Blog

Press button data sharing a reality for Community Foundations

A new tool funded by 360Giving will make publishing data a doddle for community foundations that are using Salesforce to manage their grantmaking.

The tool allows community foundations to automatically export data formatted to the 360Giving Standard cutting hours off the time it might otherwise take for them to prepare their data.

The tool has been tested over the summer as part of a pilot project. It was developed in consultation with several community foundations, who fed back on the process and instructions provided. It has been possible to create this tool because the community foundations use the Salesforce platform in the same way. There are now six community foundations sharing their data to the 360Giving Standard, meaning they can all view their grants through the same prism and alongside other funders working in their area.

Network analysis visualisation for UK grantmaking in 2016

Collectively, 46 community foundations awarded £71m worth of grants in the last year, reaching all parts of the UK and investing in a wide range of causes that matter to local people. By making publishing data quick and uniform it delivers huge potential for the Community Foundation movement to identify, aggregate and compare the kind of grants they make. We hope this will not only support their policy work, but also highlight their services to other grantmakers as well as fund seekers.

So far four foundations have tested the tool: Essex, Oxfordshire, Surrey and the Quartet. We shared our findings on the pilot at the recent UKCF conference in Cardiff, where we held a session on data sharing.

Steven Mackenzie, Development Officer for Essex Community Foundation says:

“We are delighted to be able to publicly share our grantmaking and further build the national picture on giving. The clear instructions provided coupled with the automation available within the Salesforce platform we use meant that the whole process could not have been easier.”

Anne-Marie Rogers, Marketing and Communications Executive of Quartet Community Foundation, says:

“We’re passionate about inspiring more philanthropy and we hope others will use this information to make more and better grants. We are transparent about our grantmaking and already publish details of our grants made on our website. By sharing the information with 360Giving we aim to help individual philanthropists, grantmaking trusts and researchers to find more detail on where our grants are going and understand trends across the West of England.”

Kate Peters of Community Foundation Surrey says:

“The new tool has made sharing our data very easy and much easier than I thought. The motivations to share our data are of course transparency which is so important today, but also to inspire and inform donors who are interested in what is going on in the area. We already publish our data, but 360Giving offers a much better way to present data than to have it as a list on our website. The more community foundations share their data the stronger the argument for community foundations as donors and charities will see the breadth of what we do.”

We will continue to work with the Community Foundation network over the coming year to identify shared questions, challenges and ideas for new platforms and tools. We already started by looking at network analysis to see which organisations fund the same grantees. If you have more ideas for using the data please contact info@threesixtygiving.org to find out more about this project and to get involved.

Posted in Blog

Happy 1st birthday to GrantNav – come and join the party!

Rachel Rank, CEO 360Giving

A year ago we launched a UK first with GrantNav, the free to use search tool that lets anyone easily explore and download grants data for some of the UK’s largest charitable funders.

The platform has put grantmaking on a new trajectory that has the potential to crank up the sector’s impact.

GrantNav has experienced phenomenal growth in its first year. When we launched it in September 2016, it included data from 26 funders. It now features more than 200,000 grants worth over £10bn from 48 funders. Collectively, these organisations represent the full gamut of grantmakers and you will recognise many of them including small, large, family, corporate, institutional, local authority and government funders who have joined the #greatergrantsdata movement by sharing their information in an open, comparable way.

People are regularly using GrantNav, with an average of 1,000 different people using it each month. Some are conducting basic searches to see who else is funding the same kind of activities, such as this example from an online forum run by the Alzheimer’s Society, where a user looks at the end dates of grants for dementia projects. Others are building on top of GrantNav search results and using different tools, for example to visualise funding to a specific place.

Using open data to underpin funding decisions is a new science and it’s encouraging to see GrantNav being used by different people in different ways, depending on whether they are data analysts, or (like me) just want to find out who else is funding what without having to wrangle any pivot tables.

The potential of the 360Giving dataset is improving all the time. With more data being opened up every month, we’re able to do more sophisticated network analysis, such as looking at funding patterns. We’re also going to make GrantNav even more user friendly by creating better instructions and examples of use.

When we launched GrantNav in September 2016 it was a UK first, and it remains the only place to access open, comparable data on UK grantmaking. But it isn’t the only show in town.

Other platforms that use 360Giving data are also being created, including CAST’s Beehive Giving, which is working with grant seekers to help match them with the best potential funders; and OSCI’s Local Insight, that looks at the latest data and analysis for local communities and services.

We are delighted to celebrate a year of GrantNav and how quickly it is growing. We now need you to bring your information and questions to the party and help it come of age.

We run regular Data Surgeries which bring grantmakers together to talk about sharing and using the funding information they collect. Keep an eye on our Twitter feed to find out when the next Surgery is: @360Giving

In the next few months we’ll also be launching a Challenge Fund that will look at common challenges faced by organisations and how funding data can be used to help answer them. Look out for details on our website and via Twitter.

GrantNav will be improved by having more data, which in turn will encourage more users. As the dataset grows, so does the usefulness of GrantNav. If you would like to know how you can open up your grants data then please get in touch.

http://grantnav.threesixtygiving.org/

Posted in Blog

Grantmaking data through 360Giving adds new insight to OCSI’s Local Insight tool

Oxford Consultants for Social Inclusion (OCSI) have been working with the public sector for 14 years, supporting organisations to use better data for better decisions.

At our core is providing rigorous, high quality data in accessible formats, so that decision makers and key stakeholders save time and money when planning local community services. This could be anything from informed decisions around GP services and travel planning, to providing the contextual evidence for funding bids and impact reports.

Our Local Insight tool provides up-to-date local level data matched to areas at ward and neighbourhood level in the form of maps, dashboards and reports, all in one intuitive and easy to use platform.

We are always on the lookout for shiny new data to add to Local Insight, and we are thrilled to make Big Lottery grant data available through the 360Giving initiative – take a look at a few headline stats over on our blog.

This data from Big Lottery sits alongside more than 800 other open datasets to help:

  • tell a story about neighbourhoods based on evidence
  • highlight need in local areas
  • test perceptions
  • inform strategy

Thanks to 360Giving’s Open Standard, grant-giving data is being made more readily available, and in a format that makes it easier for organisations (such as OCSI) to import into tools for instant mapping and reporting.

This provides a really exciting opportunity to build a picture of local funding streams and service provision. Combining transactional grant-giving data and contextual data of a local area can help to answer some of the big questions: Who is being funded? Who is missing out? Are we reaching those most in need? Are we duplicating services? What is changing over time?

Already 360Giving has helped more than 45 grantmakers publish more than £10bn worth of grants. We are looking forward to seeing more grants data being published – and getting more of the data into Local Insight.

If you would like to find out more about Local Insight and explore the data for yourself, register for a free trial now.

Posted in Blog

Three ways we plan to make funding easier

David Kane and Suraj Vadgama, the team behind www.beehivegiving.org, share findings from their recent user research with charitable funders and plans to put them into action to make funding easier and less time-consuming.


Beehive was set up by The Forward Foundation that understood the challenges of distributing grants, as well as the difficulties faced by applicants seeking their support. Fast forward and Beehive – a web based tool that checks and matches charitable organisations with eligible and appropriate funders – has helped over 12,000 projects.

Conscious of our heritage, and that we think the tool can work for funders as well as charitable organisations, we recently conducted some user research to kick start the development of ‘Beehive for Funders’ (working title). Here are three things we discovered and a sneak peek of some solutions we hope to build this summer…

Ineligible and unsuitable applicants

Funder verification concept from ‘Beehive for Funders’

The Directory of Social Change estimates that ineligible applications made to the largest trusts in 2010 equated to seven years of wasted effort. According to the latest figures from the Big Lottery Fund, 46% of applications to its Reaching Communities programme between May and July this year were ineligible. This pointless exertion is something we want to address through our funder verification system. Building on our user’s favorite features we’re currently improving our system of semi-automated eligibility and suitability checking to solve this problem.

These features use a combination of open data, and funders’ criteria to semi-automatically determine the eligibility and suitability of an applicant based on many key decision factors such as location, amount sought, beneficiary target, etc. It’s the only system of its kind, and the approach is entirely unique as far as we know.

Internal reporting

Funder dashboard concept from ‘Beehive for Funders’

Being able to monitor, report and share information on the performance of funds is time consuming and difficult for funders. We’re working on a simple dashboard to help funders internally evaluate and share details about how well their funding of charities has performed with controls to easily make changes for better applicant targeting.

Context

Funder insights concept from ‘Beehive for Funders’

Due diligence and understanding the context relevant to an applicant can be time-consuming and involve a lot manual research. We’re working on making it quick and easy to uncover relevant insights about an applicant, focusing on key areas of interest to funders such as deprivation and the notion of ‘funding cold spots’.

A key criteria when we embark on the development of new features is whether our solution contributes something new to the problem space – we’re confident and excited that the features we have in the pipeline are unique, and would love your feedback, so drop us a line at support@beehivegiving.org.

Dave and Suraj

 

Posted in Blog

We need more questions to unlock the value of data – #1 360Giving Data labs update

Mor Rubinstein reflects on her first eight weeks in post as our Data Labs and Learning Manager and makes a call for more questions. 

It has been eight weeks since I started my journey as the Data Labs and Learning Manager at 360Giving. Coming from the global open data world, I was excited to learn about the world of charities and grantmaking. What I have learned is that the charitable sector is facing similar issues to other sectors when it comes to the quality and use of open data. The good news is that this sector is eager to learn and to experiment – the perfect place to start a data lab!

The 360Giving Data Lab will focus on building capacity to use data for decision making in the charity sector, building tools that use 360Giving data as well as other data.

In the past weeks, I have been looking at the 360Giving Standard in depth. Our standard is the key to all our work and understanding it can help us to determine the potential uses of open data in the field. I have also spoken to many people across the charity world – from funders to grant seekers, from coders to policy experts.

One of the main challenges is that we still struggle in defining the questions we want to answer with data. Questions and learning are essential for creating new solutions. Coming up with good questions is not always easy though. There are many resources, like School of Data, that can help with creating good questions that are relevant to the sector we’re working in. What’s an example of a good question? Good question! How is the UK charitable sector funded? How does that compare to 10 years ago? Is funding going to areas identified as having the most need?

Over the next few months, we will be looking at what tools we want to create and how we want to develop our current products even further.

So, if you have a question that will help us think about what tools we should create to help unlock the value of 360Giving data, do get in touch. Email me at: mor.rubinstein@threesixtygiving.org

Posted in Blog

When is a grant not a grant…and why should we care?

Julian Tait: Project Lead, Greater Manchester Pilot

During the course of the Greater Manchester pilot, we’ve been running workshops for a broad range of grant giving organisations, providing an opportunity to listen and understand how these organisations create and use data. It should come as no surprise that grant data is recorded in a myriad of different ways using a variety of methods.

Sometimes data is recorded for a statutory requirement and collected from different departments, and for others it exists on a small spreadsheet on a grant administrator’s computer.

These data are an interpretation of the act of grant giving often represented by the language of the individual or organisation. Within an individual organisation these varying interpretations are generally not a problem, but when data is aggregated across different organisations, difference of interpretation can be magnified with a potential loss of context and understanding.

When working on technology projects it is very easy to get drawn into a lexicon of language and methods that assume the world is orderly, precise and logically constructed, whereas the opposite is often true. The challenge with any data standard, not just 360Giving, is that it has to create a framework on which different interpretations of reality can be recorded with certainty. To do this we have to make sure that we have a shared understanding of what things mean.

Within the 360Giving workshops effort is spent on defining language so that people have confidence in using the standard. As individuals we assume that people using the same words mean the same thing but often this is not the case – words are context dependent and open to interpretation – which is great for poetry but not so much for data entry.

You would assume that a grant is a well understood term – ‘non-repayable money given from one organisation to another – usually non-profit or charitable organisation – for the support of activity set out in the terms of a grant’. This is significant especially when we look at the support local authorities give to voluntary, community sector organisations and how local authorities comply with the Local Government Transparency Code in recording grants.

According to the NCVO Civil Society Almanac 2017, Local Authorities are the biggest funders of the voluntary and community sector, spending £7.4bn on grants and contracted services according to 2013/14 figures. The nature of the funding mix is roughly 50:50 for grants and contracted services in 2004, trending to 80:20 by 2014, where the larger proportion for contracted services hints at a complex and evolving relationship. When is a grant not a grant? And when is a grant a contracted service?

The nature of grant funding is changing and often – like a procured or contracted service- it is competitive. There is a finite amount of money available and a successful grant application would need to meet the criteria of the grant funding scheme, going through a selection process that would assess its quality, likelihood of delivery and due diligence. There would in all likelihood be a grant funding contract or agreement that sets out what the money has been given for and how compliance with the agreement is evidenced. Within the agreement there might also be a claw-back clause if the agreement or contract is not met. To this extent the distinction between grants and contracted services is unclear.

The grant or contract dilemma is not just one that is unique to local government either. As more organisations take a multi-partner approach to grant giving, shared and agreed definitions need to be created for not only what constitutes a grant but for the activity taking place.

The 360Giving Standard allows a wealth of information and context to be recorded, and like all good standards it is evolving to accommodate the complexities and grey areas that grant givers face. Adopting a standard to record information in the first place starts organisations off on a journey that should not only make their data more useful for themselves, but also for future partners and organisations seeking funding.

Posted in Blog

NCVO 2017 UK Civil Society Almanac: An overview

Jack Egan, Researcher at NCVO

NCVO launched the 16th edition of the UK Civil Society Almanac in May. For those not familiar with the Almanac, it is a website and publication that provides a comprehensive overview of the structure and economy of the UK voluntary sector. It does this by drawing upon data from various sources including charities’ accounts, administrative data and surveys. I will highlight some general findings below and then dive into some of the areas that are important for grant makers and foundations.

The UK voluntary sector is broad and diverse
The UK voluntary sector is made up of around 166,000 voluntary organisations, it employs a paid workforce of 853,000 people and benefits from 14.2 million regular volunteers. Voluntary organisations operate across many fields, with children and young people being the most common beneficiary group. Most organisations are small and operate locally, however the majority of the sector’s income is concentrated within larger organisations. The sector contributes £12.2bn to the economy, equivalent to 0.7% of UK GDP. We have produced a short video which acts as a great summary and can be viewed here.

The government funding landscape is changing
One of the most interesting findings of this year’s Almanac involved the split between funding from central and local government. In 2014/15, for the first time in a decade income from central government (£7.3bn) is higher than income from local government (£7.1bn). Declining income from local government is likely to affect smaller organisations who operate locally more than others and reiterates the important role grant makers have in terms funding these smaller organisations.

In 2014/15 the sector’s income from government was £15.3bn, representing 2% of total government spending. The government made grants worth £2.9bn to voluntary organisations, however the gap between this and government contracts remained large, with £12.4bn of income from government coming as contracts. At our launch event, Rosie Ferguson (CEO of Gingerbread) noted that commissioning and tendering process is becoming increasingly complex and more tailored to larger organisations. Furthermore, contracts often do not include space for evaluation or innovation which are crucial for capacity building, particularly in smaller charities.

Voluntary sector grant making continues to be important
The voluntary sector spent £6.4bn on grants in 2014/15, with over half of this spending going to other voluntary sector organisations (54%). International voluntary organisations received the largest share of these grants (38%), followed by social service organisations (16%). A relatively small number of grant makers continue to account for a large proportion of grants made. The top ten grant makers account for more than a quarter of all grants made (26%).

Diversifying income sources is key to sustainability
Charities are becoming less dependent on grants and contract income. More than half (56%) of the increase in the sector’s income over the last two years occurred in income from individuals. It is earned income from individuals driving that growth. It now amounts to £10.5bn, representing 51% of all income from individuals. Charging for services or selling new products gives charities extra an extra income source and helps to make them more sustainable in the medium to long term.

This is just a small selection of the information and data that the Almanac provides. Please visit data.ncvo.org.uk for more.

Posted in Blog

360Giving showcased on global Digital Impact roadshow

Last month 360Giving took part in the Digital Impact global roadshow that has been to Asia, America, India, Australia and Europe bringing together stakeholders working on issues related to digital civil society. Here Lucy Bernholz ‘philanthropy wonk’ and director of The Digital Civil Society Lab, who is leading the Digital Impact series, reflects on the London event and how data and digital literacy can deliver democracy and peace…

 

The Digital Civil Society Lab at Stanford University’s Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society is working with local hosts and partners in 10 cities around the globe this year to learn about the shape and challenges for civil society organizations these contexts. On June 16, in partnership with the Data Science Institute of Imperial College the event series came to London. Sixty participants from government, nonprofits, foundations and other funders, digital rights activists, scholars and data scientists spent a day articulating UK perspectives.

The agenda included discussions of digital dependencies – how can civil society organizations manage and govern the digital data and infrastructure on which each sector depends in ways that align with civil society’s values?

Recognizing that digital data are now a core resource for the sector is the first step – singular pilot projects and one-off attempts at sharing across sectors are no longer enough. Several UK examples of moving beyond the pilot were presented, including the justice data lab of NPC, the shared data platforms and tools being hosted by 360Giving, and efforts to imagine new forms of nonprofits, purpose-built for data, such as Civic Trust or Feedback Commons.

Participants from all sectors agreed that the state of digital literacy is too low. Few of us have understood the distinguishing characteristics of digital data or the political economy of digital infrastructure in ways that enable smart organizational or policy decisions. While not unique to the UK, these challenges are of national political interest at the moment, as became clear during discussions of the Conservative party’s manifesto and the role of the EU General Data Protection Regulation, set to come into effect in May 2018.

To the question ‘what is the potential prize for a digitally/data literate Civil Society’, I would say a functioning digital civil society equals functioning democracies and peace. Seriously. That’s what’s on the line.

More details of the London Digital Impact Event can be read here.

Prior to arriving in London the Digital Impact team had held a similar event in Brussels and then they moved on to Berlin. Documentation of the events, including Idea Boards, session videos, and individual interviews is being shared here.

 

Posted in Blog

Dive into data reveals government hit grantmaking bullseye with Community First Fund

The aim of the Cabinet Office’s £30m Community First Neighbourhood Matched Fund was to get small grants to the under-the-radar community projects working at the heart of the most deprived areas in the UK. Did it succeed?

Until this month, it would have been very hard to tell without extensive research where the grants went, how much was distributed, and to understand whether they ended up in the most deprived areas.

But now that the Cabinet Office has published the Community First Neighbourhood data to the 360Giving standard, it has taken me just a few hours to find out how much was distributed, where the grants went, what kinds of organisations received them and if they hit their target.

I’ve produced a short report which gives some basic stats on the grants made by the programme

It shows the largest grants were for £2,500, which was also the most frequently awarded amount – around one in five grants (3,278) was for this amount, with a further 1,171 grants made for £1,000. The average amount awarded was £1,500. Interestingly it tells us something about the life cycle of grantmaking. The grants given by the fund were generally very small: the average size of grant awarded grew slightly over the course of the fund, with a mean average of £1,274 in 2012 to £1,514 in 2014.

And by using Local Authority codes, I was able to link to data on the Index of Multiple Deprivation (sourced from the brilliant opendatacommunities site). This showed that the grants were targeted at the most deprived areas – around 35% of grants went to organisations working in the most deprived 10% of local authorities.

Then by matching to registered charity data, I brought in data on the charities that have received funding. It showed that nearly three-quarters of charities funded say they work with children and young people, and that economic and community development is another key area for them.

The value of the 360Giving Open Data Standard is that it allows for data comparison. How did the Community First Neighbourhood Matched Fund compare with the similar, though much bigger, Big Lottery Fund ‘Awards for All’ programme? Analysis showed there was a greater focus on deprived areas in Community First than Awards for All, which funded a higher number of registered charities. It was interesting to see where funding overlapped – around 500 organisations (1% of total recipients) received funding from both Community First and Awards for All.

The 360Giving Standard is built in a way that encourages making these links. By using common identifiers – “GSS” codes for local authorities and other areas, charity numbers for registered charities, company numbers – you remove the ambiguity that comes from just putting the name of the area or organisation, and it makes linking easy.

The Community First data wasn’t perfect in this regard. There were no charity numbers so I had to add them by matching with the charity register on names – however it’s a great step forward, particularly getting data from a central government grant fund.
This pretty quick analysis shows that data published to the 360Giving Open Data Standard can quickly be used to give real insight into a grant programme’s performance against its aims. It’s worth also taking a look at the official evaluation of the programme.

As well as the report, I’ve made the data analysis available on github as a jupyter notebook. This format allows you to see the python code I’m running, some commentary on what it’s doing, and the output of the code, such as charts, tables, etc.

It’s a great resource that will help with future research efforts – for example by building on previous work like this NCVO report on below the radar organisations.

Posted in Blog

A Question of Geography…

How many times have you said “I wish we knew who was funding what in our area?”

Maybe you’ve even been that brave volunteer who offered to try and pull the data together from whatever other group members could supply – and then regretted it. At 360Giving, one of the many reasons we are passionate about encouraging charities to publish their grant-making data to our standard is because it will make that process a lot simpler.

There are now 33 funders publishing data– from The Big Lottery with 163,000 grants to One Manchester with 66. To show people what you can do with all that information we built GrantNav, just one tool that helps people uncover the stories the data can tell. This month, we caught up with funding and capacity building officers who’ve been exploring how that works.

Dipali Chandra from Charitable Trusts West Midlands, contacted the office for help with using the data in GrantNav to look at grants being awarded at ward level. After explaining some of the inner workings of the tool, we asked her what being able to access the data meant for her work. “It’s about having the conversations we’ve never been able to have before” Dipali said. “we literally used to say that we can’t discuss these questions because we don’t know anything”.

Of course, there are still limitations – GrantNav’s filtering function uses the grant recipients’ address to locate the funding, rather than the project location and many funders haven’t included this kind of information in their data yet. But with a GrantNav data report including volume funders like The Big Lottery, BBC Children in Need and Comic Relief as a starting point, the much-needed conversations were launched.

Dipali also put us in touch with Austin Rodriguez, from the Neighbourhood Development and Support Unit at Birmingham City Council. Austin describes himself as a self-taught spreadsheet wrangler. He pulled data from 360Giving data together with other information supplied directly by funders and compared it with local public sector data profiling the population and needs. From this he was able to put together a report to advise the Partners Investing in Neighbourhoods & Communities group on how they were doing at getting funding into some of the most deprived wards in Birmingham.

Graph showing amount of grant funding by ward created by Austin Rodriguez, Birmingham City Council

Austin was excited by the data because it helped him to question assumptions and provide insights about how well joined up things are (or aren’t). The myth that grants were going to only the usual suspects was debunked by the numbers (101 grants, 81 recipients). Then the data supported a strong correlation between the spread of grants across different wards, and the number of established community organisations in those wards. It also highlighted areas of significant underinvestment, compared to need and assets, as well as insights about dependency on grants.

These are just the first reports we’ve had back in to the office about how data is being used in the capacity building and fundraising sector to support decision making and learning and we’re looking forward to hearing more over the next few months.

Graph showing average grant size by ward created by Austin Rodriguez, Birmingham City Council

If these stories intrigue you, what can you do?

If you’re a bit of a data dabbler – no need to be an expert – you might like to look at our top tips for working with 360Giving Standard data and geography so you can explore some patterns and trends emerging in your area.

Posted in Blog