the Digital Fund it's small enough to be more accessible, and it should. Whilst I really love how the team leader writes up weekly notes and show how they're thinking through things, there needs to be more feedback for applicants before stage 2. Maybe they will work out how to do this, as otherwise it's hard to see how the decisions are made. For example, it would be great to know why the 1st round applications that were rejected, were rejected - without resorting to the idea that it's not possible to respond. The 1st round when we applied was a couple of pages and it wasn't clear. We even had to write in to explain that when we clicked next, it submitted the form, when we thought it was going to a new page where we could add more detail. It had no room to explain much about the way we'd found the problem, the way we'd worked with our service users to unpack it, the way we'd built a MVP and had evidence about the next stage. It would be better for the 1st stage to have room for all of this - they may get fewer applications but they'd have more to pick from.
Average
Time will tell. The point of the Digital Fund is to "help the charity and voluntary sector to use digital tools and approaches to support people and communities to thrive." Digital takes time, it takes patience, it takes thought, it needs talent (that costs a lot), and it requires pragmatic timely funding. The total pot of £15m sounds like a lot but at the pace it's being deployed, it just isn't fast enough for it to work.
I would encourage you to hire people who have actually built, deployed, and scaled tech for good. It's crucial to working out who you could fund and who you shouldn't. Without that, I'm not entirely sure how decisions are being made...and I say that because I know of other charities, other than ourselves, who have working digital services that follow all the principles that the Fund stands for and yet none of us got through to the 2nd stage...which means the 'submit an idea' stage 1 became a subjective exercise - as I say, there was nothing on that form that could allow it to be anything other than subjective.
They are committed to funding user-centred digital innovation. That is vital as not many other funders have caught up with this yet. Bravo and thank you for being a pioneer and trying this out.
2
Grant Applicant - applied in 2017
Get in touch with your local funding officer ahead of application. We received excellent support from ours which made entire process easier & less daunting
Positive leader in the field, Gives more than money, Culturally sensitive, Insightful, Friendly, Builds relationships, Likes site visits, "Gets" nonprofits and issues, Openminded, Responsive
(Unknown)
Current or former grantee
Funded for amount requested
2017
Good
Local funding officer was great help around entire application process & took time to get to know us as an organization & the project itself
Good
Very
Keep it up. Glad to hear the Lanarkshire pilot has been rolled out nationally now
Local understanding and knowledge
12
Reviewer UK561 - Grant Applicant - applied in 2019
Have a clear understanding of the vision of what you are wanting to achieve. Focus on the challenges your stakeholders face, the change you want to create and how you will try and achieve that change. Consider how you can be collaborative in your approach.
Positive leader in the field, Gives more than money, Risk taker, Builds relationships, "Gets" nonprofits and issues, Openminded, Responsive
(Unknown)
Current or former grantee
Funded for amount requested
2019
Good
Good
Carry on being open to change & putting stakeholders (those people grantees support, not grantees themselves) at the heart of the way you work. Aim to be a leader in the grantmaking field, influencing other grant makers to adopt best practice and learn from each other.
Listens to grantees and is flexible in it's approach
37
Great guidance and reflections thank you!
Grant Applicant - applied in 2019
If you're applying for a fund that is run like their Digital Fund was, then it will be a positive experience. Be ready to be honest and open, and work together with them to create a really good proposal.
Gives more than money, Insightful, Friendly, Builds relationships, "Gets" nonprofits and issues, Responsive
(Unknown)
Current or former grantee
Funded for amount requested
2019
Good
Good
Learn from the digital fund - they've got a lot of things right
On the digital fund, being open to the idea that plans may change, and in fact encouraging this.
50
Thanks for this feedback, it is great to hear.
Reviewer UK907 - Grant Applicant - applied in 2019
Hands down one of the most responsible funders I've ever come across. Often funders set strategic priorities that are off-base from what the sector really needs but with the launch of the Digital Fund, National Lottery looked to the future and said what do we need to do now to uplift the sector and help it to thrive.
It's also been a very responsible application process - light touch at the beginning, tangibly building understanding among applicants on the thinking that's underpinned each strand so that they are more empowered to look at their digital transformation journey, irrespective of whether they got through to the next stage. And now, for those of us that have gotten through they are proactively reshaping the reporting process to give us trusted control over how we put the resource they've given us to good use.
Positive leader in the field, Gives more than money, Risk taker, Insightful, Builds relationships, "Gets" nonprofits and issues, Openminded, Responsive
(Unknown)
Current or former grantee
Funded for amount requested
2019
Good
Good
The National Lottery is treading ground that most other funders are pushing over to intermediary organisations to do.
It's brilliant to have organisation's like Catalyst, Shift and CAST out there who have a tremendous mission ahead of them to future-proof the social sector but the fact that the National Lottery is funding them and still providing core funding to breakout digital organisations who face a grant funding void for anything over £45k during their first few years is extraordinary.
We really appreciate that they've put themselves through their own accelerator process to get grant-making in the digital sphere right, but the overall timeline from initial expression of interest through to finding out that we'd won the award to when we'll actually get the cash is a hard one for a young start-up likes our to bare.
Firstly, the quality of organisations that they've picked for our cohort is just great and there's lots of scope for collaboration and cross-pollination because of that. Secondly, they are taking lots of great steps to ensure that we're not hamstrung by an outdated M&E cycle. They're working really hard to build a better reporting experience that matches the spirit of good design process and iterative delivery.
Built the story of the goals they have for the fund (through Medium blogs and workshops with applicants/grantees), secured buy-in from grantees on the shared mission we all have and empowered everyone involve to jump into the sandbox and build some great things.
100
Such a pleasure to read this. Thanks for taking the time.
