No result found
Charities Aid Foundation (CAF);
CAF's Young Trustees Guide examines the challenges that can prevent young people from becoming trustees, as well as exploring the benefits to the organizations who go out of their way to get young people involved in their governance. The guide also gives charities advice on how they can make young trustees feel welcome, as well as case studies setting out just some of the different structures that charities use as a way of giving young people the skills needed to become trustees.
European Foundation Centre (EFC);
In order to share important learnings from projects that have the potential to be replicated by other foundations, the European Foundation Centre (EFC) and its network of Regional Foundations has conducted research on successful initiatives promoted by European foundations that have a geographically defined focus for their activities. The aim of the research is to start sharing practices that may inspire the design of similar initiatives in other regions. The initiatives selected for the study have proved to bring positive results in the context of their implementation and have the potential for being replicated in other contexts. A tool mapping the selected initiatives is also available online: http://regional.efc.be/
Charities Aid Foundation (CAF);
CAF has been producing the UK Giving report since 2004, and has been tracking giving in the UK for several decades. In that time, there have been a number of changes to how the study is conducted in terms of approach and questions asked. As it is mentioned within last year's report, they listened to charities and their thirst for greater knowledge about giving behaviours in the UK and took the decision to move to a monthly tracking study rather than interviewing at four separate points in the year. This report covers the first year in which the research has been conducted monthly through YouGov's online panel.
Institute for Voluntary Action Research (IVAR);
This report presents a picture of evaluation within primarily larger trusts and foundations in the UK. It is based on the findings of an online survey completed by 34 trusts and foundations – 94% of whom awarded grants of more than £1m in 2013/14.
The survey was designed to address a need for information about the positioning, resourcing and uses of evaluation in trusts and foundations which was highlighted at the inaugural convening of the UK Evaluation Roundtable in March 2014.
Specifically, the survey aimed to:
Understand the range of evaluative activities that trusts and foundations are undertaking and how these activities are being organised and invested in.
Explore perceptions about how well trusts and foundations are making use of evaluative information to inform their work.
Explore the challenges that trusts and foundations are facing in relation to their evaluation practices.
This report is prepared for the Big Lottery Fund (the Fund) by the national evaluationteam and provides emerging findings and lessons learned from the first year of thenational evaluation of the Fulfilling Lives: Supporting people with multiple needsinitiative hereafter referred to as Fulfilling Lives (multiple needs).
The national evaluation has been designed to determine the degree to which the initiativeis successfully achieving its aims and how they are being achieved. The evaluation will beboth formative and summative in nature, in that, it will inform the ongoing design and delivery of Fulfilling Lives (multiple needs) and its component projects as well as assessoverall achievements and value for money to inform future decision and policy making.Within this context, the evaluation has a number of objectives:
— To track and assess the achievements of the initiative and to estimate the extent to whichthese are attributable to the projects and interventions delivered.— To calculate the costs of the projects and the corresponding value of benefits to theexchequer and wider society. This will enable an assessment of value for money of theprogramme and for individual interventions.— To identify what interventions and approaches work well, for which people, families andcommunities and in which circumstances and contexts.— To assess the extent to which the Big Lottery Fund's principles are incorporated into projectdesign and delivery and to determine the degree to which these principles affect successfuldelivery and outcomes.— To explore project implementation, understand problems faced and to facilitate theidentification of solutions and lessons learned.
This report details findings from the second year of a four-year evaluation of the 'Hub and Spoke' initiative, being undertaken by the University of Bedfordshire. Funded by the Child Sexual Exploitation Funders' Alliance (CSEFA), this initiative aims to improve services in relation to child sexual exploitation (CSE). It utilises the expertise, resources and infrastructure of an established voluntary sector CSE service (the 'Hub') by locating experienced CSE workers (known as 'Spoke workers') into new service delivery areas. The evaluation assesses the extent to which the Hub and Spoke model triggers cultural and systemic change in the way that services engaging with young people respond to CSE. Specifically it considers the impact of the Hub and Spoke model on: a) Safeguarding young people from sexual exploitation through service delivery b) Supporting and equipping specialist CSE workers to work effectively in host agencies c) Promoting stable CSE policy frameworks in new areas by raising awareness, developing procedures and improving how local policy makers respond to CSE.
The project is being evaluated by a team of researchers at the University of Bedfordshire led by Professor Jenny Pearce and managed by Dr Julie Harris as Principal Investigator. The overall aim is to provide knowledge about the potential of the 'Hub and Spoke' model of service development to trigger cultural and systemic change in the way that services supporting children and young people respond to child sexual exploitation. Specifically it considers the impact of the Hub and Spoke model on:
a) Safeguarding young people from sexual exploitation through service delivery
b) Supporting and equipping specialist CSE workers to work effectively in host agencies
c) Promoting stable CSE policy frameworks in new areas by raising awareness, developing procedures and advancing cultures of support from local policy makers responsible for CSE.
Institute for Voluntary Action Research (IVAR);
Thinking about... core funding draws on learning from their own and others' research and interviews with key informants from seven charitable foundations providing core funding to shed light on why, when and how to use core funding. Their particular focus is social welfarevoluntary organisations, many of which are local. This part of the voluntary sector relies mainly on two types of income – grants from statutory bodies and fundraising from trusts and foundations. This makes their dependence on core funding from trusts and foundations, and full costrecovery, even more critical.
Esmée Fairbairn Foundation;
In 2016 Esmée Fairbairn Foundation, together with the Blagrave Trust, surveyed UK charities on whether funder were fit for the 21st Century. From the (anonymised) responses, it appeared clearly that many charities feel that funders are getting it wrong on learning.They have written this report for the organisations they fund. They have made a lot of changes over the last two years towards a goal of shared learning and they want the people they fund to see what they are learning from what they have been told, and how they are starting to make changes as a result. They hope this report will also be useful to other funders as well.
Paul Hamlyn Foundation (PHF);
Our Museum: Communities and Museums as Active Partners was a Paul Hamlyn Foundation Special Initiative 2012 – 2016. The overall aim was to influence the museum and gallery sector to:
• Place community needs, values and active collaboration at the core of museum and gallery work
• Involve communities and individuals in decision-making processes
• Ensure that museums and galleries play an effective role in developing community skills and the skills of staff in working with communities
This was to be done through facilitation of organisational change in specific museums and galleries already committed to active partnership with communities.
Our Museum offered a collaborative learning process through which institutions and communities shared experiences and learned from each other as critical friends. Our Museum took place at a difficult and challenging time for both museums and their community partners. Financial austerity led to major cutbacks in public sector expenditure; a search for new business models; growing competition for funding; and organisational uncertainty and staff volatility. At the same time, the debate at the heart of Our Museum widened and intensified: what should the purpose of longestablished cultural institutions be in the 21st century; how do they maintain relevance and resonance in the contemporary world; how can they best serve their communities; can they, and should they, promote cultural democracy?
Rockefeller Archive Center;
During November 2012, I spent time at the Rockefeller Archive Center (RAC) in support of a broader research project entitled Film and the Making of Postwar Internationalism. The month-long archival research was focused on the role of the Rockefeller Boards [especially the Rockefeller Foundation (RF) and the General Education Board (GEB)] in cultivating ties to international progressive documentary film networks centered around British filmmaker and bureaucrat John Grierson. In this research report, I will detail the ways in which my archival visit to the RAC helped clarify the role of the RF and the GEB in inserting a distinctively American voice into progressive film networks of the 1930s and 1940s. Most importantly, the material I researched at the RAC helped shed light on the complexity of the Rockefeller interest in progressive filmmaking.
Suicide Statistics Report 2017: Including data for 2013-2015