Learning from the DEI Data Standard

The DEI Data Standard is a shared set of four questions designed to help funders capture data on how well their funding is reaching groups experiencing structural inequity. 

It is designed to help identify and target funding so that recipient organisations can successfully address the structural inequities impacting their communities.

We have been a supporter of and a subscriber to the DEI Data Standard following its launch in 2021. A common approach to collecting DEI data from applicants was never going to be simple, but we wanted to be part of it – supporting applicants and the funding sector to trial and implement a joined-up way of data collection.

The Standard itself is relatively straightforward – with four questions about each organisation, its mission and make-up, and an opt-in to sharing the answers anonymously – but pooling and sharing the data across the sector has been more of a challenge than expected.

We’re working alongside 360Giving and other funders to support this data sharing, and in the meantime we would like to bring you a concise analysis of three years of DEI data from our previous funding strategy Bridging Divides, which closed to applicants in October 2024.

We haven’t made funding decisions using this data, but we are using it to understand our own grantmaking practices and our impact. Award rates are set against a context of 57% approval across the whole of the Bridging Divides funding programme – indicated in the tables below.

All questions are optional, to ensure that organisations only answer them where they feel comfortable. There is no penalty for non-completion.

This data only applies to our responsive grants programme, which was open for organisations to apply to on a rolling basis. 

We also invest heavily into collaborative programmes, strategic initiatives and alliance partnerships – ensuring our funding has a wider and more impactful reach. 

The day-to-day management of such funding, including applications, is typically administered by our partner organisations and is outside the scope of this data analysis.

This question was answered by 1,536 organisations. The table shows the percentage of successful applications for different areas of London. 

The responses shows that we have a good geographic spread across London, albeit with more of a focus on inner London (with the exception of the City of London) than outer London. 

While the table below shows approval rates, the areas which have attracted the most funding in terms of value are: ​‘London-wide’, ​‘No specific area’ and ​‘Local area’. This highlights how City Bridge Foundation supports both pan-London work as well as more localised initiatives.

This question was answered by 1,491 organisations. The table shows the percentage of successful applications for organisations serving different communities. 

Organisations supported by City Bridge Foundation work with a wide range of target beneficiaries, with many of the led-for organisation types being awarded at a higher rate than the overall average, and at a higher rate than non-led-for organisations. 

Faith communities are a notable outlier, with only 41% of applicants successfully awarded funding. This isn’t unexpected, as we only support these groups where they offer services that are open to people of any faith (or of no faith).

As we look to move away from project funding at City Bridge Foundation and towards core funding under our new strategy, Standing with Londoners, we are looking to remove this question from our reporting.

This question was answered by 1,385 organisations. The table shows the percentage of successful applications for project funding serving different communities.

Projects supported by City Bridge Foundation cover a wide range of target beneficiaries, with disabled people, LGBTQ+ people, migrants and communities experiencing racial inequity all approved at a higher rate than average.

The ​‘older and younger people’ category is a particular low here, at 28%. It should be noted that currently the Standard doesn’t differentiate between older and younger people on this question, however this is due to be amended.

Lastly, the DEI Data Standard asks whether the organisation is specifically led-by individuals with lived experience of the issues the organisation seeks to address.

This question was answered by 1,270 organisations. The table shows the percentage of successful applications for organisations led by individuals with lived experience of different communities. 

We have approved funded organisations that are characterised by being led-by a particular characteristic or experience at a higher rate than average. 

Notable exceptions are organisations representing educationally or economically disadvantaged communities and communities experiencing racial inequity. 

This finding also came out during our review of Bridging Divides and has been a key part of our equity impact assessment of our previous funding. We are working to change our approach to assessment across eight different areas (safeguarding, finance etc) based on this feedback, to ensure that our new Standing with Londoners funding policy supports diverse groups across the capital to the best of our ability.