A review of Arts Council England’s Catalyst programme reveals a shift in attitudes towards fundraising but delivers little evidence of impact on the bottom line.
@Doug88888 (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)
A mid-point review of Arts Council England’s (ACE) £68m fundraising programme, Catalyst, has found that there are “encouraging, positive signs” that those involved in the programme are extending their fundraising expertise, trying out new fundraising methods, and developing more effective fundraising strategies. But, the report concludes, it is too early to say whether “all this experimentation, innovation and organisational change has led to positive financial outcomes”. It is also too soon to say whether structural characteristics, like an organisation’s size or geographic location, influence the success of its fundraising efforts.
The Catalyst programme was established to help stimulate philanthropy for organisations wanting “to raise their game” in fundraising. The progress report, commissioned by ACE from BOP Consulting, is based on interviews with participants in two tiers of ACE’s three-tier Catalyst programme and responses to a survey by 143 of the 390 organisations participating in the scheme. The three-year ‘tier 2’ programme aimed at organisations with some experience of fundraising has been running since March 2012, and the two-year ‘tier 3’ programme for organisations new to fundraising since May 2013. Both programmes will come to an end by July this year.
Some Catalyst funding is earmarked for helping organisations gear up resources and build their fundraising capacity and expertise, and the review has found detailed evidence of the extent to which organisational strategy and behaviour has been influenced through the programme. 69% of respondents report greater collaborative working across departments, 85% have piloted new fundraising methods, and 90% have trained a greater range of staff. The rest of the grant must be used as match-funding to incentivise donations, but the extent to which this has been successful at incentivising giving to the arts – particularly among new donors – remains unclear. 88% of survey respondents reported that they had identified and approached new donors, but the review did not include an assessment of the income they have generated thus far, or an indication of the match-funding drawn down so far. ACE told AP: “…we didn’t ask the evaluators to look at the total value of funding raised... information at this point would be misleading and would not take into account the different timelines Catalyst recipients are working to.”
Some elements of the Catalyst programme could be improved, according to respondents, with most respondents in favour of a longer timescale – something that has led the research team to conclude that “capacity building and other types of organisational change are often slower to achieve than Arts Council has planned for”. Organisations’ experience with ICT investments, such as customer relationship management software and crowdfunding, have also been “mixed”, with crowdfunding proving “difficult to make work”. The exclusion of business sponsorship from match-funding was a problem for some, as was the requirement to use match-funding money for additional artistic activity, rather than business development.
Organisations excluded from ACE’s mid-point review were those taking part in ‘tier 1’ of Catalyst – a scheme which offers match funding to arts organisations with a successful track record of fundraising, to help them build endowments that will provide an annual income. 18 organisations have been offered a total of £30.5m, with a total match funding target of £54.5m. They have until July 2015 to draw down the match funding and the evaluation of their experiences will take place after the scheme ends, with the findings included in a later report. A parallel scheme being run and funded through the Heritage Lottery Fund is being evaluated more regularly, with an annual review of each of its grantees’ progress against their fundraising targets. Of the 16 organisations awarded HLF Catalyst: Endowment grants in the first wave of funding, six were ahead of schedule, nine were behind schedule and one was on-track with their fundraising at the end of their first year.
 |