by Debbie Howitt, Grants Manager
Debbie Howitt
The London Community Response Fund (LCRF) that emerged in response to the Covid-19 pandemic is one of the largest, multi-funder crisis responses of its kind to take place in the UK. Led and convened by London Funders, this emergency funding response was modelled around an approach to collaborative grant-making that had been pioneered by John Lyon’s Charity just three years earlier in response to the Grenfell Tower Disaster. The LCRF saw 67 funders work together to ultimately allocate over £57m in funding through 3,300 grants across themes including advice, arts, food, homelessness, mental health and, of course, children and young people (CYP). Partnership and collaboration have always been fundamental to the way in which John Lyon’s Charity works. Although there are many examples of this in our practice, this piece focuses on the two recent crisis responses that have sadly been all too necessary over the past four years of the Charity’s grant-giving.
In July 2017, when I first joined the Grants Team, John Lyon’s Charity was in the midst of coordinating the Grenfell Tower Children and Young People (CYP) Funders Coalition in response to the tragedy on 14 June 2017 that gave the coalition its purpose. The question at the time was not whether the Charity would be able to respond, but rather how could we use our resources, networks and expertise from 25 years of working within the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea to ensure that funding would reach those who needed it as quickly as possible? It was on this premise that John Lyon’s Charity called our peers from trusts, foundations, local and national government around the table to see how grant-making could be done more collaboratively; so that groups at the frontline of the crisis could focus their efforts there, without the additional stress of trying to apply through multiple different, and often complex, funding processes. The model hinged on 13 funders agreeing a simple, one-stage application and reporting form, sharing local knowledge, funders undertaking their own due diligence, and ongoing conversations between both funders and frontline organisations to ensure the need was being met.
Less than three years later, this emergency funding model was adopted by London Funders, as it convened and coordinated a pan-London funder response to Covid-19 within days of the first lockdown in March 2020. The LCRF’s five waves of funding focused on: food and emergency essentials (throughout), delivering differently (digitally), summer holiday activities, recovery and renewal as we emerged from lockdown. The heroic efforts of the team at London Funders and collective willing, flexibility and dedication of resource (people, time, expertise and funding) by 67 funders resulted in over £57m in emergency funding.
London Funders also recognised the opportunity presented by this funder collaboration to adopt, encourage and share lessons on taking an equity and inclusion approach to grant-making; in response to the existing inequalities that had been both exacerbated and thrown into sharp relief by the pandemic. This included asking equity-related questions, consulting external partners with this sphere, encouraging inclusive conversation and collecting information that would enable funders to prioritise reaching target communities. As a result, at least £28 million found its way to marginalised groups, namely Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic, LGBT+, Deaf and Disabled People and the women’s sector. This is work that has since been adopted into the Charity’s own conversations, practices and journey in diversity, equity and inclusion.
Despite the challenges of the past months and years, what has emerged is a demonstration of just what is possible by working in partnership. If there can be anything positive to be taken from these crises, it is that they became catalysts for thinking differently, trialling new approaches and pushing boundaries in timeframes that would otherwise be inconceivable. They forced us to prioritise the needs of those affected above and beyond the bureaucracy that might typically hinder action. Ultimately though, these partnerships hinged on trust; in both our peers and the knowledge that the community groups on the frontline are best placed to identify and respond to the need faced. The next challenge is how we, as a sector, retain and build upon this work.