The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #165660 Message #3984535
Posted By: Vic Smith
25-Mar-19 - 03:55 PM
Thread Name: UK 60s Folk Club Boom?
Subject: RE: UK 60s Folk Club Boom?
Vic has pointed out the due diligence that Kirst of Riches has to carry out before putting anything online. That all costs money. No institution of this type will take on a project unless it has assurances that the funding is available. I work for a charity, although not in the arts, and I see this at first hand. I also see how complex and difficult applying for funding can be, the range of outcomes a successful project must achieve beyond its immediate ones, and how many very worthwhile projects fail for one reason or another to be win a grant.
Funding through ACE, National Lottery etc. has become a very complex operation. The application forms run to many pages and is so daunting many people are put off. A newish range of professionals has developed who are experienced fund-raisers who know all the ropes, tell applicants how to jump through the hoops and give the meanings to some of the fairly obtuse jargon that some parts of the of form and advice notes use. Demonstrating that you have parallel funding or financial backing can be a mighty problem. Even if the grant is given the assessment and evaluation at the end - which must be completed before the final payments are given, can be very time consuming. Then if the application is not granted, you still have to pay for the 'fund-raising professional' and you can end up out of pocket.
I have been involved in a number of applications in recent years.
For the first one (with ACE) we had one free meeting with the local ACE officer, than we had a paid meeting with an advisor and did the rest ourselves. We were granted a substantial five figure grant. We asked for feedback afterwards and were told that that it was an excellent application an the detailed links to the National Curriculum in the education section were particlarly strong... but then I was a retired head teacher with such information at my finger tips.
The second one (with National Lottery) failed. It was called "too ambitious". A less complicated application is being prepared but I can tell you that the rejection left some hard working people rather dejected.
The third one (with the South Downs National Parks) gained the full amount of £2000 which was the maximum in that category. However, I was one of the four person sub-committee working on the application and when I worked out the hours the 4 had put in and divided it into the grant, it worked out that we had been working for considerable less than the minimum wage.
Crowd-funding might be the answer as Howard suggests. but I always have misgivings with this direction around accountabilty.