learning needs analysis for funding advisors

8/14/2019 Learning Needs Analysis for Funding Advisors

1/15

Learning Needs Analysis for Funding Advice

Jonny GutteridgeFunding Advice Network ManagerRegeneration East Midlands25 January 2010


2/15

Regeneration East Midlands Page 2 of 15 Learning Needs Analysis for Funding Advisors

Learning Needs Analysis for Funding Advice

In November 2009 Regeneration East Midlands conducted a survey of the learning needs offunding advice workers in the region. 111 people responded to the survey, giving us a rich andvaluable source of information about who funding advisors are and what their needs are in terms ofknowledge, information, skills, and training provision. This document summarises our findings.

Thank you to all those who responded to the survey and who forwarded the survey to colleagues.

If you would like to make further comments on what the learning needs are around funding advice,or to suggest appropriate learning activities please contact the Funding Advice Network Manager.

Contents

Summary............................................................................................................................. 3Section 1: Skills and training........................................................................................... 4Section 2: Knowledge and Information........................................................................... 7Section 3: The changing funding advice environment .................................................... 8Section 4: Delivery of training....................................................................................... 11Section 5: Meeting needs across sectors and roles ..................................................... 13Section 6: Next steps.................................................................................................... 14Section 7: Additional information.................................................................................. 14Section 8: Contact details............................................................................................. 14


3/15


Summary

Aims of the report

With this report we aim to support the personal development of paid workers and volunteers whoprovide funding advice services for voluntary and community groups. By identifying key skills and

knowledge and trends in the sector we hope to help individuals and their managers to makechoices about training and other learning activities.

Secondly the reports analysis will guide the development of a programme of learning activitiesdelivered or promoted through East Midlands Funding Advice Network. We have identified coresubjects for EMFANs own funding advice training as well as additional learning needs that wehope to meet through events and discussions and through promoting training from other providers.

Key learning

There is a reasonable level of training in key funding advice subjects for a good proportion ofrespondents but still a significant level of need: nearly half of funding advisors appear to beworking with only quite limited training. See pages 4 and 5.

Client groups for funding advice training include those new to funding advice, general developmentworkers who give funding advice, and those seeking accredited training to support their continuousprofessional development. See page 6.

We identified support for the current OCN level 3 accreditation for training but a significantproportion of advisors do not see it as valuable for them. No clear alternative has emerged yet.See page 6.

Business advice and the use of web sites and email bulletins are important new areas of skill andknowledge for funding advice workers. See page 6.

EMFAN has support from the Big Lottery Fund to help provide funding advice training but we needto help advisors identify alternative sources of learning to address areas not covered by that

support, particularly web skills, business advice, project management and marketing. See page 6.

Even advisors who have participated in a lot of training still need the latest information aboutfunding and fundraising trends, so we need to supplement training by ensuring that advisors haveaccess to information services. See page 7.

Training is being delivered in a difficult environment, with advisors reporting change that is havinga negative impact in terms of funders expectations, the type of income available from funders, thechanging local economy and most of all the amount of income available from funders. Someadvisors are facing uncertainty about their own future and concerned about their own continuingprofessional development. See page 9.

Next steps

The EMFAN project will develop a training programme for 2010/11 in line with therecommendations in this report and work with other infrastructure projects to identify a range ofalternative training opportunities for funding advice workers.

The detailed recommendations of this report will be integrated with EMFANs project plans.

The project will also share this analysis with the Network membership, with stakeholders includingEast Midlands Funding Forum and with training providers with an interest in funding advice trainingand related areas.

The EMFAN project will continue to research and respond to the learning needs of funding adviceworkers over the course of the project (until 2013).


4/15


Section 1: Skills and training

The most important skills for funding advice

We asked people to indicate the essential and desirable skills required to deliver funding adviceservices, based on a list of subjects. We ranked the results and this gave us five distinct bands as

below, from absolutely essential elements which lots of people said were essential, to additionalskills which were scored as desirable by some respondents.

Understandingfunding criteria

Diagnosinggroup needs

Absolutelyessential

Analysis of projectoutcomes

Researching fundingstreams

Providing feedback

Working withpartners

Successful projectmanagement

Understanding trends infundraising

Essential

Businessstrategy

Working with diverse,marginalised or excluded

communities

Marketing theadvice service

Fundraisingstrategy

Organisingevents

Usingdatabases

Highlydesirable

CoachingDelivering

trainingDesirable

Writing printedpublications

Developing onlineresources

Developingwebsites

Additionalskills

1.1 A few additional skill areas were named in comments including the ability to influencefunding programmes; public speaking and presentation skills; jargon busting and enthusinggroups


5/15


Filling the gaps and getting the level of training right

To assess the extent to which respondents had the right skills for each subject area we askedthem what training they had had, and what training they would like. We broke the answers downinto introductory, advanced and accredited training. 81 people responded to this part of thesurvey.

1.2 Over half of respondents had already had training in five ormore skill areas.

However that means nearly half of funding advisors aredelivering their services with only quite limited training

1.3 Introductory trainingA quarter of respondents stated that they need introductory training in at least five

elements of funding advice.

1.4 Advanced trainingNearly half of respondents would like advanced training in at least one area. However onlya few want advanced training in five or more areas.

1.5 AccreditationWe asked, How well does current OCN level 3 accreditedfunding advice training suit your personal development?

The data indicates a problem around recognition of thevalue of accredited training. While 41% of 83 respondentsare happy with the current accreditation, 37% just dontknow what use it is to them.

Verywell

OKDontknow

Preferdifferentsystem

People needing introductorytraining in at least five subjectsrelated to funding advice.

People needing advancedtraining in at least five subjectsrelated to funding advice.


6/15


1.6 Comments from those who would prefer different accreditation show they fall into twocamps: those who are looking for a higher level of accreditation and those who are lookingfor accreditation from a sector-specific body like the Institute of Fundraising.

1.7 Across the range of skill areas four in ten respondents were interested in accreditedtraining for one or more areas, with one in eight people interested in the top five areas (see

below).

What people want, by subject area

1.8 Survey respondents were asked what training they would like to have at introductory oradvanced level, and what accredited training they would like. This enabled us to identifythe top five subjects in terms of overall demand and in terms of demand at different levels:

Top five for all training1. Understanding trends in fundraising2. Business strategy3. Project management

4. Analysis of project outcomes5. and a tie at five forFundraising strategy, Developing online resources andMarketing

your service

Top fives for

Introductory training

1. Developing online resources2. Web development3. Fundraising trends4. Business strategy

5. Marketing the service

Advanced training

1. Outcomes2. Project management3. Marketing the service4. Trends in fundraising

5. Tiebetween researchingfunding anddiagnosingneeds

Accredited training

1.Fundraising strategy2.Understanding criteria3.Business strategy4.Outcomes

5.Project management

1.9 We looked at the subjects where most people had already had training, and those whereleast training had been given:

Had training already1. Funding criteria2. Project management3. Outcomes4. Researching funding5. Providing feedback

Not yet had training1. Developing online resources2. Websites3. Marketing service4. Diversity5. Trends in fundraising

1.10 Finally we identified the areas where most people said training isnt the answer:

Training not the answertop 51. Working with partners2. Providing feedback3. Diverse communities4. Researching funding5. Online resources

1.11 In comments about the demand for training numerous respondents highlighted theimportance of on the job experience in developing funding advice skills and knowledge.


7/15


Some felt that hands-on work is much more important than training, others that traininghas a part to play. They also cited lack of budget as a reason for not stating their trainingpreferences.

Skills and training recommendations

1.12 Promote core funding advice training while supporting access to training on special skillslike web development and business advice.

1.13 There is a need for provision of an OCN level 3 or equivalent level course covering corefunding advice subjects, suitable for new funding advisors or those seeking accreditedtraining to support their on the job experience. With no clear alternative to OCN level 3,which has a fair level of approval from those who are aware of it, this training shouldremain at the core of the programme.

1.14 Work with trainers, accrediting bodies and national infrastructure organisations to improvethe value and awareness of accredited training for funding advice.

1.15 Support access to training on subjects where few have already had training including

marketing the advice service, working with diverse, marginalised or excluded communitiesand understanding trends in fundraising.

Section 2: Knowledge and Information

Information

2.1 We wanted to know how best to provide information to funding advice workers andwebsites and email bulletins came out clearly on top, then one to one contact with funders,and then network events. Comments showed that that we could have included contactwith co-workers and links to head offices or colleagues in other English regions as useful

sources of information.

Preferred information sources

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Paper bulletins

Printed funding directories

Funding fairs

Databases

Informal networking

Networking events

One to one communication with funders

Websites

Email bulletins

Total score (5 for most preferred, 1 for least)


8/15


Knowledge needs and expectations

2.2 In general respondents reported that they are expected tohave general community development knowledge includingfunding information, not just knowledge related to fundingadvice.

2.3 The questions about knowledge showed 56% agree with thestatement Every now and then there are gaps in myknowledge and I improvise and a further 17% say they areregularly challenged by gaps in their knowledge.

Networks

2.4 Asked about their knowledge of local or county networks, 56%knew of a network specifically for funding advisors and 25%knew of a development worker network that includes fundingissues. More than a quarter of respondents knew of no suchnetwork.

2.5 43% of people who know there is a local or county networkrelevant to funding advice do not participate in it.

2.6 Voluntary sector respondents were slightly more likely to benetwork members than their counterparts in local authorities.

2.7 Nine out of ten respondents working in Leicestershire, Rutland and Lincolnshire wereparticipating in funding advice networks, compared to three or four out of ten in othercounties.

Knowledge and information recommendations

2.8 Learning and development around funding advice needs to target a wide range ofdevelopment workers, not just funding specialists.

2.9 Improvements in the availability of funding information and resources could address gapsin knowledge for a significant proportion number of advisors. The EMFAN project shouldreview regional Internet information services, identify and respond to any gaps andpromote the services to funding advice workers. It should also ensure that its events andother activities provide information about new funding and resources for advisers.

2.10 The EMFAN project should promote engagement in networking by communicating theexistence, activities and successes of networks across the region.

Section 3: The changing funding advice environment

Our survey asked people to tell us how change is impacting on their work in a range of areasincluding their relationship with and income available from funders, their job security, and theneeds of groups and their communities. We wanted to understand how a new learningprogramme would fit with the reality of funding advice across the region.

3.1 Looking at the quantitative data we gathered showed that overall respondents had mixedviews about current change in the funding advice environment, with few clear trendsemerging. However the data did give some significant results.

3.1.1 Almost nobody felt negative about use of technology and the Internet for fundingadvice and more than half felt positive about it.

3.1.2 The scoring around funders expectations, the type of income available from funders,the changing local economy and most of all the amount of income available fromfunders showed significant pessimism about change going on in these areas.

Specialistfundingadvice

Generalfundingadvice

Generaldevelopmentknowledge

Know ofno local

network

Know of a fundingadvice or developmentwork network


9/15


Green show POSITIVE change, orange and red show NEGATIVE change

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Groups' fitness for funding

Groups' needs

Funders' expectations

Type of income available

from funders

Amount of income available

from funders

Funder application processes

Use of technology & Internet

for funding advice

Your organisation's

sustainability

Your job security and job role

Resources to support funding

advice work

Changing local economy

Events/changes in

communities

Significant positive change Some positive change No change Some negative change Significant negative change 3.2 The comments gave a much richer picture of what is going on. 59 respondents made

comments, some commenting on several different issues.

3.2.1 Comments about beneficial change were spread across a range of issues. The onlypositive area which showed consensus was around the usefulness of the Internet ininforming groups about funding, either through websites or e-bulletins. There weresome positive comments about web-based application processes but also somenegative ones about their accessibility. Similarly there were positive comments aboutimprovements in the support available to groups but these were matched in numberby negative ones. Other positive comments were isolated so perhaps not

demonstrating anything significant.

3.2.2 Comments about harmful change were mostly around two areas: (1) changes toavailability of funding and the economic situation for groups, with a third of theselinked explicitly to the recession; (2) challenges around the way funding is structured(not just grants) and funders expectations of groups seeking funding. There werethree comments about competition and blurred lines between the public sector andvoluntary organisations, with detrimental results for voluntary organisations.

3.2.3 Without doubt the subject that drew by far the most comment was the generaleconomic situation regarding access to funding. Respondents also had plenty to sayabout funding structures and funders expectations.


10/15


Analysis of comments by subject

Recommendations around change in the funding advice environment

3.3 Recognise that training is being delivered in a difficult funding and funding adviceenvironment, with some advisors facing uncertainty about their own future and concernedabout their own continuing professional development.

3.4 The learning programme should provide advisors with the skills and knowledge to addresskey issues of funding accessibility, funding structures and funders expectations.

3.5 Identify and promote opportunities for funding advisors to improve their ICT skills to helpadapt to, and benefit from, the trend towards more use of technology for funding adviceand funding applications.

General economic situation

regarding access to funding.

30 comments (28 negative, 2 positive)

Funding structures and

funders expectations.20 comments (20 negative)

Funder and infrastructure

organisations capacity tounderstand community needs.4 comments (2 general, 2

negative)

Support available to improve group

capacity to access funding.7 comments (3 positive, 1 general, 3

negative)

Internet information

resources.8 comments (7 positive,

one general)

Other application

innovation.1 comment (1 positive)

Sense of community.1 comment (positive)

Loan finance and

enterprise.3 comments (3 general)

Other changes to

group needs.3 comments (3 general)

Barriers to successful

applications.5 comments (2 positive, 3

negative)

Green/sustainable

agenda.2 comments (1 positive, 1

general)


11/15


Section 4: Delivery of training

Location of training

The East Midlands is a large region so we wanted to know how people felt about the distancesthey need to travel to training. We asked them how far they would be prepared to go if (a) thetraining looks just OK or (b) the training looks great.

Travel distance for different quality training

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

0-10 10-25 25-50 50-100 100+

Miles

Respondents

OK

Great

4.1 While some people would be ready to travel over 50 miles for training that looks OK, mostdefinitely would not go as far and would prefer to travel less than 25 miles. For trainingthat looks great everybody would be prepared to travel further, with more than half beingprepared to travel over 50 miles.

4.2 We also surveyed peoples access to transport and over 90% of respondents reportedgood access to a car, with nearly three out of four having good access to a train service.

Equality and diversity

4.3 We wanted to identify any barriers to accessing training due to a failure to address equalityand diversity issues. Seven of the 85 people who answered this question reported anexperience like this.

4.4 A majority said that the issue was related to their groups ability to afford the time and costof training, with one respondent saying this is particularly the case for BME groups. Otherissues that impeded access to training included visual impairment, phobia, family-unfriendly timing and part-time working.

Online or e learning

4.5 Our question about the usefulness of online or e learning that people had experiencedbefore drew 37 responses, with two thirds saying that they thought it was either fairly


12/15


useful or very useful. On the other hand 12 of the 37 thought it was only barely useful or acomplete waste of time and money.

4.6 It looks as though there is some reason to explore the contribution of e-learning to fundingadvice training, but with only a minority having experienced it and a minority of thesehaving scored it low we would need to be cautious in developing this area.

Paying for trainingThe EMFAN project needs to decide a fee structure that best meets the need for training acrossthe region so we asked people to indicate what they would expect to pay for half and full daytraining sessions.

Average fee data across all sectors

.00

20.00

40.00

60.00

80.00

100.00

120.00

140.00

160.00

180.00

Half day min. Half day

average

Half day max. Full day min. Full day

average

Full day max.

4.7 The rate people expect to pay for half a day is less than half of what they expect to pay for

a whole day. In other words it appears as though full days are more valuable on thewhole people would pay more for a full day than they would for two half days. Howeverthis does not exclude half-day trainings as a possible solution for those with limited time orresources.

4.8 The results supported the practice of charging more to funders, private sector and localauthority organisations, with voluntary and social enterprise sector respondents expectingto pay only 70% of the fee paid by other sectors for a full day of training.

4.9 Workers on permanent contracts expected to pay 30 more than temporary workers for afull day of training. Similarly, full time workers expected to pay a little over 10 more thanpart-time workers.

4.10 Several comments related to this question focused on the general inaccessibility of trainingfor small voluntary and community groups with little or no training budget, and several saidthat current training budgets are severely restricted due to the unusual economiccircumstances. Other comments focused on the need for quality training that genuinelyfacilitates learning and demonstrates value for money.


13/15


Recommendations

4.11 The EMFAN projects training should consider peoples travel preferences when identifyinglocations. Locally delivered training might make a real difference to take-up.

4.12 Training providers should proactively identify potential accessibility problems for trainingparticipants, seek feedback and consider the affordability of training for small groups.

4.13 Online learning should be considered as an additional source of training rather than as thecore of the programme.

4.14 Any difference between fees for voluntary sector trainees and others should not exceedthe difference in expectations between sectors that is indicated by the data. In otherwords, voluntary sector fees should be no less than 70% of fees paid by others.

4.15 The EMFAN project should make careful use of the data about fees people are willing topay to set prices that maximise take-up of the courses offered.

Section 5: Meeting needs across sectors and roles

To get the training right we wanted to understand the range of organisations and individualsdelivering funding advice in the region.

5.1 Almost all of the 101 people who answered a question about their role in giving fundingadvice are directly involved in advising groups.

5.2 In terms of geography, at least 15 respondents served each of the regions counties, apartfrom the smaller county of Rutland with five. Twenty respondents worked across thewhole region rather than just part of it.

5.3 Asked how best to describe their organisation, respondents were mostly from the voluntarysector (43%) followed by local authorities (22%) and funding providers (15%). Very few

respondents were from social enterprise organisations or the private sector.

5.4 Almost all respondents are paid workers with just three responses from volunteers.

5.5 Nearly a third of paid workers were on temporary contracts. In voluntary sectororganisations 40% of respondents were on temporary contracts, compared to 25% amongfunding providers and 17% among local authorities.

5.6 A quarter of local authority funding advisors who responded and two fifths of those fromthe voluntary sector are part time.

5.7 20% of respondents manage staff or volunteers as well as providing funding advicethemselves.

5.8 When we asked people about the aims of their organisation the leading answer wasimproving the sustainability of the third sector, with a lot of support for developing thesectors skills and knowledge as an aim as well. People also identified strongly withfocusing on specific geographic areas, with roughly half of respondents naming this in theirtop three aims. However additional comments made showed that the respondents aimswere diverse. They represented particular sets of beneficiaries or areas of interest: faithgroups, youth, sport, or green issues. And they didnt just advise external VCS groups: afew supported small enterprises, others gave a significant proportion of their time toadvising internal colleagues or fundraising for their organisation.

5.9 Over half of respondents said the organisations they serve are in a mix of urban and ruralcommunities and nearly a third said their beneficiaries were predominantly in ruralcommunities. Clearly there is a strong need for training that develops skills and knowledgerelevant for both rural and urban communities.


14/15


Recommendations

5.10 We need to ensure that professional development options are available to the significantproportion of people who have a shorter working week and to volunteers (often in smallgroups) and temporary workers.

5.11 Develop new learning activities around the activity of managing a funding advice service,as distinct from the activity of giving advice.

5.12 Managers of funding advice service should ensure that they have strategies to build andretain organisational knowledge to counter the effect of having a high proportion oftemporary staff.

Section 6: Next steps6.1 The EMFAN project will develop a training programme for 2010/11 in line with the

recommendations in this report and work with other infrastructure projects to identify arange of alternative training opportunities for funding advice workers.

6.2 The detailed recommendations of this report will be integrated with EMFANs project plans.

6.3 The project will also share this analysis with the Network membership, with stakeholdersincluding East Midlands Funding Forum and with training providers with an interest infunding advice training and related areas.

6.4 The EMFAN project will continue to research and respond to the learning needs of fundingadvice workers over the course of the project (until 2013).

Section 7: Additional informationTo save paper we have opted not to include appendices which could have doubled the size of the

document. Additional information from the survey available on request includes:7.1 Breakdowns of statistical data by county7.2 Breakdowns of statistical data by sector7.3 A summary of over 50 comments made about the current external challenges for funding

advisors7.4 A copy of the survey questions

Section 8: Contactdetails

Please direct your feedback, questions or comments to Jonny Gutteridge, Funding Advice Network

Manager,[email protected], 0115 979 2333, 07917 088 286

Please note that Jonnys email and telephone details will changeafter March 31st 2010 becauseEMFAN is moving to a new host organisation.. Unfortunately at time of writing the new contactdetails are unknown however emails should be forwarded automatically by Regeneration EastMidlands server until 30/06/10. If you have difficulty contacting him you will find up to date contactdetails at http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=2437071 or by contacting the Big Lottery FundsEast Midlands office on 0115 872 2950.


15/15


January 2010

The EMFAN project issupported by Big Lottery Fund

learning needs analysis for funding advisors

Documents