Managing our funding: an update on priorities and decision making processes

In recent months we have seen a significant increase in the number of funding applications received at City Bridge Foundation.

This has happened because of changes in our own funding programmes, changes introduced by other funders, and several years of pressure on the voluntary sector, not least from the pandemic and high inflation.

In order to manage this surge in applications we must prioritise applications which are most closely aligned to our mission. Our mission, as stated in our Funding Strategy 2018–2028, is to reduce inequality and grow more cohesive communities for a London that serves everyone.

New, monthly funding panel meetings have also been introduced as an additional step in our assessment process. The panels compare applications in the round to decide which grants to award.

The panels assess our rolling grant programmes, but not our collaborative programmes such as Propel, or our strategic programmes such as suicide prevention or the Anchor Programme.

In addition to the specific criteria for each of our responsive grant programmes, we will prioritise applications that are:

1. presenting impactful outcomes for targeted communities
2. led by members of the communities they serve
3. targeting individuals or communities experiencing specific forms of disadvantage or marginalisation (such as minoritised communities, low-income families, D/​deaf and/​or disabled people, and other vulnerable groups or protected characteristics)
4. based in or working in one or more of the London boroughs we have been less successful in supporting: Enfield, Havering, Hillingdon, Hounslow, and Redbridge
5. presenting strong delivery plans
6. presenting a strong financial case for support and meeting due diligence thresholds

We recognise that many applications will meet some or all these factors. We will consider each application carefully, and work towards a balanced decision. Based on our available funds, we anticipate a significantly reduced approval rate in the applications we are presently reviewing.

It has been our usual practice to offer individual feedback by telephone to applicants if requested. We regret that due to the volume of applications we are assessing this is no longer possible.

We will return to offering individual feedback as soon as we can.

The most common reasons for applications being declined are listed below.

• Other proposals were more strongly informed by lived experience, as evidenced in their planning and delivery
• Priority beneficiaries were more specifically targeted by other applicants
• Other application proposals were a stronger fit with our programme criteria
• Other applicants demonstrated greater representation of the communities they serve at every level of the organisation’s operations and governance
• Other applicants demonstrated greater alignment with our vision for London to be a city where all individuals and communities can thrive, especially those experiencing disadvantage and marginalisation
• Other applicants for the same programme proposed stronger outcomes and stronger cases for support

We understand and regret that these changes to our assessment process may be frustrating and disappointing. Unfortunately, the surge in grant applications and our available funding means we have no alternative.

We have published FAQs about the funding panels on our website, via the link below. These include advice on how to make a comment or complaint.