Sorry I was out of the country without internet so only just getting back to this!
Of those eight grants, six received 100% of what they applied for. One organisation was partially funded because we collaborated with the Strategic Animal Funding Circle and they were excited to partially fund this organisation, otherwise we likely would have fully funded their grant. The final organisation we have been funding at the same level for a few years and weren’t as excited about what they would do with additional funding compared to the other projects we were considering.
In general, our experience is that organisations that are seeking larger grants tend to apply to be evaluated by ACE, as the Recommended Charity Fund raises more money, so usually disburses larger grants and offers more stable funding. As we raise more funds for Movement Grants we might see orgs applying for larger amounts, as well as proactively encouraging applicants to think about what they would do with more funding.
We have started making improvements in our cost-effectiveness analyses, although we are constrained by a number of factors, namely limited team capacity, the volume of applications, the exploratory nature of applications, so I want to be honest in saying there is still room for improvement here.
Thanks for the questions, and do keep posting or email me if you have any other thoughts on how we can improve our grant making!
Hey Vasco,
Sorry I was out of the country without internet so only just getting back to this!
Of those eight grants, six received 100% of what they applied for. One organisation was partially funded because we collaborated with the Strategic Animal Funding Circle and they were excited to partially fund this organisation, otherwise we likely would have fully funded their grant. The final organisation we have been funding at the same level for a few years and weren’t as excited about what they would do with additional funding compared to the other projects we were considering.
In general, our experience is that organisations that are seeking larger grants tend to apply to be evaluated by ACE, as the Recommended Charity Fund raises more money, so usually disburses larger grants and offers more stable funding. As we raise more funds for Movement Grants we might see orgs applying for larger amounts, as well as proactively encouraging applicants to think about what they would do with more funding.
We have started making improvements in our cost-effectiveness analyses, although we are constrained by a number of factors, namely limited team capacity, the volume of applications, the exploratory nature of applications, so I want to be honest in saying there is still room for improvement here.
Thanks for the questions, and do keep posting or email me if you have any other thoughts on how we can improve our grant making!
Thanks for clarifying, Eleanor!