Round 7 closed for applications on 7th of August and applications are now being scored. The decision-makers are people from groups we’ve funded in the past – and this year also applicants themselves. This was one of a few changes we made to our process in Round 7. 

Why do we take this approach to funding?

We want to challenge traditional charity and funding processes where often the people making the decisions have very different life experiences to those they aim to help.We believe that it’s the people on the ground doing the work, and people from the community, who know best about what the problems are and how best to solve them. 

Why did we make changes to our approach for round 7?

We want to ensure that the decision making process is as fair, participatory and representative as possible. We felt that asking current applicants to read and score applications might mean we would have a larger pool of scorers and decrease the burden on the panel, as well as potentially providing applicants a useful insight into the way Redistro works. 

We also want to make sure that groups receiving money feel like they can manage funds in a way that works for them – which sometimes can be tricky when sent to personal bank accounts. We therefore also changed how funded groups can choose to receive money. If going to a personal bank account, groups can receive money in a lump sum or in stages when requested. We’re also offering groups help with setting up a bank account or an Open Collective account – an alternative to having a bank account.

As with everything at Redistro, we wanted to make sure decisions were being made by people in the community, so we reached out to groups funded in round 6 to get feedback on these potential changes.

Sixteen groups gave feedback and more than 80% agreed or strongly agreed to including current applicants in the scoring process. Groups fed back that it would be a great opportunity for new groups to be part of deciding where the money goes as they have first hand experience in managing and catering for community groups, as well as understanding what is needed locally. There was a feeling that it would give more people the opportunity to understand how Redistro funding works and to learn from existing groups. Folks also felt that including applicants would increase the potential for groups to work together to maximize funding and create interesting projects for the wider community. 

In the feedback, people highlighted how important it is to keep the process fair and to have scorers from diverse backgrounds. This is something we always prioritise and we’re happy that the 38 people who came forward to score in round 7 come from a wide range of groups and backgrounds. For example, just over half of the people who signed up to score are from racially minoritised and Global Majority backgrounds and two thirds describe themselves as being working class and/or low income (13% as lower middle class/ middle class, and the rest were unsure). 

To keep things fair, scorers are asked not to score groups they have a relationship with if they feel that would unduly influence their judgement of their application, and applicants can’t score their own applications. All scorers were invited to a session on how to score applications where we ran through the process and answered any questions they had. 

More than 80% of folks who shared their thoughts also agreed to offering different ways for funded groups to receive money. People felt that offering help setting up a bank account or Open Collective account would be useful for groups who want more support managing their funds, that don’t know how to set up an account or want more training. Many hadn’t heard of Open Collective and shared that it sounds like a useful way of managing money, particularly as it’s transparent and usable for unregistered groups. People emphasised that the option of receiving funds to a personal account and in a lump sum is important, especially for smaller and unregistered groups, so this is something we’ll always offer too.

Any other changes for round 7?

We understand that sometimes circumstances change and groups we have given money to sometimes don’t need it anymore, perhaps because the group stops running. We asked Round 6 groups whether they agreed with a proposal to ask groups to return unused funds, so the money can be given to other groups. Based on their feedback, we’re asking round 7 groups to try their best to either return the funds to us, so that they can be given to another group, or give the funds directly to another grassroots group doing similar work if they stop running and have some funds leftover. 

We also asked groups if they’d like to receive more support, for example, by offering them skills training or setting up a platform for sharing, where groups can share things they need and things they can offer. Everyone agreed this would be useful and we’ll be hosting an applicant gathering for round 7 applicants on the 13th of September.  

Help us to support as many round 7 groups as possible by donating to our Open Collective page. Thank you!