Introduction
The contemporary landscape of public sector funding and commissioning in the UK requires urgent transformation to address systemic societal challenges. Traditional funding frameworks, characterised by silos, fragmented resources, and competitive strategies, fail to realise the full potential of local, community-driven initiatives.
The MindKind Projects is a community wellbeing organisation based in the West Midlands. It’s mission to empower communities through co-created solutions is powered by being a people driven, business minded organisation.
The organisation has supported community leaders through our hall mark co-creation methodology to take part in a series of participatory workshops utilising art as a medium to summarise challenges and opportunities in the grant funding landscape. Insights gathered from this series of participatory workshops with 10 community leaders in the West Midlands highlights the barriers faced by grassroots organisations and provide a compelling case for innovative commissioning approaches.
This article builds on the findings from the series of workshops led by The MindKind Projects, as well as UK and international examples of philanthropy, to propose a pathway for an innovative funding movement. Scholars and thought leaders, including Paul Stepczak and Elinor Ostrom (1990), have championed flexible funding approaches that align with asset-based commissioning, long-term funding arrangements, and resource pooling. These methods prioritise strengths-based, collaborative solutions that enable sustainable impact.
Insights from the Participatory Workshop: Challenges and Opportunities
Three workshops were held in between April and December 2023 and attended by ten community leaders from the West Midlands. Recurring themes that illustrate the struggles and opportunities within the current funding landscape include:
- Silos and Inequities in Resource Distribution: Many participants described their organisations as “small boats” with limited capacity to compete for funding against larger, well-resourced institutions (“Power to act, no funding”).
- Short-Term Grant Cycles: Leaders expressed frustration with restricted, short-term funding that stifles innovation and long-term planning (“Grant reliant”).
- Collaboration Barriers: Participants noted a lack of opportunities to pool resources or collaborate effectively, with competitive structures fostering isolation (“Acting alone”).
- Power Imbalances: Larger organisations often dominate decision-making and funding access, creating silos that exclude smaller voices (“Power and resources”).
However, the workshop also surfaced opportunities to drive systemic change:
- Capitated Funding Models: Flexible funding arrangements that enable organisations to plan for sustainability.
- Collaborative Partnerships: Co-powering smaller organisations to achieve shared goals.
- Social Value Impact: Prioritising long-term, measurable outcomes over immediate outputs.
These insights align with the image, where smaller boats navigate alongside larger ships in the same “sea” of funding and resource challenges.
Asset-Based Commissioning: A Strengths-Based Approach
The concept of asset-based commissioning emerged during the workshops as a vital strategy for empowering grassroots organisations. Focussing of assets and moving away from deficits, highlighting the strengths and resources within local communities, enabling:
- Community Co-Design: Involving stakeholders directly in funding decisions to create tailored, locally driven solutions (Bovaird & Loeffler, 2012).
- Recognition of Local Expertise: Acknowledging the unique contributions of smaller organisations in addressing systemic challenges.
- Shared Ownership: Encouraging collaboration across sectors to ensure sustainable outcomes.
Workshop participants advocated for commissioning models that build on existing community assets to unlock potential and deliver meaningful change. The Scottish Community Empowerment Act (2015) serves as a valuable precedent, where participatory funding has successfully empowered local decision-making.
Long-Term Funding Arrangements: Stability for Innovation
Participants stressed that short-term, project-based funding prevents long-term planning and innovation. Long-term funding arrangements, such as multi-year grants, were identified as critical to overcoming these barriers by providing:
- Strategic Stability: Enabling organisations to plan, innovate, and scale solutions over time.
- Capacity Building: Allowing smaller organisations to develop their infrastructure and influence.
- Outcome Measurement: Offering the time needed to evaluate systemic, social impact effectively (Brewer, 2014).
Philanthropy and Multi-Year Funding: Lessons from Practice
Leading philanthropic foundations provide examples of long-term funding models that prioritise trust and systemic outcomes:
- The Esmée Fairbairn Foundation in the UK supports multi-year, unrestricted grants that foster innovation and organisational autonomy.
- The Ford Foundation internationally emphasises capacity building through flexible, long-term commitments (Pharoah et al., 2021).
Participants highlighted that similar long-term funding practices, if adopted widely, could empower organisations to respond dynamically to community needs.
Pooling Resources: Building Collaborative Ecosystems
The workshop discussions highlighted the need to break down silos and foster collaborative funding models that pool resources and expertise. Resource pooling allows organisations to:
- Amplify Impact: Combining resources reduces duplication and enables larger-scale solutions (Smith, 2019).
- Share Ownership: Smaller organisations benefit from collective influence and shared decision-making.
- Co-Power Marginalised Voices: Pooling creates opportunities to empower organisations that traditionally face barriers to funding.
Case Study: Collaborative Funding in Practice
- The National Lottery Community Fund (UK): By prioritising cross-sector partnerships, this fund supports locally-led, collaborative initiatives that address systemic challenges.
- United Nations Pooled Funds (Global): These international models demonstrate how collective funding can address complex, large-scale crises with shared accountability (Bennett et al., 2016).
Participants emphasised that pooling resources at a local level could create a more equitable funding landscape, where smaller organisations are supported to thrive.
Building an Innovative Funding Movement
The participatory workshops highlighted the urgency of reimagining funding system to address public needs. To address systemic challenges effectively, a new funding movement must centre on:
- Asset-Based Commissioning: Recognising and building on local strengths and expertise.
- Long-Term Funding Arrangements: Moving away from short-termism to provide stability and enable systemic impact.
- Resource Pooling: Fostering collaboration to break silos and amplify collective outcomes.
- Social Value Impact: Prioritising long-term, measurable social value over immediate outputs.
These principles align with expert recommendations from Stepczak, Milbourne & Cushman (2015), and philanthropic leaders who advocate for funding practices rooted in equity, collaboration, and sustainability.
Conclusion: Towards a Collaborative and Equitable Future
The participatory workshop with West Midlands community leaders highlighted both the barriers and opportunities within the funding system. By embracing asset-based commissioning, long-term funding arrangements, and resource pooling, funders and policymakers can unlock innovative, equitable solutions that address systemic societal challenges.
The small boats, big boats, same sea metaphor co-created with community leaders encapsulates the shared nature of these challenges: regardless of size, organisations must collaborate and co-power to achieve collective impact. A funding movement grounded in innovation, inclusion, and sustainability can ensure that all organisations, large and small, have the resources and capacity to thrive.
References
- Bennett, C., et al. (2016). Pooling for Impact: Collaborative Funding Models in Humanitarian Aid. UN Research Institute.
- Bovaird, T., & Loeffler, E. (2012). From Engagement to Co-Production: The Contribution of Asset-Based Commissioning. Public Administration Review.
- Brewer, J. (2014). Evaluating Long-Term Social Impact: A Framework for Philanthropy. Policy Press.
- Harrow, J. (2013). Philanthropy, Policy, and Practice. Routledge.
- Milbourne, L., & Cushman, M. (2015). Voluntary Sector Funding and Innovation. Palgrave Macmillan.
- Pharoah, C., Jenkins, R., & Goddard, K. (2021). Giving Trends: Philanthropy in the UK. Centre for Charitable Giving and Philanthropy.
- Smith, M., et al. (2019). Collaboration and Impact: Breaking Down Silos in Funding. Policy Press.