Rosa is one of three funders who connected via the Association of Charitable Foundations (ACF) and agreed to work together on a research project. I’m delighted to share what we found out – and what we learnt about collaboration along the way.
I’m one of the co-convenors of ACF’s Violence Against Women and Girls member network. The idea for this research project came about through discussions within this network, where members recognised that there was an information gap that needed to be filled.
As funders, we were already clear about the ‘why’ – we knew just how vital women’s and girls’ organisations are. We had less evidence about ‘where’ and ‘how much’: when funding is awarded in the women and girls sector, where exactly is it going and how much is being awarded? Our research set out to answer these questions.
Rosa agreed to lead the project, partnering with the National Lottery Community Fund and Esmée Fairbairn Foundation. Together we commissioned the Centre for Regional, Economic and Social Research (CRESR) at Sheffield Hallam University to conduct the research.
What we found out
The key finding of our research was that the UK’s women and girls sector is not getting the investment it needs or deserves – and this is putting its long-term sustainability at risk, to the detriment of women and girls across the country.
In the most recent 360Giving data for 2021, just 1.8% of the total £4.1bn grants recorded went to organisations specifically focused on work with and for women and girls. This is a tiny share of funding to deliver campaigning, advocacy and service delivery for over half the population.
Our research also showed that one-third of all grants for ‘women and girls’ focused activity – worth £24.7m – went to organisations with no specific focus on women and girls. This suggests a worrying lack of priority for the women and girls sector. Organisations led by women and girls are nowhere near the front of the queue for the funding available to support the sector.
Not only are the odds for securing funding stacked against them, our research shows that funding awarded to the women and girls sector is not conducive to building sustainable organisations, nor to addressing the complex and systemic issues affecting women and girls across the UK.
The majority of grants given to women’s and girls’ organisations were for less than £10,000. In addition, the tiny amounts of funding are unevenly distributed: micro and small organisations make up 86.5% of the sector by number, yet receive just 3.9% of the total income. In our experience, these organisations often have women with lived experience driving this work, bringing unique perspectives, expertise and insight that can help shape the sector.
Many UK charities depend on volunteers to deliver their activities. However, our research shows that women's and girls' organisations have a greater dependence on volunteers to keep their operations running than many other sectors. While women’s and girls’ organisations make up 3.5% of all charities, their total volunteers make up 6.6% of all volunteers recorded by charities. This suggests that volunteers play a vital role in delivering the critical work of women’s and girls’ organisations.
If you’d like to read more about our findings, download the full research report Mapping the UK Women and Girls Sector and its Funding: Where does the Money Go?
Through the ACF member network, all three funders knew each other before we undertook the project and had already built a trusting relationship.
What we learnt about collaborating on research
We took a collaborative approach to the research project, involving our partners in every decision. All three funders helped to develop the research brief, interviewed research organisations and steered the research.
We also felt that it was important that the research team took an active part in our decisions. This approach has meant that all the organisations involved were actively engaged in the project, and that we could resolve any issues as they arose over the course of the project, rather than at the end. We could also gain a wider range of perspectives on the work we were undertaking.
We think that this approach produced a stronger research report – even if having more people to consult on decisions slowed the process down at times.
We did underestimate how much time it would take to work in this way. For other funders who are looking to adopt a similar approach to collaborating on research, we would suggest that you think carefully about how much time it might take and are realistic about how much resource might be needed to support this type of partnership.
Through the ACF member network, all three funders knew each other before we undertook the project together and had already built a trusting relationship. We think this pre-existing relationship was important in the success of our partnership.
Would we do it again? For Rosa the answer would be a resounding yes. We gained so much more from working closely with other funders than we could ever have achieved as one organisation.
What next?
We hope that our fellow funders across the UK and internationally will use our research to consider how they actively and sustainably support, invest in and commission the women and girls sector over the coming years.
We also hope that women's and girls' organisations will be able to use this information to support and fund their work, particularly as they make the case to funders for investment.
Whilst this research has made significant progress in mapping the funding that is going into the women and girls sector, Rosa’s role as a research commissioner is far from over. More research is needed, and our next steps will be to gather insights from leaders of women's and girls' organisations to better understand the income they receive, their funding requirements and future outlook.
ACF member networks
Violence Against Women and Girls is one of ACF's 15 member-led networks, which offer members an opportunities to connect, discuss a variety of topics and share best practice and learning.
