This page has the transcript of the webinar held on 5 February 2026. There are also links to watch the recording and additional questions we gave written answers to during the webinar, or have responded to after the webinar.
Webinar recording and download the presentation
Speakers
- Alison Holdom, Funding Manager Lead - Creative, Confident Communities
- Simon Wightman, Funding Manager Lead - Our Natural World
- Laura Lines, Funding Manager Lead - A Fairer Future
- Luna Dizon, Communications Lead (Q&A support)
Welcome and housekeeping
Alison Holdom:
Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to this pre-application Q&A. We're really pleased so many of you could join us today, and hope you find it useful.
I'm Alison Holdom, Funding Lead for Creative, Confident Communities, and I'm here with my colleagues Laura and Simon, and we'll spend the next half an hour sharing information about our grant funding, what we're looking for, and how we make decisions. Then we'll then use the rest of the time to answer questions, which my colleague Luna will facilitate.
Our colleagues Tom, Gina, and Salma are also on hand in the background, and they'll be typing in response to some of the questions you ask. Sarah is also here, and she focuses on social investment, so if you have specific questions about social investment, please do share them.
For accessibility, we have Nana and Altan, who will be providing BSL interpretation and interpreting what is spoken live. To make sure they're always on view, we recommend keeping your view to gallery view, including when the slides are being shared.
And we also have our speakers to describe themselves and where they are, so I'll begin. I'm an older white woman with shoulder-length fair hair, and I'm sitting in front of a bookshelf, rather, that is completely overflowing, and I'll pass on to Simon.
Simon Wightman:
Hi everyone, I'm Simon, I work in our Our Natural World programme at Esmée. I'm a tall white man with curly hair that's going a bit grey, and I'm wearing a body warmer because there is no heating on in my house.
I pass over to Laura.
Laura Lines:
Hi everyone, I'm Laura, I'm one of the funding managers in A Fairer Future team. I'm a white woman with brown curly hair and fringe, brown eyes. I'm working from home today, so I've got my background blurred out.
I'll pass back to Alison.
Alison Holdom:
Thank you both. So just a few practicalities before we start. Live captioning is also available for this session, and if you click the closed captions button at the bottom of this window, you can see them. You can post questions at any point using the Q&A facility, which you can find at the bottom of your screens. And I'd also encourage you to vote for questions that are submitted by other participants, if you'd really like to see that particular question asked. And you can do that by clicking on the thumbs-up icon next to the question in the Q&A facility.
As mentioned, we have Tom, Gina, Salma, Luna, and Sarah all answering responses to questions. We'll try to answer as many as we can, and we'll prioritise questions that are upvoted, but if there are some that we miss, we will answer them afterwards, and we'll be using all the questions today to update the FAQs on our website. And you may find the answer to your question already there.
We're expecting a lot of questions today, but please don't worry if you miss anything. We're recording this webinar, and we will share the transcript with additional questions covered on our website as soon as we can.
So, if we could go on to slide 2, we can start get started.
Plan for the session
Alison Holdom:
So, let's get started. Welcome again, everyone. It's great to have you with us, and thank you for taking the time to join. We started holding pre-application Q&A webinars because we know that you want to ask us questions before applying to Esmée. We can't speak to you all individually. We've had over 400 questions. We've had 400 people signing up for this webinar. So, hopefully, this way, we can get you a good way to answer as many of your questions as possible. I'm just going to momentarily switch my camera off, because it's doing something very strange.
We've had over 400 people queue up for this web- sign up for this webinar, so hopefully this is a good way to answer as many of your questions as possible. We'll make changes after every webinar based on the feedback, and we'll ask you for your thoughts following this one, too.
And here's the plan for today's session. So, we'll start with an introduction to Esmée, then we'll go on to what we don't fund and what we look for, then how we make decisions, the application process, the Q&A section, and then some further information and resources.
We're aware we need to strike a tricky balance today. We want to be more transparent, but we also need to be absolutely honest. We're not holding this seminar to encourage more applications, as we continue to make a similar number of grants.
Need is rising in the sectors we support, and as a funder that is open, we have been receiving more applications, so we want to do more to save people from spending precious time applying to us, when unfortunately it's not likely that we will fund their work.
We hope that this webinar will help you to decide whether you should invest time in applying to us, or if your efforts might be better focused elsewhere. We want to answer as many questions as possible, but we know that the main question for many of you is, will Esmée fund my work? And I'm sorry, but the answer for most people will be no. We won't be able to give you one-to-one advice or feedback about your organisation due to the number of applications we receive, but we hope that today will provide a clearer picture of what we are looking for, how we make decisions, and how we use our application process to do that.
I'm going to now hand over to Simon.
Overview of Esmée's strategy and funding priorities
Simon Wightman:
Thanks, Alison. Our strategy, which will run until the end of 2027, focuses on three aims - Our Natural World; Creative, Confident Communities; and A Fairer Future. And as well as assessing and managing grants and social investments, our funding managers are exploring other ways we can be proactive in making progress towards our goals. This includes inviting applications, commissioning research, convening and brokering alliances, and using our influence, where that's the best way of achieving our aims.
As Alison said, this webinar will focus on our grants, but before we get stuck into that, I wanted to give a quick overview of our social investment programme. Social investment is basically and broadly repayable finance. It can include loans, equity, community shares, and bonds.
Organisations often use it to increase their sustainability and their impact. It might be purchasing an asset or developing a product. And it's worth noting that we don't offer grant funding for capital costs, but we can look to offering social investment. The best place to go for more information and tools to help navigate the world of social landscape is Good Finance, and we've put a link.
At Esmée, we invest in organisations, funds, and projects that create an impact towards our funding priorities. We will work with applicants to find the type and term of investment that best helps them to achieve that impact. That can include considering a blend of grant and repayable funding. A link to more information on how to apply is in the chat. You'll also find examples of organisations and projects that we have invested in.
So, turning to grants, this slide shows a few numbers describing the size and shape of our grant making. We have an annual budget of about £50 million for grants across the three aims. We choose to focus our funding mostly on a relatively small number of longer-term core cost grants. Last year, we made 241 grants across 13 funding priorities. The average grant amount was £204,363, And the median was £195,000.
What we don't fund and what we're looking for
Simon Wightman:
Or what we don't fund. This slide details what we don't fund are exclusions because our focus is on longer-term grants for work with that strategic focus, we don't fund very small organisations with a turnover of less than £100,000, or those without an established governance. By that, we mean we don't fund organisations that aren't constituted.
Most of our grants support charities, but we do fund other types of organisations, like community interest companies or community benefit societies. It is worth noting that if your organisation is not a registered charity, we will assess governance and the risk of disproportionate personal benefit, and you can find out more information about that on our website. It's also worth bearing in mind that if you are not a charity, we won't be able to give you unrestricted funding. But we might be able to give core costs, or project costs, to progressed charitable aims pending an assessment.
Now, I'm not going to go through all of the rest of the exclusions in detail, but if you have any questions on these, then do put them in the Q&A. We'll either answer them today, or we will include them on the round- up afterwards. I'll pass over to Laura.
Laura Lines:
Thank you. So, what do we fund? I think is probably what everyone's asking. So essentially, we fund work that fits our strategy. This slide here gives you an overview of the three strategic aims and the corresponding funding priorities, in which there are 13.
Our Natural World has five, A Fair Future has five priorities, and Creative Confident Communities has three priorities. It's worth noting, when we talk about Creative, Confident Communities, the communities relates to connection by place.
There is the full details of the strategy, including a full-text version for screen readers on the website, and you can also find the full funding guidance, more information about long-term outcomes, and what we're focusing on, and also case studies.
We thought it'd be useful to just talk you through a kind of example of one of the priorities and what the guidance looks like, so thank you. So this one is an example for Migrant Justice, which is a priority under A Fairer Future. You will see at the top there, we've identified three longer-term outcomes. So essentially, when we're looking at applications for funding, we're considering how that work, the proposed work, aligns and helps contribute to these three long-term outcomes.
Below that, you'll see there's additional guidance, and this is to give you a sense of the key things we're looking for and the type of work we want to support during the assessment. So, for Migrant Justice, the additional guidance relates to all three of the outcomes, but in other priorities, there is specific additional guidance for each long-term outcome, so it's really important to look at the guidance for this specific area you're interested.
In accessing funding for, your application could link to, it may be one outcome, or all three outcomes, and it can cut across different priorities. What we're keen to understand is what the work we want applicants to be able to talk about the work they're doing and how they align across the priorities. We have found, typically, that applications are stronger when they can strongly connect to the guidance for one priority versus being lightly connected to several priorities. Click on to the next slide, please, Luna. Thank you.
So, just to say a bit more about what we're looking for. So, as well as a strong fit to our strategy, and the contribution to our outcomes, we're looking to fund ambitious work that is creating systemic change, that can really understand the context and the issues it's working in, and has plans for how to kind of address that and have a sustaining impact.
We want to support work that has a wider influence, so goes beyond direct delivery, can influence policy, practice, attitudes, behaviour. There's potential to scale, replicate, or to share learnings with others to do the work as well.
We're looking to support work that centres lived experience, justice, and equity, and we're looking for organisations that take a collaborative approach, so they have a good understanding of the wider movement or ecosystem or systems they're working in, and have connections and contacts to communities and networks and grassroots organisations.
And finally, we look at governance and leadership, so understanding what, how the organisation is governed, what systems, policies, practices are in place. To make sure that's done effectively, and that there's relevant skills and experience within the organisation.
To bring, I guess, what we're looking for, to light a little bit more, I thought I'd just talk through an example of one of our grantees that we're funding. So, under Migrant Justice priority, we fund Migrants Organise. So, they're a charity founded and led by people with lived experience, so it's migrants and refugees. It combines direct support for people with experience and campaigning, organising, and movement building in order to change narratives, policy, and practice, and address the sources of injustice. The work resonates with all three of the outcomes under migrant justice priority.
Migrants Organise also holds an infrastructure role within the sector, so it incubates and platforms grassroots organisations. It trains community leaders to better understand structural systemic issues, and how that links to the wider discourse. And it's also part of broader alliances and coalitions, and works collaboratively, both in and across the sector. I think I'm passing back to Al now.
What we consider when making decisions and Diversity, Equity and Inclusion
Alison Holdom:
Thank you, Laura, and I'm glad to say I'm back on camera, I'm sorry about that earlier. So, the next slide is about how we make decisions. Now, we have to make judgments. When assessing applications, we consider a range of factors based on how strong a fit the work is to our strategy, and how well-placed the organisation is to do that work.
The link on this slide, where it says learn more about how we make decisions, will take you to our page on how we make decisions, what we look for, and how we do this within our application process. These are all things that we're thinking about from our point of view, in the context of our strategy, other work we're funding, and our own plans.
The next point is about diversity, equity, and inclusion. One of the things that we consider when we're assessing is diversity, equity, and inclusion, or DEI for short. In our application process. Applicants will be asked at each stage of the assessment about DEI. Firstly, when you submit an expression of interest, you are asked to complete a DEI monitoring form. The form is based on something called the DEI Data Standard. This collects organisation-level information on whether an organisation is working for and led by a group sharing a single characteristic. It's not a way to capture the breadth of how DEI is present or not present in an organisation. It's more a way of us, as a funder, understanding high-level data in organisations that apply to us.
We appreciate that there can be nuance in the way in which diversity shows up in organisations, and how you might live equity and inclusion. If we move forward to having an assessment call with an applicant, there will then be an opportunity to explore the approach to DEI in more detail.
What do we do with the information on DEI that we gather? Well, this information helps us to understand who our funding is reaching, as well as identify and address structural inequity in our funding. It's part of our assessment of applications, and we're also interested in how people and communities most impacted by the issues can shape the work. For some areas of our strategy, we are prioritising applications from organisations led by people who have lived experience of the issues. And this is highlighted in our guidance, and is relevant particularly for a number of the Fairer Future priorities. For example, within our Arts and Creativity Making Change priority.
We work on creating a more representative cultural workforce, and this is focused on disabled people and communities experiencing racial inequity. And so, with this one, we prioritise organisations, applications from organisations that are led by those groups. Not all organisations we fund will be led by those with lived experience of the issue they are working on, but DEI is still an important part of the assessment. In those cases, we'd be looking to understand the approach to DEI, how the organisation represents the community it works with, how it ensures equity in its work, and what mechanisms it has in place to ensure that voices that are more likely to be excluded can be heard.
To give you an example of how this works in practice and alongside our various funding priorities and outcomes. I've given the example of Anti-Racist Cumbria. They aim to make Cumbria the first anti-racist county in the UK, working across a range of sectors, including very many other partners, stakeholders, and decision makers. The grant was made through Creative Confident Communities Priority, Communities Working Together for Change, because it takes a place-based approach, working with multiple communities and key local stakeholders. And this fits the priority whereby people determine equitable and aspirational visions of what they want their community to be.
We know that our eligibility criteria are an unfair barrier for organisations that are led by communities experiencing racial inequity, or that are disability-led, as they tend to be smaller organisations. In our experience, we don't think that our open application process is the best way to fund smaller, grassroots organisations. Instead, we're focusing on finding and funding those organisations proactively. For instance, by expanding and strengthening our networks, targeted referrals, and monitoring the sector. We also fund in partnership with specialist organisations who have the relevant reach and expertise. For example, we've partnered with the Baobab Foundation, the Civic Power Fund, and Comic Reliefs Global Majority Fund.
Based on the DEI we gathered about who our funding is reaching last year, around half of the grants that we made went to organisations led by people who faced structural inequity as a result of their identity or lived experience. And you can find more information about the DEI data we gathered on our website, and Luna will also share the link in the chat.
There will also be information about who our funding is reaching, and more on how we classify and use the data we're given.
Application process, application numbers and tips
Alison Holdom:
Now, my colleague Luna will start a short video which explains more about how to apply to us.
How to apply for funding video
Before applying, check if we're the right funder for you. Take our quiz to check you meet our minimum eligibility criteria. We'll ask you quick questions about your work and organisation. And it takes just 5 minutes.
If you're eligible to apply, read our guidance about the funding priorities relevant to your work. It has more detail about the long-term outcomes we're focusing our support on. We use this to guide our assessment on strategic fit.
Here's the guidance for one of our priorities, as an example. You can also find information on each stage of the application process. So you know what to expect, and how we make decisions. This will help you understand whether it's worth investing time in applying to us.
If you decide to apply, there are three stages:
One, let us know about your work by submitting an expression of interest. Use this to tell us briefly about what you want Esmée to support, the impact you're aiming for. And how it contributes to our strategy. And your organisation. How you're well-placed to do the work. You'll have 300 words.
We will also look at your website to learn more about your organisation and impact so far. You'll hear from us within 4-6 weeks to let you know if we'll take your application further.
If we think your work is a potential match, we'll invite you for an assessment call to learn more. It's also a chance for you to learn more about us as a funder and our strategy. The call will cover fit to our strategy and impact you're aiming for. Your approach, and your track record. The assessment call will help us understand how likely it is we will fund your work. We'll let you know the outcome within 2 weeks.
If we think your application is a strong fit for our funding, we will invite you to submit a proposal. With additional information we may need. If you already have a strategy document and business plan. Covering the work you're applying for, you can use these instead of our proposal form. We may have a follow-up call to discuss anything we need more detail on. We'll then carry out a detailed assessment.
We aim to give you a decision within 3 months of receiving your proposal.
Alison Holdom:
We'll now pass over to Simon, who is going to talk about behind the scenes here.
Simon Wightman:
Thanks, Alison. So what happens when you submit an expression of interest? Well, we use it as a screening process. We're checking if it meets our eligibility criteria, if it's a good fit for our long-term outcomes. Expressions of interest might be discussed at our weekly team meeting to consider potential opportunities with the strategy, and also how it fits with other work we might already be funding. We'll check other publicly available information, such as through the organisation's website, or via the Charity Commission, to learn more about the organisation and your impact so far. For those that look a really good potential match, we will invite for an assessment call. And that's a chance for us to explore the work a little further. More detail about each stage of the application process is on our website.
We want to be upfront about the number of applications that we receive. 11% of expressions of interest that come in through the website with no previous contact were invited to an assessment call last year. Half of those who had an assessment call were then invited to submit a full proposal.
And of these, 91% received a grant. The reason that share is high is because we focus on inviting only those applications that we're confident are a really strong fit with our strategy. For expressions of interest we invite, the success rates are much higher.
We are mindful of the bias here. We will ask applicants the same questions, and we'll use the same assessment process for the expressions of interest we invite, and those we don't. But our existing knowledge and our learning will obviously factor into decisions. I'm going to pass on to Laura.
Laura Lines:
Thank you. So I'm sure a lot of you are interested in how you can get onto our radar. So it's important for Esmée to remain open to applications, as well as supporting organisations that are already known to us, as well as making connections ourselves.
There's two key ways to get into learn more about organisations, for us to learn more about organisations' work. One is by us proactively seeking them out. We attend sector and community events, we carry out research into areas of work, and we follow up on recommendations from people we fund or work with. The other is through submitting an expression of interest on our website.
Alison Holdom:
In 2025, 30% of grants we made were given to organisations that we hadn't previously funded, and most of these came via the open application process. So if you want to get on the radar, the best thing to do is submit the Expression of interest through our website.
Thanks, Laura. We often get asked what makes a good expression of interest, and we're going to just quickly tell you our own thoughts about that.
Laura Lines:
Sure, yeah, so I think a good expression of interest for me is one where it comes across, it's clear, it understands the change that they want to make, and the context around that, and why they're well-placed to do it, i.e., the kind of methods they're using, the evidence of impact, or what are their kind of developed plans are to try something different, and whether they have the necessary skills and experience in order for it to be successful.
Alison Holdom:
Thank you, Laura. I think for me, a good expression of interest is one that's really clear about the impact it wants to have, and provides really strong evidence to support that. And when we say evidence, that could mean the result of the work that's already been done, or for newer work. It could be the experience of the team, the depth of the research and understanding of the issue, and it can be also the connections and networks needed to make the work succeed. For Creative, Confident Communities, this is particularly true. And also, in that area, a good expression of interest is one that can show the work is place-based, and that the community has leadership over the work.
Simon Wightman:
Yeah, certainly agree with both of you. I think one of the really tricky things is being a really good piece of work probably isn't enough. And I think the ones that really stand out for me are those that show a clear route to influence beyond a grant geography or grant funding period. That could be through confidence built through a track record of successful influencing, or it could be a new and innovative approach to addressing an acknowledged issue, or an unusual partnership that brings previously unheard or ignored voices to the fore on a particular issue.
Alison Holdom:
Thanks very much, both of you.
Q&A
Alison Holdom:
So, it's now almost half past two, and we're going to move over to the second part of the webinar, which is your questions, and Luna is going to start that for us. Thank you, Luna.
Luna Dizon:
Hi, everyone. Thank you for putting your questions in the Q&A facility, and also to those of you who submitted questions in advance, we will try to get through as many as we can.
I'm gonna start with one of the questions, a couple of questions that have come up in the Q&A facilities, especially as they've been, outvoted, so they, they seem to be, something that lots of people want answered. So the first question is from Michelle. Do the changes in policy and practice that you ask for as part of A Fairer Future need to be national, or could they be local or regional?
Laura Lines:
Yeah, thank you for the question. So I'd say, in terms of, like, the work that we currently fund and we're looking to fund, it can be either or. And obviously in certain contexts, certain policy spheres, sometimes the national policy is not in a reachable space, but I think we do look at what the influence and the impact is, so actually really good local, regional influence is really important, and actually we've seen how sometimes it's been, like, a local influence, like, within a specific borough or council, and actually then other people have been able to pick that up and implement it in their own regional context, so yeah, it doesn't have to be national, it can be a smaller scale than that. I think we're looking for, like, how you're doing it, how you're measuring that, and also then how you can share that learning with other people who might be able to then also replicate it.
Luna Dizon:
Thanks, Laura. I'm going to move on to this next question about our criteria around having wider influence. So does Esmée require a lot of track record with this, or would you support organisations to develop this work?
Additionally, how do you assess whether the work has potential to be scaled up or replicated? Al, do you want to start with that question?
Alison Holdom:
Thank you. Let's do it in reverse. How we decide about scaling and replication really does depend on the work, and the impact that you're trying to have. I think, firstly, we would obviously look at the impact that the work had had so far, and we would really dive into how much knowledge and understanding the organisation had about the need for it to be expanded.
We recognise that some models are really hard to scale up, and that some work is absolutely better delivered in a really particular area, or a really particular group of people. Sorry, can you repeat the first part of the question, Luna?
Luna Dizon:
Yes, sorry, it was about, wanted to influence, and I already put it in there, moved on, yeah. Why does Esmée require a lot of track record with this? So would you be wanting to see that in the application, or how would you look for that?
Alison Holdom:
If an organisation was aiming to do this, but hadn't done it yet, I think what we would be looking for was an indication that there was an appetite from other people, that they had been involved with other conferences or sharings, that they had some ability and experience within the organisation to do it. So, it's both that there's an external interest, or there's a gap in information, or a gap in models that organisation could share. But also that they had some skills to be able to do that, or they had an appreciation of how they could build the skills to do that.
Luna Dizon:
Oh, thank you. Unless Laura or Simon want to add to that, I'll move on to the next question.
Simon Wightman:
No, I think similar to what Al said, the organisation delivering the work doesn't have to always be the same organisation that is going to amplify and roll out those key messages at a national, it might be through partnership. So one organisation doesn't necessarily have to have all of the experience and track record for every aspect of the work, as long as we're confident that those connections exist between those who are going to use it to support advocacy and those that are going to focus on delivery.
Luna Dizon:
Thanks, Simon. So I'll move on to Hamida's, question. When funding core capacity forecasts, what does strong and responsible use of that funding look like from Esmée's perspective, particularly for organisations operating between communities and decision-making spaces?
I'm go to you, Al.
Alison Holdom:
Yeah, that's an interesting question. I think, obviously, there's a fundamental question around, telling us about whether it's core in terms of being salaries, and why those roles are needed. But there's probably something also around how much the core funding in terms of, the links into other organisations, and whether or not by shoring up the core funding, we're enabling you to work more, to partner more, to collaborate more. So, I think we're looking a lot at what is the additionality that our core funding would give the organisation, so that you can either do more, or partner more, or work more. We are aware that core funding is extremely difficult to get from many sources, and that it's a really key piece of work in stabilising organisations. And also in terms of just really building their ability to sort of work more on the areas that they're focused on.
Luna Dizon:
Thanks, Al. So there are a few questions here around, like, how we define communities, and also, I'm going to ask one about DEI in terms of how we define an organisation as being led by. I'll start with, so I'll read a few questions out, and then go to the panel.
So there's a question here about Creative, Confident Communities, and that by communities, but in this work, we really mean communities connected by a place, rather than a community with a shared identity or shared interest.
There's also a question here from Hannah about asking for more information on our definition of local communities. They work with learning disabled people who are often excluded at work, that is focused on place, especially when it's a smaller geographic area.
And there was a question that came in advance, but is actually also here, which is specifically about, our priority on Arts and Creativity Making Change, towards the long-term outcome on, representative cultural workforce. So in that priority towards that outcome.
We are prioritising work by organisations that are led by, as well as in specific areas of the country, and, they are asking a question because, they don't quite meet our definition of being a led-by organisation. So, sorry, there's quite a few questions there. I'm going to start with, Al, if you could say a little bit more about communities connected by place.
Alison Holdom:
Yeah, so within Creative, Confident Communities, when we talk about communities, that funding is place-based. It's about place-based activity, so we are talking about a community of place, not a community of interest.
Alison Holdom:
Hi. Can you not hear me?
Laura Lines:
I can hear you fine now. I think it might be the Esmée office situation.
Alison Holdom:
Okay, I'll carry on then. If you are a community of interest within a community of place, then we are able to look at that, because then we quite often find that there are specific issues or specific opportunities that come up in a place that affect one particular group of interest within that community. So, we can look at things under that basis, but it will generally, when we mean community, we mean community of place.
Through Creative, Confident Communities, in terms of what is a community in scale, we fund at all levels, so some of the things that we would consider a community are literally just a few streets, and some are citywide, or even county-wide. So, it's really a question of what is the issue that's being dealt with, and how does that reflect the community in that area, no matter what the scale is?
Okay, Luna obviously can't hear us much at the moment - shall I go on to answer the question about representative cultural workforce?
While you're there. That does, I'm afraid, at the moment, because the very, very high number of applications, that is very restricted to the focus that's on our website, which is about organisations that are led by the people they're trying to support, and it's also largely work that's outside London. This is to balance our portfolio, because we do fund quite a lot of organisations already that are… that are doing this work within London. So, there is those two criteria are, at the moment, in place, and very much focused on that particular priority.
I don't know if Luna's back in touch.
Luna Dizon:
I can hear you now. Can you hear me okay?
Apologies for that, everybody. I think, did you answer all those questions? Okay, cool, great. I will just move on to another question.
I might actually ask a question that came in advance, which is what are the most common reasons for turning down, applications? And I wonder if you can, if all the panel can talk through the main reasons in your areas.
I'll start with you, Laura, if that's okay.
Laura Lines:
Yeah, that's fine. There's different levels around when organisations are declined, so I think there's obviously the initial eligibility, and then there's initial screening, and then the assessment call, so I think ones that get through to the assessment call, where it looks like there's some fit, but then they don't quite make through to proposal. I think a lot of the ones we decline there is because it's too focused on, I guess, service delivery and frontline delivery and not connecting it up to the system change work. So, we fully appreciate that frontline delivery and service delivery is a huge part in how you change systems and how you get the information, spot the trends, build the evidence in order to create the systemic change.
But what we wouldn't fund pure, frontline delivery advice. We're funding ones that want to have a bigger impact and create system change by, like, influencing, so leading to campaigns or research or things that are going to shift the dial and have a wider impact. So, I think ours is when it's to service delivery and not focused on system change enough, and that's in the Fairer Future specifically.
Simon Wightman:
I think for under Our Natural World, I mean, I suppose there are some parallels, really. I think one of the most frequent reasons that we will turn down proposals is where we don't feel that there's enough evidence of a new and different approach. So it could be really impactful work in the place that it's focusing on, but we think that's been done in lots of other places, or we can't see what the wider sort of impact of the work is beyond that direct benefit.
Alison Holdom:
And I think for Creative, Confident Communities, it's very similar. For expressions of interest, mostly they're turned down because they're not community-led, or the community don't have access to decision-making in the work. And at proposal level, it's very similar to A Fairer Future, in that it's about organisations that are often turned down because they don't have wider impact, or they can't evidence the wider impact of the work, or they're not working in collaboration or in a way that's really going to multiply the impact of their work and enable significant change to happen.
Luna Dizon:
Thanks, everyone. So there's another question for all of you here. This question is, it feels like there's a lot of information to get into just 300 words. Do you have any tips for achieving this?
Simon, you're nodding. I'm gonna ask you.
Simon Wightman:
Just out of empathy, really, with the questioner. Yeah, no, it is really tough to get everything that you want into 300 words. My advice would probably be don't try, because the final decision on whether or not we're going to fund a proposal isn't made on the expression of interest. You're looking to get to that stage of having a conversation. The thing that's really going to strike us is if you've really brought out what's different about your proposal, what's the wider change that you think you can deliver, and why are you the right organisation to do that? I think if we can get that sort of USP of your proposal, that kind of what's different from all of the other proposals, then we can build a bigger picture of the whole programme.
At the, at the call stage, and, and if you're invited to at the full proposal stage.
Alison Holdom:
I would agree with Simon on that one. We do need the answer to the question about what is it you're actually asking us to support. We need to understand what you're doing and what you would be using the money for. But more important is that other question, really, about why are you best placed to do this work, and what's the change you're focused on achieving?
I think the question, you know, for all of the work that we do, that question about impact and change, and being able to evidence it is really important.
Laura Lines:
Yeah, I agree with those. I think maybe avoid, like, the generic sentences, and try and just drill straight into the specificity of the, like, your approach or your work. The chances are, if you're applying, you see a line with our strategy, we know something about the context and the issue, so I guess not necessarily going into detail on that, but understanding what your route is to address that.
And I think if you've had some successes or some wins, like, the impact point, where that's the organisation or individuals who are now leading a newer organisation, I think it's, like, try and get them in, because I think kind of helps inspire a bit of confidence. But also just to say, we read the expression of interest, but then we also do the closer looks in terms of, like, go to websites or go to your socials, or look at your annual reports, so again, anything you can put on those sites that give a bit more flavour of the uniqueness or the breadth of your work, or the impact of your work, we look at all of that as well to, like, factor into the decision, so it's not just the 300 words.
Luna Dizon:
Thanks, all of you. So I'm going to move on to a question from Munawara.
Apologies if I'm pronouncing anybody's names wrong. So, Munawara's question is, I'm interested in knowing whether Esmée considers funding newer organisations that are set up to tackle systemic exclusion by enabling more of the community to be in a decision-making position.
I think there's actually a slightly similar question here that I'm also going to read. This is, do you fund an application for the new work that is aiming to start systems change and DEI? Small charities need some funding first to start this work, or do they have to already be working on it?
Laura, I'm gonna go to you. Let me know if you need me to, repeat either of those questions.
Laura Lines:
Yeah, so I think the point around funding new work and new organisations, so yes, we would be open to that, we have done it. I think it is understanding, I think it's understanding, like, their role in the ecosystem, or their understanding of the work, and their, like, if it's individuals, what I guess the credibility in them delivering that work and giving confidence that they can do their work, so it's, I guess, individuals' track record, or the understanding, or that they're bringing a different approach,
What was the second part around the… there's something about smaller charities and…
Luna Dizon:
Yeah, so one of the questions was about new work that is aiming to start systems change, which I think that's the one that you answered. The other one was about… Oh, sorry, I just need to find it again, I'd already moved it on. Sorry. It was from Munawara. It was to do with, trying to get, communities, as part of the decision-making process.
Laura Lines:
Within the organisation, or within, like, broader system change?
Luna Dizon:
Part of the work that they're doing. So, yes, sorry. Oh no, I found a different question.
Laura Lines:
So I think, yes, we are interested in that, because we do want to support people who lived experience being part of those systems and having that power, and I think that probably Al's got some stuff around the CCC, the Creative, Confident Community's work. I'd say that we are really interested in terms of system changes, actually, who's in the rooms, who's having those conversations, who's bringing the evidence and intelligence, so we do want to support that work. I think it's hard if it's a small group of individuals or organisations who aren't constituted, we're not able to support that.
There's work we do, I guess, funding through other organisations, so delegated grant making, giving that to, like, I guess, Baobab or Global Majority Fund, Civic Power Fund, who are sometimes, like, closer to the grassroots and able to kind of distribute that, funding more effectively than we can, and also offer more support. Once we make a grant, we are actually quite a hands-off funder because of the volume, so actually sometimes smaller organisations need more capacity from us in terms of that support, which we're not able to offer. So sometimes we work through conduits or delegated grantmaking to support smaller grassroots, work that we can't support directly.
Simon Wightman:
And I think building on Laura's point a little bit, in that often when we make a grant, one organisation is responsible for that grant in terms of their relationship with us, but they will often have a partner who's in a much better place for delivering impact within a community or something else. And that organisation might be too small to apply to us directly, might come under the £100,000 year annual turnover, for example.
But in working together, they could be the beneficiary of some of that funding. They could be paid through that grant with that organisation to do that work. So that's another way in which, smaller organisations that can be best placed to have that sort of direct impact and benefit from the grant.
Luna Dizon:
Munawara, if we haven't properly answered your question, do put it in again. And I don't know if, the panel want to talk a little bit, like, give examples of organisations that we have funded that are, you know, really working on giving more decision-making power to the communities that they support.
Al, I don't know if you've got a good example that you'd like to share.
Alison Holdom:
Sure, I mean, within Creative, Confident Communities, we're funding quite a lot of work around citizens' assemblies and citizens' juries, which are, you know, very much localised ways of involving local people in decisions that affect them, and we're funding some organisations that are doing it about their own work.
But that's not the only approach we're taking. I mean, it's one approach we're taking. We're also funding a lot of collaborations and networks as a way of getting funding out to smaller organisations. And that's particularly around peer learning, because, as Laura said, you know, we are not in a position, because of the volume of grants, to offer much support to people directly, and so we're finding quite a lot of peer learning networking opportunities so people can do it that way. But, I think, we're not prescriptive about the way in which people are involved in decision making. We're really interested in different models. And the different ways of doing it, and how people find the best way.
Luna Dizon:
Thank you. So I'm going to move on to Alex's question, so Alex says the advice for the EOI seems to prioritise new, innovative work or partnerships, but the overall support that we provide seems to be focused on core support. What is the balance between offering funds for core versus new programme delivery?
Who wants to start with that? Simon?
Simon Wightman:
So when we're making a proposal, we need to understand the impact that it's going to have, and the specific difference that it's going to make, but that doesn't necessarily mean that that's best achieved through a project costs grant. So if we give a core or an unrestricted grant to an organisation, lots of the information we need is still about the specific impact you'll make, and the theory of change behind how you're going to do that. But if what you need to do that is core administrative costs to be covered because other funders won't do that, or your CEO's salary to be covered because other funders won't do that, then we're really open to those conversations. But we still need to know, because that's what, we still need to know what the route to impact is. So it can sound a little bit, perhaps, like a project pitch, or more of a project pitch than it is, but the conversation really is, how does our grant most help you achieve that change, and that doesn't have to be through project costs.
Laura Lines:
I would just add to that, because also I think sometimes this varies in terms of areas of work and what the nature of the work is that you're doing. And I think in some of the justice areas.
I think the bulk of the funding is multi-year unrestricted core costs for organisations to do really good campaigning work or strategic litigation work, and again, it's not necessarily new and sexy, but if it's effective and is having an impact, then we are prepared to continue funding that, if I guess, you're if you're making traction influencing change, and you're also identifying new areas or issues or challenges that need to be addressed, so the new bit might be the new challenges rather than the new ways of working. So yeah, I'd say it doesn't need to be brand new and innovative, but it has to be… I guess what we're looking for is effective routes to change, and that can vary across the different areas of work, from the environmental, to the play space, to the social justice. So I think it's understanding what the tools are and how you can use them.
Simon Wightman:
Yeah, I totally agree with that, and that's where your track record can really come into play in terms of demonstrating that you're the right organisation to fund in that space. Because also, if we're giving a 3- or 5-year grant, you may not know all of the things you're going to have to work on, over that period. And that's when we'll really look to what's your track record, what's the change that you've influenced, so far.
Alison Holdom:
And can I just follow that up by saying that's particularly the case in Creative, Confident Communities, because a lot of the work that we fund is co-created, and the applicant that's putting in the bid does not know what that's going to be, because the whole act of co-creation means that they don't know what the outcome is yet. So, we are open to being flexible around what the actual delivery is, what the actual programme is, so long as we know that the intention of the outcomes is put in place, and also that the people who are delivering it, the people that are making the application for the grant, can really evidence in their track record that they are able to do that work, and they're able to use that community-led process to achieve it.
Luna Dizon:
Thank you all. I'm going to ask a couple of questions that came in advance. This one, is from Lucy, so they're particularly interested in our priority on Community-led Art and Creativity. Lucy's question is, is it possible to apply for one-year funding for a small grant to use for core costs to explore and build partnerships, with the idea to apply for something bigger and multi-year once the underlying work is complete?
And then, there's another, question here from Melanie, who also asks about the possibility of applying for a multi-year grant, with one year being the strategy and community partnership, and then year two, three being about implementation. I think some of that you've already covered, but I suppose, is there anything that you'd want to add?
Alison Holdom:
I think in terms of CCC that that's probably more likely because of the co-creation element. So we have got several grants where the first year or the first six months is very much tied up in developing the processes that are going to be appropriate for doing that work it tends to be that the organisations that come to us have some experience, and so we're able to fund them for a number of years on the assumption that the first year will be developing, and then the next two years will be delivering. It's quite unusual for us to just do one year.
And then, follow that up with further years. The reason for that is a timing thing as much as anything, in that, you know, as you solve in the process, it can take several months to get through our system. And in a year, you might not know the results, you'd have to apply to us within 6 months of getting the grant. You probably won't know by then if it's working or not. So it's quite difficult, and under that way of working, there'd be a big gap in the middle. If that works for you, we can look at it, but again, we'd always, we do prefer to do multi-year funding, so our main way of looking at things is through a multi-year lens.
Luna Dizon:
Thanks, Al. There's also another question here from Melanie around how involved in strategic thinking or building would Esmée want to be? They were asking about, Community-led Art and Creativity, but I don't know if others want to talk about how, you know, how involved we want to be in, in, work that we support.
Simon Wightman:
I think it's a really tricky one, because it depends. So there are areas of work under Our Natural World, and I think under all of the aims, where we realise that there are some really nutty problems, and that actually it, quite often, it's helpful to have a funder in the room because the ask isn't entirely clear. Usually, there will have been some proactive work on our side to find out what those… to work on those issues and understand who's active in it, so that will often be part of our proactive roadmap work, rather than something we would expect to come in, through the portal. But it depends. As I think Laura said earlier, that we tend to be quite a hands-off funder because of the number of grants thatwe're managing. So, I think the majority of grants in the portfolio, I might not speak to more than once or twice a year, potentially, because they're just getting on and doing the work. Whereas others, it's more important for us to be more involved in understanding what more we could do and who else we need to work with, and then we would have a much more, much more interaction. So, a bit of a non-answer, perhaps, but it's a tricky one to give one answer to, I think.
Laura Lines:
Can I add to the non-answer?
Simon Wightman:
Yeah.
Laura Lines:
I'm just saying, because again, I think there's, I mean, the funding team's quite mixed in terms of our experience and skills and that sort of thing, so there's some people who are, like, from sectors and have actually really niche expertise in certain areas, and there's some that are quite generalist in expertise around grant making, so I think it's as and when is appropriate for us to step in and help, and when it's not our place, and we shouldn't be interfering. I think what I do see is, like, our role is, through our grants management relationships.
It's actually where we can see things happening, or where we can share intelligence or connect people up, like, if we know things are happening here, they're everywhere, or there's different models, how we can share the intelligence between grantees or other partners or other funders, and join up the work, to help, I guess, like, bolster it, but not to necessarily interfere in the strategic thinking, but, like, to join up the dots from, like, the very privileged bird's eye view that we have of some of the sectors.
Luna Dizon:
Thank you. I'm going to move on to Maggie's question. So Maggie would like to understand, in our criteria, we talk about, we're looking for work that has scope to spread and by this we mean, can expand its influence beyond the initial impact, and our funding.
Who would like to take that first? I'm going to then pick on Al.
Alison Holdom:
I know, it's alright. I think it differs in the three areas that we fund. I think in Creative, Confident Communities, we are quite keen to support local models that have the opportunity to be replicated. So that's kind of what we're looking for. Sometimes it's about spreading, but it's mostly about, is that a model, or is that a way of working that could be done in other communities, or could support other community work? It tends not to be, so much about spreading from one organisation.
Luna Dizon:
Thank you. Laura, do you want to add to that?
Laura Lines:
I was going to say, I think I've noticed some of the things where things have happened, because actually they've had volunteers or staff members who actually are working remotely in different areas, and they've been able to, like, then link into that network and spread the work and kind of lift resources and use them there. But I think that is very much all about, like people on the ground and in the places being able to do it. I think it's hard to just lift one model and put it somewhere else without that kind of local connection. The other thing where I've seen work being spread is where, thinking about in our leaving care strand, where some of the organisations working with care experienced, care leavers, how they were kind of working with the local authority to guarantee that their immigration status was resolved before they turned 18, and there being, like, a kind of charter, and actually the local authority signing up to that, and I've seen that being replicated, and intelligence being shared, about how to kind of… and also the local authorities working together on how they can better do things and learn from one another, how to implement stuff. So, I think some of it's actually, how can you help your local authority to, like, know what's happening somewhere and then implement it in their place. So, a lot of it's been part of, like, coalitions or just learning networks and sharing that information, and being there to kind of, I guess, yeah, share your learning from it, and what worked and what didn't work when you're trying to implement things.
Luna Dizon:
Thank you. I'll move on to Tim's question. Can you say what level of financial details or budget you expect at the EOI stage? How specific you need to be at this initial stage in relating to the level of financial ask.
Simon, do you want to start with that one?
Simon Wightman:
Yeah, so, I'm trying to remember how much we do ask for at EOI, so I think we have a basic turnover, information that we will if you're invited to a call, depending on the organisation, and Laura mentioned that we don't just have your EOI to go on, we can access other information, which is publicly available, so we might have specific questions around finances, at the conversation level, but we won't be going in-depth into financial due diligence, usually, until a full proposal stage. I've probably missed, some useful stuff there, Laura.
Laura Lines:
The only thing I'd add to that, because I think you're right, we look at what's publicly available. I think if there's something, and especially because we prefer to just do core costs wherever possible, which, therefore, we don't need specific budget information, I think on the call we might ask what's your current funding situation, who are your key funders, what's your general turnover, etc, to get a sense of it, but not go into it in detail. The only caveat on that, I think, is if there is, like, if it's specific funding for a project, or if it's partnership bids, we sometimes do want to see the budget, so we can see how the funding would be split amongst various partners, and the equity within that. So, I think… and again, this isn't necessarily to try and make people do lots more work at an earlier stage, it's more to prevent, like, actually, if things aren't stacking up, we wouldn't want to invite it, and then do loads more work and then turn it down.
So I think some things where we think there might be some crunchy stuff that we should draw out before we invite and put people to extra work, we would do that by email or in the phone call ahead of time, but that's probably by exception and not the rule. So, it generally is we just look at publicly available and have a quick chat about it on the call. But if it's more in-depth, like, project, and we think it could be deal-breaker stuff, then we would, we would kind of get into an EOI stage just to prevent putting people to work further down the line.
Alison Holdom:
Yeah, and if I could just add something, I think it depends sometimes as well which priority you're applying under. For example, if you're looking at the Community-driven Enterprise and Regeneration outcome, obviously, that has a strong focus on things like community-owned assets and community-led enterprises, so the finances are really key to that. And so, under that one, for example, you will be asked more information at the expression of interest stage.
Sometimes also with, as Laura said, with the partnerships or with the networks, we'll be looking for balance between the organisations and who is paying what and who's getting what from the funding. So, it slightly depends what you're applying for and what priority you're applying in.
Luna Dizon:
Thank you. So I'm going to ask a couple of questions here about, scale and spread, of the work, I guess, related to that sort of wider influence criteria. So, this is a question from Philip. Would Esmée fund work that develops an innovative and scalable new approach to service delivery?
And then there is a question here - are you open to funding projects that are testing new approaches to social enterprise development and community improvement at the local level, which could act as a proof of concept for something that could be applied in other locations nationally?
Laura - would you be happy to answer the first question on, an innovative and scalable new approach to service delivery? And then, Al, could you answer the question about, social enterprise development?
Laura Lines:
Yeah, sure, so it's hard to understand whether I'm applying this to how you mean it to be applied to, but hopefully I can give you an answer, and you can always come back if it's not answering it. I think in terms of new approaches to service delivery and making it innovative and scalable, I think we would consider, like, looking at that model and testing and designing that model, but the thing is, we're not going to continue funding service delivery, so I guess it's what's the long-term impact, and how is that service delivery going to be funded in the long term? And actually, if you need some funding to, like develop and test and bring in people to do that. That's potentially of interest. There's obviously lots of questions around that, but I think we wouldn't essentially create systems that are going to be reliant on us funding them indefinitely, and especially to do service delivery, so, yeah, so kind of yes and no to that, point. I guess it would be much more about what's the sustainability, what's our role, and how and when could we exit from it, would be the kind of things to think about.
Alison Holdom:
Thanks, and to the second question about, testing new approaches to social enterprise development, I mean, in principle, that is, to an extent, what the Community-led Regeneration priority is around, is how social enterprise or community asset development is managed. I think the, the point about whether it's a proof of concept that's something that could be applied in other locations, if that is the aim of what you're doing, is to create something that's actually going to be applicable in multiple places or multiple communities.
We'd be really interested to understand why you think that, what evidence you have, and how much you've done about investing and investigating the model and the need for the model. It's potentially something that we could be interested in, but we'd need to know an awful lot about the background to the work, and the background to the organisation that was doing the work. But it's a potential thing that we could look at.
Luna Dizon:
Thank you. So there's a question here that's, from a smaller organisation who may have only done a small amount of work amplifying young people's voices in the wider system, but their size stops them making wider system change.
How do we get out of this chicken and egg scenario? I mean, the question is specific to Children and young people's rights, I guess, or our priority around that, but I'm sure there's similar cases for work that could contribute across all our strategy, but Laura, I'm going to go to you first. Do you need me to read that question again?
Laura Lines:
It's how they, I guess, break out of being a smaller charity, being able to scale up and get the funding for that. I mean, I think it's a really good question, it's a really hard question, and I don't think there's a straightforward answer to it, I guess, in things what we would be looking at to maybe support an organisation to make that next step change. It'd be down to, like, the impact, their ways of working, their routes to change, and understanding what they could do with the additional capacity, and what change that could unlock.
And again, I just, I mean, obviously just think there's a lot of competition for funds, and it's, I guess we're looking at would we do this for one and not another, or which ones should we be doing it for? And that's looking at it across the piece and, like, see who's having cut through, and if they work in a specific context, or actually there's a specific need for the work, so I think there's lots of contextual things that come into play, but I think it's understanding the impact and then actually fully understanding your plans and how you intend to make that step change and make it sustainable.
Luna Dizon:
Thanks, Laura. I'm conscious we've only got about 5 minutes left. I'm going to look to the panel to see if there's any particular questions that they would like to answer from the Q&A facility. We will answer as many of these questions as possible afterwards, and share those once we've, once we've got the recording and transcript up as well. So, apologies that we won't be able to answer everything in the next 5 minutes.
So, Laura, since you've unmuted yourself, is there a question you'd like to answer from here?
Laura Lines:
Just because I saw one, it's probably worth us all contributing, about, how do we get to know and understand the context outside of London, which I think is a really valid question as, a London-based funder, although we have got staff, kind of broader than that. And I think, as we said earlier, capacity is an issue in terms of us trying to get out and about, but we do try and do it as much as we can, I know there's kind of different project visits, and also just connecting with our grantees UK-wide and hearing from them directly about things, sometimes doing visits part of broader coalitions that bring that kind of intelligence, to us, and also we've done specific visits to, kind of, Northern Ireland and Scotland and Wales, and I guess it's, yeah, just us trying to be more proactive.
So, it does happen, probably not as enough as many of us would like it to, because we love to be out and about seeing, things more, but, yeah, I guess those are the routes to us, kind of, learning more from different contexts, but again, this plays out differently in different teams. So I'm sure Simon and Al have got contributions.
Alison Holdom:
Yeah, I mean, obviously, for Creative, Confident Communities, it's a particular issue, because we are doing place-based funding, and we are in London. And I think what we're trying to do there is, for our team, we're very conscious about sharing knowledge between us, trying to gain as much knowledge as we can about the places that we're funding. If we start to get multiple applications from particular places, we start investigating what's happening there. And I think, when we talk to people, we visit and we try and visit multiple organisations to get a broader sense of a place.
We also work with other funders who sometimes have a more specific focus on particular places than we do, so there are other funders who work in a much more targeted way in certain areas. Obviously, we partner with them, and we use their knowledge, their better knowledge than ours, about those particular places. Equally, if we know there are certain places there is particular movement around an issue that's happening in a particular geography, then we would probably investigate and try and find out as much as we can about that. But it's a very, very particular issue for Creative, Confident Communities, and one that we're really trying to resolve, how we do that best.
Further resources
Luna Dizon:
Thank you. I'm just going to share the last couple of slides that we've got here. So, this just has, links to, support applying and for further information. So, it includes a link, for instance, to our, to the accessibility-related support that we offer. So, if there is a barrier due to a disability, if there is a barrier to you applying due to a disability, you can apply for up to £500 [correction - it's £650] in an accessibility support payment.
There's also a link there where you can download our full guidance, as well as the, a sample application form. A link, too, to an overview of our grant funding, so you get a sense of the size and shape of our funding, but also there are links from that page to funding lists that we have for each priority, which could be helpful in terms of understanding what things we've funded before. And then, also, on the last slide, we've got a link to other funding sources, so there are funding directories, including if you're interested in social investment, a link to Good Finance on that page.
And other useful sector resources on various different topics, including fundraising, legal, campaigning, digital and safeguarding. I'm gonna hand over back to, Al.
Alison Holdom:
Thanks, Luna. So, just to close, I just wanted to say thank you to everyone for being here, to the panel, to my colleagues behind the scenes answering the questions. And to Nana, and I'll turn for the BSL interpretation. But mostly thank you to all of you for attending this afternoon, and for giving up your time, and for asking questions, and for doing the really vital and important work you do to make a difference in the sectors that we all share.
Thank you very much for attending, and have a good afternoon.