An Evidence Review of

Organisational Sustainability:
an analysis of the support available
to VCSE organisations
November 2017
Nick Ockenden, Andrew Curtis, Joanna Stuart and Matthew Hill

1
Contents

Contents .......................................................................................................................... 2
Summary .......................................................................................................................... 3
Implications for policy and practice .................................................................................. 8
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................... 13
2. Understandings of organisational sustainability .......................................................... 16
3. Diagnostic tools to assess organisational sustainability ............................................... 22
4. Support available to organisations .............................................................................. 28
5. The impact and effectiveness of different forms of support ......................................... 40
Bibliography ................................................................................................................... 48
Appendix A. Search terms and results ............................................................................. 58
Appendix B. Diagnostic tools to support organisational sustainability ............................. 60
Appendix C. Funding programmes focused on increasing organisational sustainability .... 73
Appendix D. Forms of support to increase organisational sustainability .......................... 76
Appendix E. The Common and Open Source Diagnostics project ..................................... 94

2
Summary
This is a four-page summary of the key findings of the Evidence Review of Organisational
Sustainability, outlining the key points and content of each of the reports chapters. It sets
out a number of different ways in which organisational sustainability can be understood,
before outlining the different diagnostic tools and mechanisms that are available to
organisations wishing to improve their sustainability and the various forms of support that
can be accessed. It then examines the impact and effectiveness of this support, and finally
discusses some implications for policy, practice, and research. Full detail can be found in the
main body of the report and in the accompanying appendices.

1. Introduction
Aim of the review
The Big Lottery Fund (The Fund) and the Office for Civil Society (OCS) commissioned NCVO
to undertake a review of the different mechanisms and forms of support available to
organisations wishing to develop their sustainability. This review sought to answer the
following questions:

1) What models are used by government, foundations and other stakeholders to support
organisational sustainability?
2) What are the strengths and weaknesses of these various models?
3) To what extent is direct funding useful or necessary to organisations, or are other forms
of more tailored support more useful, effective and impactful?
4) What support and resources are available to the VCSE to increase their sustainability?
5) What diagnostic tools (or other tools) are used to assess sustainability?
6) What is the role of non-financial resources in sustainability?

Methodology used
We undertook a systematic search of academic literature, grey literature, funding guidance
and practical guides, reviewing evidence in English from 2000 onwards. We also searched
the websites of infrastructure organisations, funders, and other organisations to identify
sources of support available to organisations wishing to develop their organisational
sustainability, as well as to identify diagnostic tools that could be used by these
organisations. Finally, we undertook three expert interviews with people involved in the
field.

3
 2. Understandings of organisational sustainability
There are many and varied understandings of organisational sustainability and we have
summarised five different ways in which this term can be understood and applied to this
review:

a) Sustainability of organisation and purpose;

b) Organisational sustainability, capacity-building and capability-building;
c) Organisational sustainability and resilience;
d) Organisational sustainability and life-cycle;
e) Organisational sustainability as a journey.

This review will primarily focus on the sustainability of organisation, but consider it a
journey rather than destination, recognising the importance of organisational life stage.

3. Diagnostic tools to assess organisational sustainability

We identified 56 diagnostic tools that were designed, at some level, to help improve
organisational sustainability. The table below summarises some of the key characteristics
we identified.

Majority
Focused on the overall health of the
organisation.
Free to access (at point of entry).
Self-assessment.
Simple and short, stating that they would take
less than 10 mins to complete.
Online, as downloadable PDF documents
describing the tool and the process and
providing the survey, questionnaire or tool.
Minimal follow-up, at most signposting to
further resources or discussing what different
scores would mean and the action that could
be taken.
Intended to be completed by trustees, the
CEO or senior staff with a good overview.
Aimed at any voluntary organisation of any
size and field of operation.
Minority
Focused on a specific element of organisational
sustainability, such as developing trading activities.
Paid for.
Facilitated/supported, or a combination of online
and face-to-face support.
Involved and comprehensive process.
Online, with direct access to an interactive tool,
which produce a score and/or report for the
organisation.
Bespoke follow-up support, based on the results of
the diagnostic.
For use by staff at any level.
Specific sub-sectors included international
development, criminal justice, social enterprises.

4
 4. Support available to organisations
We identified multiple forms of support available to organisations wishing to improve their
organisational sustainability. These included forms of funding through grants as well as
wider forms of support that was provided through consultancy, training and other
mechanisms. The main types of support identified are summarised in the table below.

Topic of support Mechanism of delivery Cost Selected example

Financial Training Face-to-face Paid for Building future sustainability (VONNE)
sustainability High intensity
Events Face-to-face Both Ensuring the sustainability of your
Overall Medium charity (Guardian Voluntary Sector
organisational intensity Network)
sustainability Consultancy Face-to-face Paid for Strategic consultancy for charities (CAF)
High intensity
Business model Mentoring Face-to-face Free Charity mentoring (Lloyds Bank
(re)design Medium Foundation for England and Wales)
intensity
Governance and Top tips Online Free Introduction to developing a
leadership Low intensity sustainable funding mix (Womens
Resource Centre)
How to Online Free Tools for success (CASS Centre for
guides / Medium Charity Effectiveness)
toolkits intensity
Blog Online Free Reflecting our own sustainability plan
Low intensity (IVAR)
Public wiki Online Free How to support the sustainability of
Low intensity funded projects (NCVO KnowHow
Nonprofit)
Official Online Free Collaborative working and mergers
guidance Medium (Charity Commission)
intensity
Case studies Online Free Merger case studies (NAVCA)
Low intensity

5
5. The impact and effectiveness of different forms of support
The research we identified frequently fails to establish a clear connection between the
intervention and changes in organisational sustainability, largely due to the complexity of
the changes involved and the frequently slow pace of change.

We nonetheless identified four main areas of impact for organisations:

a) Improvements in funding;
b) Changes in organisational structure;
c) Changes in individuals attitudes and capabilities;
d) Planning for sustainability.

Studies of capacity-building and funder-plus initiatives have identified a range of factors that
can act to maximise the chances of the interventions being successful, including:

a) Prioritising context;
b) Sufficient time and resource to engage;
c) Sufficient interest and willing;
d) Managing organisational and individual expectations.

Implications for policy and practice

This review outlines some possible implications and considerations for those developing,
providing or accessing support focused on increasing an organisations sustainability:

Organisations accessing support

a) Think carefully about what organisational sustainability means;
b) View organisational sustainability holistically;
c) Learn from mistakes.

Providers of support
a) Adopt a holistic approach to support;
b) Allow organisations time to engage;
c) Bring together learning from diagnostic tools;
d) Build support around organisation life stage and context;
e) Develop support for smaller organisations;
f) Ensure opportunities for peer support and networking.

Policymakers and funders

a) Value the full range of support options;

6
b) Maintain a place for core, unrestricted funding;
c) Fund support on the sustainability of purpose;
d) Recognise that sustainability may be harder to achieve in some fields of operation.

Researchers
a) Build the evidence base on the impact of support.

The full review

The following chapters will discuss the findings outlined above in more detail, followed by
appendices which include more detail of the evidence we identified in this review. Given the
practical focus of this review and its desire to make a meaningful contribution to policy and
practice, it will, however, begin with a detailed discussion of the implications outlined
above.

7
Implications for policy and practice

Based on evidence presented in this review and NCVOs wider insight, this opening section
outlines some possible implications and considerations for those developing, providing or
accessing support focused on increasing an organisations sustainability.

(A) Organisations accessing support

Think carefully about what organisational sustainability means
The wide range of support that is available to organisations does not mean that all of it is
relevant or useful and there is often value in challenging certain assumptions. Organisations
should think strategically about what organisational sustainability means to them and what
support they require as a result. Diagnostics can be a helpful way of providing this steer, but
organisations should exercise caution around pursuing some paths towards sustainability
simply because there is a large amount of support available in that area. Income
diversification, while broadly seen to be an indicator of organisational sustainability, may
not suit all organisations especially if they do not have experience of developing and
managing earned income streams. Equally, becoming a social enterprise may prove highly
beneficial for some in terms of enhancing organisational sustainability, but is likely to
remain inappropriate for other organisations.

View organisational sustainability holistically

While much support for the development of organisational sustainability is conceived as
financial sustainability, there is value in appreciating it as considerably broader. Factors such
as strong governance, ability to measure impact, or staff or volunteer satisfaction are all
important elements of being a sustainable organisation in the long term. Equally,
connection to the beneficiary group and maintaining credibility and accountability to them
is vital for longer-term organisational survival (as well as having connections to sustainability
of purpose). Pursuing financial sustainability alone, in a siloed approach, could risk
damaging other important elements of organisational sustainability or contributing to
mission drift unless it is understood as being part of the same ecosystem.

Learn from mistakes

Building and improving organisational sustainability is an ongoing process that involves
learning and reflection. Organisations should only take part in diagnostic processes or access
support if they have the time, space and desire to commit and reflect appropriately,
something that can then maximise the potential benefits. While learning is central to the
process, a commitment to making behavioural and structural change, if required, is also
important. This will, of course, depend on the type of diagnostic involved or the support
accessed, as there are varying levels of intensity and duration involved.
8
(B) Providers of support
Adopt a holistic approach to support
As with organisations accessing the support, providers should both be clear about which
component of organisational sustainability they are focusing on, and ensure that they are
considering the breadth of elements that make up organisational sustainability, from
governance to workforce. While there is clear value in focusing on financial sustainability,
the marketplace would benefit from more providers offering support that is wider than
topics such as income diversification, something that is already well-catered for.

Allow organisations time to engage

Many organisations are not able to engage sufficiently due to lack of time. Some of the most
popular forms of support were those which freed up staff time to think strategically about
longer-term organisational sustainability. Support provision, where possible, should provide
for sufficient time to engage, something that could be facilitated through funding provision
to buy out staff time to devote to the topic. It is recognised, however, that this can also be
dependent on the organisations willingness to engage with support, as noted in 6.1.

Bring together learning from diagnostic tools

The extent to which the learning and knowledge within geographically-specific forms of
support (e.g. that provided by local CVSs) can be brought together and shared beyond those
specific localities should be explored as there appears to be considerable duplication
between resources, tools and diagnostics. This review has highlighted, as previous reviews
have, a wide variety of diagnostics in existence, many of which are seeking to achieve
broadly the same thing; something which appears especially true of the health checks.
Rather than seeking to duplicate, there could be value in consolidating and combining some
diagnostics. This should not be at the expense of those tools and health checks which are
specific to a particular sub-sector, but there could be considerable value to drawing
together learning from across the multiple tools that are currently available. This has
already been done to a large degree with the VCSE Strength Checker but there appears to
be more scope for this to take place across the sector.

Certain organisations, particularly those that are larger and operate across a wider
geographic area may be better placed to undertake this activity as they are more likely to
have resource than the smaller organisations who might not necessarily be best placed to
develop them themselves. There is also a potential curatorial role that national
infrastructure organisations and national funders could play in checking the quality of
existing and new diagnostics, recommending appropriate tools from the many that exist.
Smaller, locally-based organisations can nonetheless have an important role to play in

9
helping to localise or contextualise tools as well as providing one-to-one support
throughout the process.

It is also useful to recognise that some diagnostic tools may have a limited life span,
something that can be associated with project-specific funding or when the providing
organisation ceases to exist. Organisations seeking to develop new diagnostics should first
consider the range of existing tools on offer, and combine or build on an existing tool if
appropriate.

We also recommend that anyone with a particular interest in diagnostic tools and processes
within the voluntary sector connects with the Common and Open Sources Diagnostic Project
being led by The Fund, the Lloyds Foundation for England and Wales, and Access, which is
seeking to map the national picture of diagnostics available to the voluntary sector more
comprehensively than was possible with this review1.

Build support around organisation life stage and context

Support appears to be especially effective when it is geared towards a particular life stage of
an organisation and in addition takes into account context: for example, some funding was
directed at organisations wishing to grow whilst other forms of support were geared
towards more-established organisations wanting to explore new organisations forms, such
as mergers or developing themselves as social enterprises. There will still be value in more
generic forms of support (which can also be more cost-effective), but targeted support
should continue to have a place within the overall provision.

Develop support for smaller organisations

While small and medium-sized organisations were one of the specific target groups of the
support identified in this review, evidence also suggests that smaller organisations are
subject to a potentially wider range of challenges than their larger, more financially-stable
cousins. They often lack the resources necessary to develop their own resources, so may
benefit from using those developed by other, larger organisations. While the commonly
used distinction of small and medium-sized organisations having an annual income of under
1m is useful, there would be value in designing support targeted at organisations towards
the smaller end of the income bracket (i.e. for organisations that are completely volunteer-
run).

1
Further information on the initiative, including sources of learning that have shaped the project,
will soon be available. In the meantime, to register interest, please contact ed.anderton@access-
si.org.uk. Additional information is available in Appendix E.
10
Ensure opportunities for peer support and networking
While peer networking featured as an element of some forms of support, there was not
necessarily a high priority given to it. The value of simply being able to speak to someone
else experiencing similar challenges should not be underestimated and opportunities to
bring together staff at all levels, but particularly senior level, should be included within
different forms of support. This can be informal in nature and as simple as facilitating
telephone calls or other opportunities to meet.

(C) Policymakers and funders

Value the full range of support options
While more involved, intensive forms of support tended to be valued more highly, they are
also resource-heavy. Engaging meaningfully in any form of support or diagnostic process will
be beneficial to some degree, and lighter-touch approaches should not necessarily be
overlooked.

Maintain a place for core, unrestricted funding

While funder-plus and different models of support can be hugely valuable, the benefits of
core, unrestricted funding (including full cost-pricing for projects and activities) should not
be overlooked, allowing an organisation to buy time to look at wider issues and have the
space to consider challenges they would not normally be able to look at. Conversely,
evidence suggests that a lack of availability of core funding can contribute to organisational
instability (potentially also contributing to a higher staff turnover and a loss of knowledge
and expertise) and thereby act against efforts to achieve organisational sustainability.

Fund support on the sustainability of purpose

While organisational sustainability has been the focus of this review, the sustainability of
purpose, irrespective of the organisation around it, has not necessarily received the same
amount of attention in the literature or in support provided. While in the majority of cases,
an organisation clearly cannot fulfil its mission and support its beneficiaries without an
organisational structure around it, in some instances the best thing for the beneficiary group
may be for the organisation itself to cease functioning and close well. It would be beneficial
for there to be more support available for organisations who may wish to take this route,
especially that which can support the early stages of thinking.

Recognise that sustainability may be harder to achieve in some fields of operation

Recognition should be given to the fact that in those policy areas that may receive greater
attention from policy-makers (and potentially thereby funding opportunities, or the number
of contracting opportunities or opportunities to develop earned income) may have greater
scope to access support and funding to support the journey towards organisational

11
sustainability (e.g. health and social care or children and young people). Equally, some
organisations, however effectively they operate and however strong their relationships are,
may not be able to sustain themselves and their activities in the longer-term without grant-
based income from central or local government. In order to avoid a bias in the voluntary
sector, in which organisations in certain sub-sectors become more sustainable than others,
new support packages and funds should be developed which recognise and value the
diversity of voluntary sector organisations and that organisational sustainability (at least in
terms of developing opportunities for earned income) is more feasible for certain
organisations than others.

(D) Researchers
Build the evidence base on the impact of support
There is a need for additional research and evaluation of the impact and effectiveness of
different support mechanisms that are designed to enhance an organisations sustainability.
Given the slow pace of change associated with organisational sustainability, impact
assessment and evaluation needs to take place over a sustained period of time (i.e. years
rather than months) when there would be the greatest chance of detecting change.

It is recognised, however, that this is highly dependent on long-term resource which is not
always available in evaluation and research budgets. As such, there would be considerable
value in funders building in longer-term, repeat visits to any evaluations or impact
assessments of programmes focused on organisational sustainability that they may
commission. With regard to the Local Sustainability Fund, The Fund and OCS could gain a
considerable amount of insight by commissioning research to revisit the grant holders and
their organisations 12, 18 or 36 months after the completion of their projects as many of the
impacts identified in the original evaluation will take longer to be seen than the timescale
allows. This could, for example, be achieved through an agreed opt-in process with grant
holders who may be willing to be tracked, something that other evaluations and projects
could gain considerably from.

12
1. Introduction

1.1 Aims of the review

The past five years has seen considerable, and growing, interest in how voluntary sector
organisations can enhance their sustainability in the longer-term, potentially driven by
wider trends in stagnating income throughout the sector and an increasing reliance on
earned income (NCVO, 2017). Equally, there is a wealth of support available to organisations
wishing to improve their sustainability.

The Big Lottery Fund (The Fund) and the Office for Civil Society (OCS) are particularly
interested in the topic, having developed the Local Sustainability Fund (LSF) as well as
having been involved in multiple other forms of support focused on organisational
sustainability. Building on the learning from this programme and others, The Fund and OCS
commissioned NCVO to undertake a review of the different mechanisms and forms of
support available to organisations wishing to develop their sustainability. This review
therefore seeks to inform the wider debate around organisational sustainability and provide
insight to those organisations wanting to enhance their sustainability. It is also intended to
inform the on-going development of the LSF and its evaluation2.

Several high-quality reviews which address organisational sustainability to varying degrees

already exist (most notably IVAR, 2016; TSRC, 2014) and this review has not, therefore,
sought to duplicate such work but has used these reports as a starting point on which to
build. As such, this review sought to answer the following questions:

1. What models are used by government, foundations and other stakeholders to support
organisational sustainability? Including:
(a) Funding models
(b) Advisor-based models
(c) Business partner-based models
(d) Other models

2. What are the strengths and weaknesses of these various models?

3. To what extent is direct funding useful or necessary to organisations, or are other forms
of more tailored support more useful, effective and impactful (e.g. consultancy or
training)?

2
The evaluation of the Local Sustainability Fund is being led by NCVO in partnership with Resources for
Change.
13
4. What support and resources are available to the VCSE to increase their sustainability?
Including:
(a) Paid for support/resources
(b) Free support/resources

5. What diagnostic tools (or other tools) are used to assess sustainability?

6. What is the role of non-financial resources in sustainability? Including:

(a) partnership and collaboration
(b) leadership and governance
(c) skills/capability development
(d) service/business model (re)design

1.2 Approach
1.2.1 Methodology
We undertook a systematic search of academic literature (journals, book chapters), grey
literature (evaluations, reports), funding guidance (e.g. from trusts and foundations) and
practical guides (e.g. toolkits, training materials), reviewing evidence in English from 2000
onwards. Further detail on our approach, including the search terms used, the journals and
number of pieces of evidence identified, is available in Appendix A.

We also searched the websites of infrastructure organisations, funders, and other

organisations to identify sources of support available to organisations wishing to develop
their organisational sustainability, as well as to identify diagnostic tools that could be used
by these organisations3. While this approach was undertaken systematically, it also
employed a snowball approach when identifying organisations. We concentrated on
support and funding that was active and open, unless otherwise stated.

Finally, we undertook three expert interviews with people involved in the field to seek their
views on organisational sustainability and the support available, as well as to sense check
drafts of this review. They were: Myles Kunzli, Consultant at NCVO; Angela Ellis Paine,
Research Fellow at the Third Sector Research Centre (TSRC); and Mike Aiken, Research
Associate with the Institute for Voluntary Action Research (IVAR). We are very grateful for
their input.

3
A wider, more comprehensive piece of work, The Common and Open Source Diagnostics Project, mapping
and examining diagnostic tools and mechanisms available to voluntary sector organisations is currently
underway and being led by The Fund, the Lloyds Foundation for England and Wales, and Access. Our review
will refer to and signpost to this work where relevant, and we have been in discussion with staff to ensure the
two pieces of work complement one another. For further information see Appendix E.
14
1.2.2 Scope of the review
The table below summarises what is in and out of scope for this review.

In scope Out of scope

Acknowledging key components of
organisational sustainability (e.g. financial
sustainability)
The different forms of support available to
organisations wishing to enhance their
organisational sustainability (e.g. training
on how to diversify a funding mix)
The forms of support that can be accessed
in order to enhance the components and
characteristics of organisational
sustainability (e.g. training on how to
diversify a funding mix)
Describing and analysing definitions and
understandings of organisational
sustainability
The actual mechanisms organisations
undertake to enhance their sustainability
and their effectiveness (e.g. the process of
diversifying The Funding mix)
The components and characteristics of
organisational sustainability themselves
and the validity of the link between these
(i.e. an analysis of the link between a
diverse funding mix and organisational
sustainability)

1.3 Structure of the report

Chapter two begins with a brief exploration of the different understandings of
organisational sustainability and how these have been applied for the purposes of this
review. Chapter three then outlines the diagnostic tools and resources that are available to
organisations, before the different types of support available to organisations wishing to
develop their organisational capacity are examined in chapter four. Chapter five then
describes the evidence for the impact of these types of support and diagnostics, including
their strengths and weaknesses.

15
2. Understandings of organisational sustainability

There are many and varied understandings of organisational sustainability, which have been
explored comprehensively in other reviews; indeed, Hopgood and Cairns (2016) identify 12
different meanings in their recent review, Thinking about Sustainability, noting that a
single definition of sustainability does not appear to be realistic, nor do we think it would be
helpful (p.45). It is not, therefore, our intention to duplicate this work but it is nonetheless
useful to summarise some of the different ways in which organisational sustainability can be
understood, how organisations may seek to approach it, and how we have interpreted and
applied such definitions for the purposes of this review. As will be emphasised, these terms
and definitions are not mutually exclusive and there is considerable overlap between them.

2.1 Sustainability of organisation and purpose

While organisational sustainability is a contested term, it can frequently be seen to include
sustaining the fabric of the organisation so that it can achieve its mission and continue to
deliver its services (Hopgood and Cairns, 2016). This includes a wide variety of processes and
practices within the organisation but perceptions tend to be dominated by financial
sustainability, a bias which is subsequently reflected in the bulk of the support that is
available.

A second way to conceive this is as the sustainability of the purpose of the organisation. This
includes sustaining the cause and mission of the organisation and its work with
beneficiaries, irrespective of the organisation's survival as a physical entity, which could
contribute to discussions of sustainability which involve closure and merger. Hopgood and
Cairns (2016) describe this as the continuance of a particular stream of work rather than the
organisation (p.12).

This review will predominantly focus on the first understanding, sustainability of

organisation, but will attempt to view it through as broad a lens as possible rather than
solely concerning financial sustainability. It will, however, also refer to sustainability of
purpose where relevant, primarily to allow a discussion of the wide range of resources
available that are focused on mergers.

At this stage it is worth unpicking financial sustainability in a little detail, something which is
seen in terms of reducing costs or increasing efficiencies, or diversifying the income base of
the organisation. In many cases, voluntary organisations may seek to adopt a new structure
or model of delivery so they can access wider forms of income and move away from grant-
based funding models. Macmillan (2007) notes that it is now an intention of much support
to the sector to help move organisations away from dependency on government grants,

16
stating that implicit to this is an assumption that less dependency means more
sustainability. Equally, Hailey and Salway (2006) describe the growing awareness of the
importance of accessing alternative sources of funds and developing new funding models.

Similarly, diversification of income can involve attempts to increase unrestricted funding to

an organisation, with several pieces of evidence pointing out the importance of core funding
(including full-cost pricing for activities and other sources of unrestricted income) and the
damage that not making this available can do to organisational sustainability:

Over-dependence on restricted funds is an indicator of potential unsustainability and

an inability to undertake strategic planning and development.
(IVAR, 2012, p.13)

'Voluntary organisations identify core funding as critical to organisational stability

and sustainability for a myriad of reasons, including: strengthening independence;
buffering against unexpected hardship; contributing to organisational overheads;
and buying time and space for thinking and planning.
(IVAR, 2013, p.13)

Several studies have, however, challenged, to varying degrees, the accepted wisdom that a
more diverse, and often earned, income is a positive development in terms of organisational
sustainability. It may be possible that pursuing such diversification of income and in
particular earned income, could have negative consequences for the functioning of some
organisations:

It is argued that revenue diversification can increase resource dependencies through

having too many masters as well as adding heavy layer of infrastructure and new
costs to cope with the heavy management requirements of different income
streams.
(Hopgood and Cairns, 2016, p.13)

Equally, in their review of The Fund funding for social enterprises, Social Enterprise UK
found that most organisations did not see 100% sustainability from sales and contracts as
achievable, or at best see some elements of their business achieving this with other parts
always depending on a grant/subsidy (no date, p.36). NCVO also note in their Financial
Sustainability Review that such approaches will not necessarily suit nor lead to greater
sustainability for all organisations:

17
 The significant growth in income from individuals has been driven by fees charged by
charities for services. Relying on this as a major source of future income growth may
be unsustainable or undermine organisations charitable aims in some parts of the
sector.
(Birtwistle and OBrien, 2016, p.7)

Partnering with other organisations is a further way in which organisations can seek to
enhance their sustainability, with many of the benefits again being considered in terms of
financial impacts, particularly in terms of reducing costs (Padilla et al, 2012).

2.2 Organisational sustainability, capacity-building and capability-building

There is a wealth of capacity-building and capability-building initiatives targeted at VCSE
organisations and this review will discuss many of those focused on organisational
sustainability (see chapters 4 and 5). Capacity-building and capability-building is not,
however, the same as organisational sustainability; an organisation that has had its capacity
built is not necessarily sustainable because it has increased capacity. Instead, for the
purposes of this review, both capacity-building and capability-building will be seen as
mechanisms available to organisations wishing to improve their sustainability; they are one
way albeit a common one in which organisations can access support to work towards
greater sustainability. The literature is dominated by studies of capacity-building rather than
capability-building, and this review will draw predominantly on the former (although in
some cases the two terms, perhaps not usefully, can be used interchangeably).

One particular element of capability-building described in the literature, however, is the

development and enhancing of board and governance performance and effectiveness.
While there is a wealth of literature on this subject within the voluntary sector and what
contributes to its success, Herman and Renz (2008) highlight that there is limited evidence
to connect board effectiveness to organisational effectiveness:

Several studies, using different kinds of NPOs and different conceptions and
measures of board and organizational effectiveness, have found a relationship
between board effectiveness and organizational effectiveness. The common
assumption is that causation is from board to organizational effectiveness. However,
only one study to date (Jackson and Holland, 1998) provides any solid evidence in
support of the assertion that board effectiveness is a cause of organizational
effectiveness.
(Herman and Renz, 2008, p.3)

18
Some studies do seek to connect good governance with effectiveness, which while not the
same as organisational sustainability, can nonetheless be interpreted as a potential
indicator of or contributor to an organisations sustainability:

An organization that is administered and governed capably is more likely to be

effective
in achieving its goals.
(Mandeville, 2007, p.293)

While not providing evidence of a connection between governance and sustainability, some
providers of support make aspirational connections when they describe their offer, for
example, the Small Charities Coalitions 'Building Resilience Programme' which states that
'we are delivering a 3-year programme that aims to build the skills and expertise of boards in
small London based charities so that they are better equipped to respond to the challenges
they face'4.

2.3 Organisational sustainability and resilience

One way in which an organisations sustainability can be conceptualised is through its
resilience, and its ability to adapt and respond to external shocks and the frequently rapidly
changing circumstances which it finds itself in; the overlap with issues such as effective
governance is illustrated above in the example from the Small Charities Coalition. A helpful
way to understand this can be by distinguishing between short and long-term sustainability
for organisations: Bowman (2011) notes that shorter-term approaches tend to be associated
with resilience and survival, whilst long-term objectives concern the maintenance (and
expansion) of services.

Resilience and adaptability are therefore important elements of organisational sustainability

and forms of support that focus on enhancing an organisations resilience are described in
this review.

2.4 Organisational sustainability and life-cycle

Organisations will require different forms of support at different stages of their lives, as they
grow, develop, and in some cases decline:

[In order to] to support nonprofit organizational progress and development, there is
a value to considering both life stage and capacity in tandem. Perhaps the strongest
proponent of this perspective is Stevens (2001, p. 53) who argues that there can be

4 This form of support, along with numerous others, will be examined in more detail in chapter three.

19
 no definition of nonprofit capacity without a stage-based approach. Capacity will
look different from one stage to the other.
(Andersson et al, 2016, p.2,868)

Figure 1. Non-profit lifecycle stages

(Stevens, 2002)

Equally, in their study of voluntary sector organisations in the north of England, Chapman et
al (2013) identify the following stages of an organisations life regarding sustainability:
successful and sustainable; becoming more stable and sustainable; stable but struggling to
be sustainable; becoming less stable and sustainable; closed. This connects to the earlier
definition of sustainability of purpose, acknowledging that in some instances the best
decision may be to close the organisation and allow the purpose to be sustained in another
form (for example, through a merger).

There is a considerable volume of literature on mergers, including support material (see

chapter 4), although we could identify no research which directly connected mergers to
organisational sustainability. There is, however, a considerable amount published that
focuses on the factors that could contribute to the success of a merger, with Aiken (2017)
noting that mergers undertaken from a position of strength rather than defensive strategies
have been found by IVAR to hold more promise (p.5), although most pieces of research
focus on aspirations rather than identifying impact.

These stage of an organisations life will be considered throughout this review when the
different forms of support are discussed. It is also important to note that life stage is not
necessarily a linear process in which an organisation progresses sequentially from one life-
stage to another. As figure 2 illustrates above, it is possible for organisations to move
between life stages, something that would further affect the type of support an organisation
requires.

20
2.5 Organisational sustainability as a journey
This review interprets organisational sustainability as an on-going process and a journey for
an organisation, rather than an absolute end-point that can be achieved. This will affect how
some of the different forms of support are described and how their effectiveness is
discussed in chapter 5; in many cases, for example, it is challenging if not impossible to
describe the impact of support because the changes can be subtle, longer-term, and still
taking place.

2.6 Organisational sustainability and this review

Taking in to account these different ways of considering and describing organisational
sustainability, this review will primarily focus on the sustainability of organisation, but
consider it as a journey rather than a destination, recognising the crucial importance of
organisational life stage.

We also recognise that there are various factors which may act as indicators of
organisational sustainability and while they do not guarantee sustainability in themselves,
their presence may suggest that an organisation is more likely to be sustainable in the
longer-term. While it is possible to challenge some of these assumptions (with regard to the
diversification of income, for example), we will nonetheless employ this to help identify,
frame and describe the different forms of support available to organisations. The diagram
below, which is based on Hopgood and Cairns (2016) work on definitions of sustainability
within the voluntary sector, sets out some of these, recognising that this is not an
exhaustive list.

Figure 2. Contributors to organisational sustainability

21
3. Diagnostic tools to assess organisational sustainability

This chapter identifies a range of different diagnostic tools and mechanisms that are
available to organisations to assess their sustainability. We identified 56 diagnostic tools
that were designed, at some level, to help improve organisational sustainability, however,
as will be seen they demonstrate considerable depth and breadth. The majority were UK-
based (47), but some were from other countries, mainly the USA. While this review has
attempted to be comprehensive in its identification of relevant diagnostic tools, it is an
evolving field and as such it is not intended to be and was not able to be a definitive survey
of the diagnostic tools available or an assessment of their impact, effectiveness and usage5.

The tools identified for this review are listed in Appendix B.

3.1 Diagnosis as a form of support

The process of diagnosis is often a key part of an organisations journey to becoming more
sustainable and as such diagnostic tools are frequently connected to other forms of support.
In some instances, diagnosis will precede such support, for example, informing the type of
consultancy support provided to organisations, but in others it will be embedded
throughout the entire process as an intrinsic element. Equally, it can come at the end or
later in the journey, in an attempt to assess any changes in an organisations sustainability
over time. While diagnosis is a form of support in itself and the journey towards
organisational sustainability is not a linear process, for the sake of practicality and clarity
this review describes the diagnostic tools and processes prior to examining other, wider
forms of support which are discussed in chapter 4.

3.2 Aims of the diagnostic tools

All of the tools identified, variously, sought to help organisations identify their strengths and
weaknesses in terms of their organisations sustainability, as well as their capacity and
capabilities, and highlight areas that might require attention in the future. This was most
frequently referred to as a health check, a term that was used in the name of 14 of the
diagnostics identified, particularly in those produced by CVSs.

5
An additional review of diagnostic tools and processes is being undertaken by a group of funders throughout
2017, led by The Fund, the Lloyds Foundation for England and Wales, and Access. We have not sought to
duplicate this work and have signposted to their findings and insights where appropriate, but it is
recommended that due to the more comprehensive nature of their review anyone with a particular interest in
diagnostics should see Appendix E.
22
Most diagnostics had a broad focus but a minority chose to focus their diagnosis on
particular elements of organisational sustainability, such as the governance or workforce of
the organisation. The diagnostics we identified tended to focus on the following areas:

Organisational overview / health check. Most diagnostics set out to diagnose and
assess the overall health of the organisation. They intended to identify strengths and
weaknesses in a variety of different areas, and thus the elements that required
addressing for the organisation to become stronger, more resilient, and more
sustainable. There was also often a focus on helping organisations think through the
necessary strategic decisions.
Leadership and governance. This could include assessing skills within the board,
thinking through succession planning for leadership, legal issues for boards, and
strengths and weaknesses in organisational governance.
Skills / capability development. Some of the diagnostics had a more specific focus on
one particular element of practice within the organisation, such as the Pay and
Employment Rights Services Health Checks which is focused on diagnosing compliance
with human resource procedures. Such tools may be on the fringes of organisational
sustainability, but nonetheless inform important precursors to sustainability (in this
case a healthy, content, effective workforce).
Business model (re)design. A minority of tools had a specific focus on diagnosing an
organisations ability to develop new models of delivery or income, which could help
enhance overall sustainability (e.g. Hall Aitkens Social enterprise Diagnostic Tool; and
the Development Trust Associations6 Fit for Purpose, focused on community
enterprises).

3.3 The design and functioning of diagnostics

The format of the tools varied considerably, from light-touch models (e.g. downloadable
PDF questionnaires that were designed to be completed in no more than ten minutes) to
more involved processes which would be facilitated by an external individual.

6
The organisation is now called Locality but was operating as the Development Trusts Association at time of
publishing the diagnostic.
23
 Figure 3. Variations in the complexity of diagnostic tools

Mode of delivery Online / Intensity Cost Selected examples

face-to-face
Questionnaire Online Medium Free Income Spectrum Tool (Voluntary
(simple) Norfolk7)
Questionnaire Online Medium Free Take your temperature. A brief
(detailed) organisational health check (Clinks)
Interactive tool Online Medium Free GRIPP online (Greater Merseyside
ChangeUp)
Consultancy Face-to- High Paid for Sustainable Funding Healthcheck
face (NCVO)

There were also variations in the extent to which the diagnostic process was supported,
with the majority identified designed to be self-administered and available on-line. Dayson
and Sanderson (2014) undertook a review of capability-building within the voluntary sector
in which they surveyed organisations to ask whether they provided diagnostic tools as part
of their support. While broader than organisational sustainability, their findings nonetheless
complement those of this review, identifying that only 20 per cent of respondents to their
survey said they charged a fee for their diagnostic service, noting that where they did, the
median cost for the tools or services was 500. To some extent, whether or not a diagnostic
was free (at the point of entry for an organisation) may obscure details of how they have
been funded or resourced (e.g. in some cases the cost was paid for by a funder, which
allowed organisations to use the tools at no direct cost to themselves).

Figure 4. Support available in the diagnostic process

Diagnostic Facilitated / Output Selected examples

approach self-
assessment
Involved, Facilitated Bespoke Organisational Capacity Assessment
supported support and (PACT)
process advice
Interactive, Self- Automatically Core Capacity Assessment Tool (TCC
fully assessment generates Group)
functioning tool report /

7
Originally designed by NCVO.
24
 benchmarking
/ score
PDF Self- Self-scoring Organisational health check (Cumbria
downloadable assessment CVS)
survey
Prompting Self- New thinking CC8 Internal Financial Controls Self
questions / assessment Checklist for Charities (Charity
checklist Commission)

Those that were self-administered were often designed simply to start a discussion within
the organisation, but the results of even quite simple tools could nonetheless be used by
infrastructure bodies (especially CVSs) or funders to inform the support they could provide
to the organisation.

3.4 Description of provider

Diagnostics were mainly provided by the following types of organisation:

Local infrastructure organisations (e.g. CVSs). This was the most common individual type
of provider. These tended to be described as health checks and were at the shorter end
of the spectrum. Dayson and Sanderson (2014) note that the health checks they
identified as part of their review of capability-building in the voluntary sector were more
likely to be provided by small and medium-sized organisations than by larger ones; while
they did not explicitly discuss whether they were provided by infrastructure
organisations, most of these organisations are likely to fit within the small and medium-
sized income bracket. The health checks identified in this review were also often
connected to follow-on support, using the results of the diagnosis to target support to
member organisations operating within their area. The content and process of the
diagnostic itself, however, did not appear to be area-specific and there were commonly
elements of overlap between different diagnostic tools.
National infrastructure bodies. NCVO was the individual organisation that provided the
greatest number of diagnostic tools and resources, likely representing the breadth of its
remit as a national body, but sector-specific bodies such as Social Enterprise Works8 also
offered a large number.
Funders and grant-makers, typically who had funding or research programmes that
specifically supported organisational sustainability within the voluntary sector (e.g. The

8
Social Enterprise Works ceased trading on the 31st March 2017. The diagnostic tool is, however, still available
at http://www.socialenterpriseworks.org/benchmarking/?page_id=7 and has therefore been included within
this review.
25
 Fund, Northern Rock Foundation).

3.5 Longevity of diagnostic tools

The diagnostic tools identified in this review are active and open for use. They range in age
from having been established within the past 12 months to as early as 2009. While it is not
possible to comment on the extent to which these diagnostics will have a long life, an earlier
and comprehensive review of voluntary sector health checks by Ellis and Gregory (2009)
identified 18 live diagnostics, of which only two now appear active. This is not necessarily
unusual in that the authors also identified 19 tools that were no longer in existence at the
time of their review, suggesting a possible regular turnover of such diagnostics. This can be
partly attributed to the fact that some of the providing organisations identified in the 2007
review are no longer in existence, either through closure or merger. It may also be the case
that some diagnostics are limited by project funding or have a deliberate time-limited
lifespan, although Ellis and Gregory go on to describe often ambitious plans to expand and
embed the diagnostics, something which appears not to have happened in the longer term.
Indeed, the authors disappointingly note that one of the striking findings of the study is the
number of tools that were either never convincingly used after their development and
piloting, or which have fallen into disuse (p.27).

3.6 Characteristics of diagnostic tools

The table below describes some of the dominant characteristics of the diagnostics
identified.

26
 Figure 5. Characteristics of diagnostic tools
Majority
Focused on the overall health of the
organisation.
Free to access (at point of entry).
Self-assessment (e.g. Localitys Early Warning
Guide).
Simple and short, stating that they would take
less than 10 mins to complete (e.g. the GRIPP
tool).
Online, as downloadable PDF documents
describing the tool and the process and
providing the survey, questionnaire or tool.
Minimal follow-up, at most signposting to
further resources or discussing what different
scores would mean and the action that could
be taken.
Intended to be completed by trustees, the
CEO or senior staff with a good overview.
Aimed at any voluntary organisation of any
size and field of operation.
Minority
Focused on a specific element of
organisational sustainability, such as
developing trading activities (e.g. Hall
Aitkens Social enterprise Diagnostic
Tool).
Paid for.
Facilitated/supported, or a combination of
online and face-to-face support (e.g.
NCVOs Sustainable Funding Check).
Involved and comprehensive process (e.g.
NCVOs PQASSO standard).
Online, with direct access to an interactive
tool (e.g. Mckinseys Organisational
Capacity Assessment tool), which produce
a score and/or report for the organisation.
Bespoke follow-up support, based on the
results of the diagnostic (e.g. local CVSs for
member organisations within their
locality).
For use by staff at any level.
Specific sub-sectors included international
development (e.g. BONDs health check),
criminal justice (e.g. Clinks Take Your
Temperature), or social enterprises.
27
4. Support available to organisations

We identified multiple forms of support available to organisations wishing to improve their

organisational sustainability, including those provided by government, foundations, and
other stakeholders. These included forms of funding through grants as well as wider forms
of support that was provided through consultancy, training and other mechanisms. In this
chapter, we report on active, open forms of support but where relevant may refer to
recently closed forms of support.

This chapter is split into two sections, the first of which discusses the different types of
direct grant funding available to facilitate organisational sustainability, and the second
describes the different forms and types of support for organisations seeking to build their
sustainability, that are wider than the provision of grants or loans. As will be seen there can
be, however, considerable blurring between these two forms of support. This overlap can
be quite deliberate, in the case of funder plus models, for example, which provide forms of
support such as consultancy alongside a financial investment. Furthermore, there can be a
clear financial value to non-financial forms of support, such as the time and resources
required to develop and provide consultancy. Equally, wider forms of support can often
have a direct cost attached to it, such as for a training course. While no distinction is perfect,
it has been necessary for this review and connections between the two categories will be
highlighted where useful and relevant. The diagram below illustrates some of these
connections, including highlighting the contribution of diagnosis in helping to inform and
steer funding and support. The proportion size of the circles nominally represents the
volume identified, with more sources of support identified than direct funding.

28
Figure 6. Relationships between diagnosis, funding and support to help build organisational sustainability

4.1 Funding to build organisational sustainability

4.1.1 Direct funding
A limited number (11) of open funding programmes explicitly focused on organisational
sustainability were identified9. A further seven were identified that had a specific focus on
sustainability but that had recently closed. A list of the funds identified can be seen in
Appendix C.

The Fund was the single biggest funder observed, although much of its focus of the
programmes identified appeared to be on supporting organisations to move into the social
investment field10 (which could be seen as one way in which to increase organisational
sustainability, noted in section 2.3), and the Esmee Fairburn Foundation and the City Bridge
Trust also had several relevant funding streams. Of the 11 programmes identified, most had
some form of restrictions on who could apply although these were mostly associated with
organisational income; four had geographic restrictions (organisations in Cumbria and
London), one was restricted to independent museums, and one to community businesses.

9 Many currently active funds have an interest in project sustainability (for example prioritising applications

who can demonstrate that their project could be sustainable after funding comes to an end) or organisational
sustainability (i.e. many want a certain degree of organisational stability before they will consider funding), but
this remains secondary to their primary purpose which is to support a particular cause or project. Such funding
programmes have not, therefore been included in this review.
10
This does not necessarily reflect the focus of The Fund as an entire funder.
29
The focus of the funding identified can be broken down into three categories:

1. Overall organisational sustainability. This tended to be focused on the overall

sustainability of the organisations involved, for example with Esmee Fairbairn
Foundations AIM Sustainability Grant scheme, focused on independent museums, which
states its intention as being to help medium and smaller sized AIM [Association of
Independent Museums] members to improve their medium and long-term sustainability.
The language used by funders in the descriptions of their programmes suggests there are
two overall objectives, which are not necessarily mutually exclusive:
(a) Strengthen and grow organisations, as with Lloyds Bank Foundation's 'Enable Grants'
which aim to 'put charities in a stronger position to better deliver services and attract
funding and Francis Scott Charitable Trusts Step Change Grants which saw
themselves as 'an accelerator of existing potential'.
(b) Build resilience within the grantees, for example, 'to better equip individuals and
organisations for the challenges ahead' (Francis Scott Charitable Trust).

2. Support for mergers (e.g. Esmee Fairbairn Foundation which provides up to 15K for
merger planning costs). While this tended not to be discussed explicitly in the context of
developing organisational sustainability and was often targeted at organisations which
had already made a conscious decision to at least explore a merger or who were
considerably down the path to merger, it nonetheless connects the definition of
sustainability of purpose (see section 2.1).

3. Support for developing and designing new business models, including social investment
start-up (e.g. Esmee Fairbairn Foundations Social Investment work; City Bridge Trusts
Social Investment Fund; and The Funds Big Potential Fund) or community business start-
up (e.g. Localitys Bright Ideas Fund). This appears to be designed to give organisations
the space and money necessary to try something new, as well as consult with their
beneficiary groups. Such forms of support are often framed within the understanding
that new business models may facilitate access to new forms of income and the finances
of the organisation to become diversified.

The size of grants tended to vary, frequently according to the focus of the funding: those
aimed at supporting the transition to new funding models (e.g. social investment) tended to
be for larger sums (e.g. above 100K), perhaps reflecting that larger organisations are more
likely to be in this position, whilst many of the other funds were for amounts of money less
than 20K and could often be specifically targeted at smaller organisations.

30
4.1.2 Funder-plus models
All but one of the active funding programmes provided only funding. Locality's Bright Idea
Fund, adopted a funder-plus model, which 'aims to give your community group the support
and tools to start setting up a community business' and involves grants of up to 20K plus 15
days of tailored support. The funder-plus approach was also seen in four of the recently
closed programmes, which involved various wider forms of support (most typically
consultant-based advice and guidance). This suggests, at least with regard to the funding of
organisational sustainability, a potential shift in the focus of funders away from a funder-
plus models towards direct grant provision although it is not possible to say with any
certainty whether this is a broader trend.

The different components of a funder-plus approach, including consultancy and other forms
of support, will be examined more fully in the following section.

4.2 Support to build organisational sustainability

This section describes the various wider forms of support available to voluntary sector
organisations and the different models and approaches used to promote organisational
sustainability, but also includes support available to other forms of organisations in some
instances (e.g. social enterprises). It also references some forms of support that have very
recently come to an end (such as those connected with project funding) as they nonetheless
demonstrate the range of support on offer or has at some time been on offer, and in some
cases are still accessible to organisations11.

We adopted a deliberately broad approach when searching for forms of support and have
subsequently identified considerable depth and breadth to what is available, finding over
100 different types of support and resources. Some are explicitly focused on organisational
sustainability as the sole objective of the support, whilst others have a more peripheral
interest in sustainability, with the intensity and duration of the support also varying
considerably. This section will present selected examples from those we identified but the
full list is available in Appendix D.

The table below summarises the different types of support available to organisations
wishing to build their sustainability, and seeks to categorise them according to a range of
characteristics. Each of these elements will be discussed in turn in further detail after the
table.

11
This section focuses on support provided by organisations, rather than that provided by individuals who may
be acting as independent sole traders.
31
 Figure 7. A summary of the main types and characteristics of support available

Topic of support Mechanism of delivery Cost Selected example

Financial Training Face-to-face Paid for Building future sustainability
sustainability High intensity (VONNE)
Events Face-to-face Both Ensuring the sustainability of your
Overall Medium charity (Guardian Voluntary
organisational intensity Sector Network)
sustainability Consultancy Face-to-face Paid for Strategic consultancy for charities
High intensity (CAF)
Business model Mentoring Face-to-face Free Charity mentoring (Lloyds Bank
(re)design Medium Foundation for England and
intensity Wales)
Governance and Top tips Online Free Introduction to developing a
leadership Low intensity sustainable funding mix
(Womens Resource Centre)
How to Online Free Tools for success (CASS Centre for
guides / Medium Charity Effectiveness)
toolkits intensity
Blog Online Free Reflecting our own sustainability
Low intensity plan (IVAR)
Public wiki Online Free How to support the sustainability
Low intensity of funded projects (NCVO
KnowHow Nonprofit)
Official Online Free Collaborative working and
guidance Medium mergers (Charity Commission)
intensity
Case studies Online Free Merger case studies (NAVCA)
Low intensity

4.2.1 Topic of support

Expanding on this table, the most common thematic areas observed were:

1. Financial sustainability
This was the most common way in which organisational sustainability was observed within
the different examples of support. Providers of support, however, often sought to make
clear that this is not simply about achieving more money, but about a new strategic
approach in which income is diversified and more reliable in the longer term, allowing

32
organisations to exist more sustainably and have a greater impact in the longer-term12.
Examples included:

a) Income diversification (e.g. NCVOs Income Spectrum: Helping You Find the Right
Income Mix).
b) Use of reserves (e.g. CFGs Beyond reserves. How charities can make their reserves
work harder).
c) Impact measurement (e.g. NPC and partners Impact measurement programme).

2. Overall organisational sustainability

There are multiple resources that have a broad focus on organisational sustainability as a
broad concept, and they do not tend to focus specifically on one particular element,
including support which sought to:

a) Build a successful organisation (e.g. DSCs Building a successful organisation workshop

which states its aim as being to help build organisational success and sustainability).
b) Encourage and facilitate growth (e.g. support provided by the Northern Rock
Foundation13 or the Francis Scott Charitable Trusts Step Change consultancy; this is still
discussed within the context of organisational sustainability but many commentators
stress that sustainability is not simply about growing the size of an organisation).
c) Building organisational resilience and managing change (or surviving, particularly
focused on addressing or coping with the many challenges voluntary sector
organisations can face, for example the Small Charities Coalitions Building Resilience
Programme or NCVOs KnowHow Nonprofit How to be resilient).
d) Some forms of support could be focused on the sustainability of projects, as opposed to
the organisation themselves (e.g. The Funds Thematic review of project sustainability).
e) Strategic planning. (e.g. NPCs Reviewing and improving your charity's strategy training
day). While some support was provided here, it is perhaps on the fringes of
organisational sustainability: while good strategic planning is taken to be an important
element of sustainability, it is considerably broader than the focus of this review.

3. Business model (re)design

This included three main elements:

a) Merger, collaboration and closure. Given current interest in mergers within the sector,

12
This review has deliberately not included forms of support which are focused on fundraising more generally.
13
While the Northern Rock Foundation ceased to exist in 2016 some of the support it provided is still relevant
to organisational sustainability and will therefore be referenced as the Northern Rock Foundation within this
review. It is discussed in the present tense because these examples of support are still publicly available.
33
 there are a reasonable number of resources aiming to help organisations take this path
if they choose. While some of these resources could provide information at an
introductory level, most appeared to be geared towards organisations who had already
decided merger was a serious option or were already advanced in discussions with
potential partners. Examples include: the Charity Commissions guidance on
Collaborative working and mergers; and the Small Charities Coalitions courses on
Mergers and closing down courses.
b) New/different forms of income (e.g. social investment, social impact bonds, community
assets). Closely connected to income diversification, various forms of support are aimed
at helping organisations build new, non-traditional forms of funding. Such approaches
are clearly not suited to all organisations as the support frequently makes clear, but
there is an implicit assumption that accessing these new, different models can help
make organisations more sustainable by reducing reliance on (less sustainable and less
diverse) forms of funding such as grants. These resources, however, do not tend to
present themselves with explicit reference to organisational sustainability itself.
Examples identified included: The Funds Social investment explained; and Localitys
Community ownership and assets webinar).
c) Partnership and collaboration (not including merger). Mainly toolkits, these were
designed to help organisations work together effectively. Many were designed by and
geared for local authority working, but several were specific to the voluntary sector
(e.g. KnowHow Nonprofits Partnership governance framework and toolkit and
Compact Voices Partnership working toolkit).

4. Governance and leadership

For example, the Small Charities Coalitions Building Resilience Programme which while
addressing resilience, is specifically targeted at building the capabilities of trustees.

4.2.2 Mechanism of delivery

The main ways in which the different examples of support were available and delivered can
be categorised as follows:

(a) Training, courses, events and workshops

These primarily face-to-face forms of support can range from half days or full day sessions
(e.g. The Cranfield Trusts masterclass series on business planning and financial planning) to
multiple days (e.g. VONNEs Building Future Sustainability project which involved two five-
day sessions).

34
(b) Consultancy
This tended to be tailored to the individual needs of the organisation accessing support and
was frequently charged-for (with the exception of that provided as part of grant-funding,
see 4.2.3). It is also at the more comprehensive end of the spectrum, but was in general
provided by the larger organisations (e.g. NCVO, CAF, NPC).

(c) Mentoring
In one case, Lloyds Bank Foundations Charity Mentoring programme, members of the
charity are matched up with employees of Lloyds Bank to help the charity operate more
effectively and/or respond to any challenges it faces. This was also one of the few forms of
support we identified that directly drew on the skills and experience of business partners.

(d) Guidance and information

This mainly included how to guides, official guidance, blogs, wikis, top tips, and information
sheets. It could also include the findings from research reports and evaluations. While not a
direct form of support, the learning can nonetheless be used by organisations, for example,
Charity Finance Group research report, Do mergers in the voluntary sector provide financial
stability for the newly formed organisations? In other cases research on wider topics may
refer to issues of sustainability and how it can be achieved (e.g. past research by the North
Rock Foundation on the range of challenges facing voluntary sector organisations in the
north of England).

(e) Case studies

Practical examples were often given (e.g. NAVCA case studies of organisations merging) as a
standalone resource or as part of reports, publications and tools.

The vast majority of support is available online, primarily as downloadable guidance or

reports, but some online courses are also provided. Some forms of support combine online
and face-to-face, sometimes with an initial online stage followed by a more comprehensive
face-to-face follow-up (e.g. NCVOs Certificate in Sustainable Funding). These models tend
to be more comprehensive and paid-for (see below). This approach is also seen with
dedicated support-based projects, such as High Peak CVS Sustain project, which offers a
variety of downloadable online resources as well as face-to-face guidance and advice.

Face-to-face forms of support tend to describe themselves as more tailored to the individual
organisations needs, and are therefore frequently based on a consultancy, paid-for model
(e.g. NCVOs Sustainable Funding Health Check) but can also include training sessions, half
and full days.

35
4.2.3 Cost
We observed several different cost-based models for the support provided:

(a) Free to all

The vast majority of support offered has no charge attached and can be freely downloaded
from the organisations website. The free support is dominated by online resources but
some face-to-face support is also free (typically that provided by voluntary sector
infrastructure bodies) or includes minimal costs (e.g. The Cranfield Trusts management
consultancy which asks participants to cover volunteer expenses).

(b) Free to members

A large number of resources are free to access for the members of those organisations (e.g.
NCVOs StudyZone videos). The cost to non-members was often fairly minimal (e.g. many of
NCVOs KnowHow NonProfit support information is 8.99 to access).

(c) Free to partners / grant recipients

Using the funder-plus model, some support can only be accessed by those who are in
receipt of funding from the support provider.

(d) Charged-for
This tends to be the face-to-face support and that which is often based on a consultancy
model, but also includes training and events. It is frequently more comprehensive in nature
and can take place over an extended period. Prices tend to vary considerably dependent on
the nature of the support provided, the size (income) of the organisation (ranging from
8.99 for online information to just under 1,950 for NCVOs Sustainable Funding Health
Check, which involves face-to-face consultancy with the organisation), and whether or not
they are members of the provider. There are also some forms of face-to-face support that
are charged for but at a nominal rate, with the provider meeting its costs primarily through
external grant funding (e.g. VONNEs Building Future Sustainability Training event, which is
funded by the Esmee Fairbairn Foundation, the Garfield Weston Foundation, and the
Community Foundation for Tyne and Wear).

While this review has not been able to examine changes in trends of charging over time,
Dayson and Sanderson's (2014) study of capability-building provision in the voluntary sector
provides some useful insight. While considerably broader than organisational sustainability,
their online survey of providers found that 'charging for support was the most commonly
identified main income source and the income source respondents said was most likely to
increase in the future' (p.5). The authors note this is likely to be because a continued decline
in statutory funding for support provision, something that could help to explain the

36
providers we identified that offered support as means to generate income for their own
organisations.

4.2.4 Target audience

While most of the support was aimed at voluntary organisations of any field of operation
and of any size, there were some important exceptions to this, including:

(a) Small and medium-sized organisations

Particularly those organisations with an annual income under 1m (e.g. support provided by
Lloyds Bank Foundation for England and Wales and the Small Charities Coalition), with
support providers noting that smaller organisations face entrenched challenges within the
current environment (this relates particularly to intentions around issues of resilience).
There remains, however, a wide range of sizes of organisations within the income bracket
up to 1m, with many very small, or volunteer-led groups experiencing very different
challenges to organisations closer to the upper bracket. While much of the support provided
through CVSs will be geared towards smaller organisations, there appears to be little that is
specific to very small, or micro organisations.

(b) Geographic restrictions

Some of the support is designed and provided by organisations with a particular geographic
focus (e.g. local CVSs) but even these tended not to be specific to the locality in their
content and could, in theory, be largely used by an organisation in any area. However, while
such support could often be accessed anywhere (in the case of online support), face-to-face
supported provided by geographically specific organisations tended only to be available to
organisations within those areas or regions, often who need to be members.

(c) Sub-sectors
Some (although a minority) of support is targeted at specific fields of operation (e.g.
international development) or particular types of organisation (e.g. social enterprises).

(d) Senior staff, CEO, and trustees

While the majority of the support could be used by staff of any level, some was specifically
designed for the most senior staff and in particular trustees, particularly that which was
focused on developing financial sustainability within organisations (e.g. NCVOs Financial
Intelligence for Trustees training day).

4.2.5 Provider
While a wide range of support providers were identified, these were dominated by two
organisations: NCVO and The Fund. In the case of NCVO, this was partially because of the

37
wide range of support it offers through KnowHow Nonprofit and Funding Central. The Fund,
on the other hand, provided most of its support more indirectly, primarily through
information provision in reports. Infrastructure organisations (e.g. NCVO, CVSs, Locality,
NAVCA) were the single largest group of providers of support, but grant-makers (e.g. The
Fund, Lloyds Bank Foundation, the Northern Rock Foundation) also made up a significant
number (see Appendix D for more detail).

Many providers, namely the CVSs, had a local or regional remit (these tended to provide
free, high-level, short online documents), but the majority were national or did not have a
specific focus. As has been discussed, even with local providers, the support was not always
limited to the area or region within which the provider operated.

Most providers were within the voluntary sector but there were several private sector
organisations offering different forms of support, often in partnership with a trust or
foundation (e.g. the Lloyds Bank Foundation for England and Wales Charity Mentoring, in
which charities staff are matched with bank employees; and the Cranfield Trusts Business
Planning for Social Investment Masterclass, which is delivered jointly with Deloitte).

4.2.6 Gaps in the provision of support

The diversity of forms of support available to organisations represents the range of
challenges organisations face in their journey to become more sustainable, as well as the
range of definitions and interpretations of sustainability, some of which were outlined in
section 2.1. It has nonetheless been possible to identify the following areas where provision
was perhaps weaker and gaps may exist:

(a) Early stage of thinking in business model (re)design

While there was considerable support to help organisations develop their social investment
market, for example, or to learn about mergers, they tended to be geared towards
organisations who were already further down the path and had decided at a reasonably
high level that this was the right approach for them; there was less support available to
organisations who might be wanting to explore the suitability of such approaches at an
earlier stage.

(b) Smaller organisations

While organisations such as the Small Charities Coalition and funders such as the Lloyds
Bank Foundation for England and Wales provide targeted support to smaller organisations,
commentators note that due to the unique challenges they face in the current economic
climate, a gap exists in support: even when there seems to be an abundance of capacity-
building assistance, critical gaps still remain (e.g., meeting the specific needs of small

38
nonprofits) (Millesen and Bies, 2007, p.27). CVSs nonetheless perform an important
function here, working with many small, local organisations who may not be able to access
support elsewhere.

(c) Closure, exit strategy and sustainability of purpose

With the exception of the support available focused on mergers, there appears to be limited
support focused on how organisations can close effectively without damaging their
beneficiary group. This is perhaps an indication of the priority given to sustainability of
organisation rather than sustainability of purpose (see section 2.1).

39
5. The impact and effectiveness of different forms of support

This chapter examines the extent to which different forms of financial and non-financial
support, including diagnostics, are useful to organisations wishing to improve their
sustainability by examining evidence of outcome and impact, and what some of their
strengths and weaknesses are.

5.1 Evidence of impact and effectiveness

5.1.1 Limitations to the evidence
The research we identified particularly with regard to capacity-building frequently fails
to establish a clear connection between the intervention and changes in organisational
sustainability:

There are many varied potential benefits from funding organisations to build their
capacity but these have yet to be proven.
(Woodward, Kinsella and South, 2013, p.18)

Despite the significant attention and energy not to mention financial resources
foundations devote to providing assistance beyond the grant, much of it appears to
be ineffective. Our data and analyses demonstrate that, today, when foundations
provide assistance beyond the grant, they are often doing so in ways that do not
translate into a noticeable impact on the grantee organizations or programs that
they fund.
(Buteau et al, 2008, p. 18)

Furthermore, we were not able to identify literature that compared and contrasted financial
and wider forms of support (nonetheless acknowledging that there is a blurring between
the two) so it has not been possible to conclude whether or not providing direct funding is
more or less effective in building an organisations sustainability than providing wider forms
of support that are broader than the provision of grants. We also identified no literature
that examined the impact and effectiveness of diagnostic tools as an approach to support
the building of organisational sustainability. A major review of building capabilities within
the voluntary sector (Ellis Paine and Macmillan, 2013) also noted very limited evidence of
the effectiveness of diagnostic tools and the difference they make.

It is still possible, however, to comment on some of the positive impacts of different forms
of support, as will be discussed later in this section.

40
5.1.2 Factors helping to explain the limited evidence base
We identified several important factors in the literature which can help to explain the
limited amount of evidence that we identified:

(a) The complexity of organisational sustainability

Numerous authors (20) describe changes in organisational sustainability as a process which
is impacted on by multiple different factors, many of which are outside of the control of the
organisation being supported. Attributing changes in the sustainability of an organisation,
therefore, to one particular intervention remains highly challenging:

Because of the nature of organizational change processes, it is challenging to

establish direct or causal links from capacity-building interventions to measurable
organizational outcomes.
(Millesen and Bies, 2007, p.23)

The question of how to link or attribute any change in a wider system to one
particular input is a major challenge and represents a significant obstacle to
assessing the impact of organisational capacity-building.
(Hailey, James and Wrigley, 2005, p.10)

(b) The pace of change

The long-term nature of changes in organisational sustainability does not suit the frequently
short-term timescales of much impact and evaluation work. Several studies in this area
acknowledge that it was simply too early to concretely say anything meaningful about
longer-term sustainability, although did note numerous positive, early changes. The NCVO
Institute for Volunteering Researchs evaluation of the Big Assist programme reported that
even after 12 months it often still appeared to be too early to tell whether this [the support]
would make them more sustainable (Curtis, 2015, p.4), although it did report a general
sense of optimism amongst organisations receiving support. Similarly, in their review Early
Indications of Sustainability at the Big Lottery Fund, THE FUND acknowledge that many of
the challenges and barriers to sustainability are beyond the direct influence of BIG (and other
funders) (THE FUND, 2007, p.28). Rocket Science, also note, in their evaluation of the
Supporting Change and Impact Fund note that a longer period is needed to observe the full
effect of The Fund on sustainability (2014, p.5).

(c) The intensity of interventions

As has been seen in chapter three, much support can be light-touch in nature which means
that caution should be applied when examining the impact on something as significant as
organisational sustainability. Equally, numerous forms of support are tailored specifically to

41
the needs of individual organisations, meaning that knowledge of what works and what
doesnt, as well as impact, can be highly context-specific and not necessarily transferable to
other organisations or the wider sector (Woodward, Kinsella and South, 2013).

(d) A reliance on self-reporting and satisfaction surveying

The impact and effectiveness of much support provided by consultants, for example, tends
to be focused more on customer satisfaction and on process than outcomes (Connelly and
York, 2002, p.34; also Despard, 2016), limiting our knowledge of impact. Equally, much
research relies on self-reported data rather than triangulating against external perceptions
or organisational measures of sustainability. As such, it can often focus on the aspirations
and intended consequences of the support, rather than the actual outcomes (NAVCA, 2010
and IVAR, 2011, cited in Woodward, Kinsella and South, 2013, p.15). This also appears to be
the case in Ellis and Gregorys (2009) review of health checks in the voluntary sector, which
primarily discusses intended benefits rather than assessed impacts and outcomes of their
application.

5.3 The difference that support can make

When examining the evidence of the impact of support, it is important remember, as has
already been established in section 2.1, organisational sustainability is not necessarily an
end point to be reached, but a dynamic and continual process (Padill et al, 2012, p.viii).
This subsequently affects how impact may be interpreted and described. In their evaluation
of the Big Assist programme, for example, Curtis (2015) describes organisations having
taken steps to sustainability whilst Kennedy and Sharp (2015) note that organisations
tended to talk of having planted the seeds, or being further along on the journey (p.5) and in
their study of sustainability within Capacity Builders funding, Shared Intelligence state that
the case studies also showed that it is difficult to describe infrastructure organisations as
achieving sustainability, suggesting that becoming more sustainable is an ongoing
process (2010, p.1).

While much literature, especially evaluations of capacity-building and funder-plus models of

support, describe considerable breadth to the impacts being experienced by organisations,
it tends to concentrate on the factors or characteristics that can contribute to organisational
sustainability (see figure 2). Curtis, for example, identifies organisational transformation,
income increases, a raised profile, a changed offer, and moving to new premises as impacts
of the Big Assist Programme (2015, p.4) while Woodward, Kinsella and South (2013) list
changing organisational structures, diversifying income, strategic planning, and Board
involvement. While valid and documented changes, they are not necessarily direct evidence
of an organisations sustainability, perhaps reflecting the complexity of the journey and that
there is not necessarily an end point to be reached.

42
We have nonetheless identified the following areas of impact for organisations in receipt of
support:

(a) Improvements in funding

In their evaluation of the HSCVF Building Sustainability: Extended Support Package,
Woodward, Kinsella and South (2013) found that nearly four in ten projects surveyed
reported that the support they received had made a difference to their funding
arrangements. Organisations were preparing themselves for longer-term sustainability by
changing their structure, collaborating with others, exploring new funding opportunities and
improving their evaluation (p.7). The authors also note how some organisations had
become more tender-ready and had diversified income streams. Ellis and Gregory (2009) in
their review of voluntary sector health checks (which are one form of diagnostic tools) note
that 'agreed intended benefits related to identifying strengths and weaknesses, making it
easier to get funding, and acting as a trigger to action and improvement' (p.46). While this
describes the aspirations rather than the actual outcomes of using diagnostic tools, it
nonetheless indicates that completing a diagnostic in isolation can still be a useful form of
support, even if it is not directly connected to some of the other forms of support discussed
in this report.

(b) Changes in organisational structure

This could include forming social enterprises, for example (Woodward, Kinsella and South,
2013).

(c) Changes in individuals attitudes and capabilities

Several pieces of research discuss an important change being that staff, typically at a senior
level, had adapted their way of thinking towards developing their organisation. In their
evaluation of The Funds programme Getting Better by Design, which encouraged
sustainability in the widest sense to enable organisations to meet the needs of their
beneficiaries better now and in the future for the voluntary sector in Scotland, the authors
note that many of these changes are about mindsets rather than radically different models
of service provision (Kennedy and Sharp, 2015, p.2).

(d) Planning for sustainability

Woodward, Kinsella and South (2013) found that nearly nine in ten projects evaluated in the
HSCVF Building Sustainability: Extended Support Package said the bursary had helped their
organisation make future sustainability plans. It had provided increased impetus, focus and
support and helped engender a greater feeling of optimism (p.7). Furthermore, an
important impact was allowing the time and space to stand back, something that appeared

43
to be especially important in the context of very busy organisations, allowing an
organisation to consider wider issues that it had not had the chance to do before:

For the majority it had allowed them time to prepare for change and establish new
ways of communicating, managing volunteers and preparing bids.
(Woodward, Kinsella and South, 2013,p.43)

The evaluation findings demonstrate that without such dedicated funding, projects
feel it is very difficult to divert their attention away from day to day project activity to
focus on development and sustainability.
(Rocket Science, 2014, p.6)

Similarly, Rocket Sciences evaluation of the Supporting Change and Impact Fund identified
that it had given [organisations] the breathing space and resources to dedicate their
energies towards achieving greater sustainability and impact for their beneficiaries (2014,
p.5), stressing that without such funding organisations would find it challenging to draw
themselves away from their everyday activities.

5.4 Factors that can facilitate the success of interventions

Studies of capacity-building and funder-plus initiatives have identified a range of factors that
can act to maximise the chances of the interventions being successful. While the topic of
capacity-building may in some cases be broader than organisational sustainability, the
insight from these studies can be nonetheless directly transferable to forms of support
specifically focused on an organisations sustainability.

It has not been the intention of this review to assess the impact and effectiveness of
individual examples of support but it has been possible to describe which approaches might
be particularly beneficial (or at least popular), something which could provide insight to
those wanting to develop and offer support to VCSE organisations. It is important to note,
however, that while this is possible, many facilitating factors can be unique to the individual
organisation (including factors such as organisational size, life stage, operating
environment), particularly with regard to support that is bespoke to the individual
organisation and its needs:

Critically which outcomes are most important and which will lead to future
sustainability is unique to each project. The flexible, personalised nature of the
scheme meant the support could be individualised to each project.
(Woodward, Kinsella and South, 2013, p.43)

44
 The evidence that exists is highly specific to the individual situations and contexts of
the partnerships concerned.
(Kara, 2013, p.3)

One of the major lessons to draw from this research is that the processes involved in
capacity building are complex and there is no one successful model that is suited to
all circumstances.
(Cornforth et al, 2009, p.54)

It is nonetheless possible to identify the following factors from the literature. In each of the
following sub-sections the number of pieces of evidence identified on that particular topic
have been included.

(a) Prioritising context (5)

While support varied in form with much being generic, several authors note that the most
effective form of support was that which was bespoke to the organisation being supported.
This could take the form of consultancy or tailored advice and guidance, and there is some
indication that organisations being supported value support from people more than
products (Leviton et al, 2006). IVAR have completed several studies of funder-plus and draw
a similar conclusion, noting that frontline organisations tend to prefer closer or more
intense methods of support, such as face-to-face, consultancy-type support that responds to
specific organisational contexts (IVAR, 2010) and the most useful support is bespoke and
attuned to organisational context and needs (IVAR, 2012, p.17). The authors go on,
however, to note that this approach can, however, be very resource intensive (IVAR, 2010).

Leviton et al (2006) also identify that assistance was more effective when it was timed to
match a grantees stage of development and adapted to its particular local circumstances
(2006, p.204), perhaps helping to explain the aforementioned challenge of identifying
common impacts and learning across what is a very diverse, broad range of support. Equally,
'a common element in all health checks was the importance of flexibility in how and where
the health check was carried out, in who took part in health check meetings, and in the use
of the tool itself ' (Ellis and Gregory, 2009, p.39).

Other factors that could affect the success of an intervention include having a good match
between consultants and the staff and organisation being supported (Kara, 2013;
Woodward, Kinsella and South, 2013; Ellis and Gregory, 2009), and the quality of support
(Woodward, Kinsella and South, 2013):

45
 'It was clear from the interviews that the relationship between the development
worker and the client organisation was crucial. It was felt important for people to feel
they had been properly represented in the notes and summary of the health check.'
(Ellis and Gregory, 2009, p.37)

(b) Sufficient time and resource to engage (4)

While it is clearly dependent on the intensity and duration of the support offered, authors
have stated that ensuring that the organisations being supported (and their staff) have the
time to engage meaningfully with funder-plus models and consultants is likely to maximise
the chances of positive impacts being seen, and crucially the reverse can act to limit impact
(Woodward, Kinsella and South, 2013; Kara, 2013; Reid and Gibb, 2004).

In their evaluation of funding and support from the Lloyds Bank Foundation for Scotland,
Reid and Gibb (2004) found that some organisations required more time than was available,
to the extent that they paid for additional support from the consultant from their own
funding. A lack of time is not, however, necessarily due to a lack of willingness, with
numerous authors noting the pressures organisations are under, especially those that are
smaller. Several authors (Woodward, Kinsella and South, 2013; Reid and Gibb, 2004)
describe the challenge of whether or not such support should be aimed at organisations
that are stable (and therefore potentially more able to devote the time required) or at
organisations in crisis (who may be in greater need but less able to be involved). Indeed,
Cornforth (cited in Ellis and Gregory, 2009) notes that capacity building was more likely to
be effective if the client organisation was not in the midst of a major project or crisis (p.38).
This potentially emphasises the value of connecting support to the particular life stage of an
organisation (see section 2.3).

Lack of resources could also mean that the organisations being supported were not able to
implement or act on the recommendations of consultants providing the support (Reid and
Gibb, 2004).

(c) Sufficient interest and willing (3)

Similarly, interest, enthusiasm and proactivity on behalf of the organisation being supported
can be important, with authors noting that it was a two-way process in which the individuals
and organisations being supported had to be prepared to interact and learn:

in order to be truly effective, nonprofit administrators needed to be proactive in their

pursuit of ideas and solutions to address organizational issues and problems. They had to
do more than attend the workshop or training sessions, they had to be motivated to

46
 apply the information they learned in ways that would contribute to organizational goals
and objectives.
(Millesen and Bies, 2007, p.24)

[The support] appeared to benefit most those grantees that took the initiative to use it,
with initiative more likely to come from programs with active and broadly engaged
leadership and from those offering a wider range of services.
(Leviton et al, 2006, p.204)

This also appeared true in the successful application of health checks within the voluntary
sector, with Ellis and Gregory noting that organisations should 'ensure that there is some
willingness at the start, but recognise that it may take time for the enthusiasm of one or two
people to become infectious' (2009, p.38).

(d) Managing organisational and individual expectations (3)

Managing expectations is cited by several studies as being important, namely in that
charities being supported (especially those that are smaller) should be made aware of the
limitations of any support, in that alone it is not necessarily likely to make fundamental
changes (Reid and Gibb, 2004).

47
Bibliography

Aagaard, P. (2012) The Challenge of Adaptive Capability in Public Organizations, Public

Management Review Vol. 14 , Iss. 6

Al-Tabbaa, O., Leach, D and March, J (2014) 'Collaboration Between Nonprofit and Business
Sectors: A Framework to Guide Strategy Development for Nonprofit Organizations',
Voluntas 25 (3), pp657 - 678

Amunega, A. A.; Osanmor, S. and Kurfi, A. (2012) 'Board Governance Development for Civil
Society Organizations: A Strategy for Systems Strengthening and Sustainability', The
Business & Management Review 2.2: 1-6

Andersson, F.O. (2011) 'Organisational capacity and entrepreneurial behaviour in nonprofit

organisations', Voluntary Sector Review, 2 (1) pp 43 - 56

Andersson, F.O., Faulk, L., Stewart, A.J (2016) 'Toward More Targeted Capacity Building:
Diagnosing Capacity Needs Across Organizational Life Stages', Voluntas 27: 6, p2860 - 2888

Backer, T. E. (2001) 'Strengthening nonprofits: Foundation initiatives for nonprofit

organizations', in C. J. De Vita & C. Fleming (Eds.), Building capacity in nonprofit
organizations. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute

Besel, K., Williams, C., Klak, J (2011) 'Non-profit sustainability during times of uncertainty',
Non-Profit Management and Leadership 22 (1), pp53 - 65

Big Lottery Fund (2007) 'Early indications of sustainability at the Big Lottery Fund', Big
Lottery Fund, London

Big Lottery Fund (2011) Making the most of capital funding: what makes benefits last.
Sheffield: Cresr

Big Lottery Fund (2011b) Building capabilities for impact and legacy: A discussion paper.
London: Big Lottery Fund

Birtwiste, M. and O'Brien, A. (2017) 'A financially sustainability review of the voluntary
sector' NCVO, London

Blumenthal, B. (2003) Investing in capacity building: A guide to high-impact approaches.

New York: The Foundation Center

48
Boin, A. & van Eeten, M. J. G., (2013) 'The Resilient Organization', Public Management
Review, Vol. 15 , Iss. 3

Bolduc, K., Buchanan, P. and Huang J. (2004) Listening to grantees: What nonprofits value
in their foundation funders. Center for Effective Philanthropy.

Bolton, M. (2006) Strengthening the hands of those who do: A review of a decade of project
grants awarded under the Baring Foundations Strengthening the Voluntary Sector
Programme. London: The Baring Foundation

Bolton, M. and Abdy, M. (2007) Foundations for organisational development: Practice in

the UK and USA. London: The Baring Foundation/Northern Rock Foundation

Bolton, M. and Cooper, C. (2011) Capital matters: How to build financial resilience in the
UKs arts and cultural sector. London: Mission, Model, Money

Bolton, M., Kingston, J. and Ludlow, J. (2007) 'The Venturesome model: reflecting on our
approach and learning 2001-2006', West Malling, Kent: Charities Aid Foundation.

Bonilla, M. (2015) 'Building resilience in small nonprofits', OD Practitioner 47(1), 814

Bower, J. L.(2007) 'How managers' everyday decisions create or destroy your company's
strategy', Harvard Business Review , Vol. 23 Issue: 8,

Bowman (2011) 'Financial Capacity and Sustainability of Ordinary Non-Profits', Non-Profit

Management and Leadership 22 (1), pp 37 - 51

Bowman, W. (2011) Financial capacity and sustainability of ordinary nonprofits, Nonprofit

management and leadership, 22(1) p. 37-51

Bowman, W. (2011) Finance Fundamentals for Nonprofits: Building Capacity and

Sustainability. Hoboken. NJ: John Wiley

Brick, P., Kail, A., Jarvinen, J. and Fiennes, T. (2009) Granting success: Lessons from funders
and charities. London: New Philanthropy Capital

Broadbent, J., Laughlin., R & Alwani-Starr, G. (2010) Steering for Sustainability, Public
Management Review Vol. 12 , Iss. 4

Brown, W., Andersson, F.O., Suyeon, J. (2016) 'Dimensions of Capacity in Nonprofit Human
Service Organizations', Voluntas 27: 6, 2889 -2912
49
Bryan T, Brown C. (2015) The Individual, Group, Organizational, and Community Outcomes
of Capacity-Building Programs in Human Service Nonprofit Organizations: Implications for
Theory and Practice. Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership &
Governance [serial online]. November 2015;39(5):426-443. Available from: SocINDEX with
Full Text, Ipswich, MA. Accessed June 8, 2017.

Buteau, E., Brock, A. & Chaffin, M. (2013) 'Nonprofit Challenges: What foundations can do',
Cambridge, MA: Centre for Effective Philanthropy

Buteau, E., Buchanan, P., Bolanos, C. and Brock, A. (2008) More than money: Making a
difference with assistance beyond the grant. Cambridge, MA: The Center for Effective
Philanthropy

Cairns, B and Hutchison, R (2005) A Study on Performance Diagnosis for the Performance
Improvement Hub: Final Report. Birmingham: Aston Business School, Centre for Voluntary
Action Research

Cairns, B, Harris, M and Young, P. (2005) 'Building the Capacity of the Voluntary Nonprofit
Sector: challenges of theory and practice', Intl Journal of Public Administration, 28: 869
885

Cairns, B., & Hennessy, C. (2014) Profound and Practical Difference: Evaluation of Lloyds
Bank Foundation for Northern Irelands Creating Change Programme. Belfast: Lloyds Bank
Foundation for Northern Ireland

Caron, W. and Macmillan, R. (2015) 'What's the problem? The role of diagnosis in building
the capacity of voluntary and community organisations', Voluntary Sector Review 6 (3),
325-332

Casadesus-Masanell, R. and Ricart, J. E. (2011) 'How to Design a Winning Business Model',

Harvard Business Review 89, nos. 1-2: 100107.

Champan, T. and Robinson, R. (2013) 'The crystal ball: how do TSOs see their future'
Durham University, Durham

Connelly, P. and York, P. (2002) Evaluating Capacity-Building Efforts for Nonprofit

Organizations 34(4)

Cornforth, C. and Mordaunt, J. (2011) Organisational capacity building: Understanding the

dilemmas for foundations of intervening in small- and medium-size charities, Voluntas 22,
428449

50
Cornforth, C., Mordaunt, J., Aiken, M. and Otto, S. (2008) The Charities Aid Foundation
Grant Programme: Learning from capacity building and lessons for other funders. West
Malling: The Charities Aid Foundation

Coutu, D. L. (2002) 'How Resilience Works', Harvard Business Review, v80 n5 pp. 46-
48,50,52,55

Craig, G. (2016) 'Community capacity-building: Something old, something new?', Critical

Social Policy Vol 27, Issue 3, pp. 335 - 359

CRESR (2001) Sustaining the benefits of capital funding. Sheffield: CRESR

Curtis, A. (2016) Independent evaluation report. Aiding organisational change. London:

NCVO IVR

Dayson, C. and Sanderson, E. (2014) Building capabilities in the voluntary sector: a review
of the market, Birmingham, University of Birmingham TSRC

Dayson, C., Macmillan, R., Paine, AE, Sanderson, E. (2017) Third Sector Capacity Building,
online

Despard, M. R. (2016) 'Can Nonprofit Capacity be Measured?', Non Profit and Voluntary
Sector Quarterly Advance online publication

Diamond, J. (2008) Capacity Building in the Voluntary and Community Sectors, Public
Policy and Administration 23 (2), 153-166

Eade, D. (2007) 'Capacity building: who builds whose capacity?', Development in Practice
Vol. 17 , Iss. 4-5.

Elliott, D. (2012) 'Voluntary sector support services: towards a research agenda for
chargeable services', Paper presented at the VSSN / NCVO Researching the Voluntary
Sector conference, University of Birmingham, September 2012.

Ellis Paine, A., Taylor, R and Alcock, P. (2012) Wherever there is money there is influence:
exploring BIG's impact on the Third Sector. Birmingham: TSRC

Ellis, J. and Gregory, T. (2009) How are you doing? A review of health checks used by
voluntary and community sector infrastructure organisations in their capacity building
work. London: Charities Evaluation Services

51
Fudge, S. (2009) 'Reconciling agency with structure: The contradictions and paradoxes of
capacity building in Wales' 20002006 Objective 1 programme', Critical Social Policy Vol
29, Issue 1, pp. 53 - 76

Gilbert, C., Eyring, M. and Foster, R. N. (2012) 'Two Routes to Resilience: Rebuilt your core
while you reinvent your business model', Harvard Business Review, Dec

Govindarajan, V. and Trimble, C. (2011) 'The CEOs Role in Business Model Reinvention',
Harvard Business Review, Jan-Feb

Hailey, J. (2014) 'Models of INGO Sustainability: Balancing Restricted and Unrestricted

Funding', INTRAC Briefing Paper 41, Oxford: INTRAC

Hailey, J. and Salway, M. (2016) 'New routes to CSO sustainability: the strategic shift to
social enterprise and social investment', Development in Practice Vol. 26 , Iss. 5

Hailey, J., James, R. and Wrigley, R. (2005) Rising to the Challenges: Assessing the Impacts
of Organisational Capacity Building Praxis Paper No. 2 INTRAC

Hamel, G. and Vlikangas, L. (2003) The Quest for Resilience. Harvard Business Review, 81,
52-63.

Harrison, E. (2012) 'Bouncing back? Recession, resilience and everyday lives', Critical Social
Policy, Vol 33, Issue 1, pp. 97 - 113

Harrow, J. (2001) "Capacity building" as a public management goal - Myth, magic or the
main chance?', Public Management Review Vol. 3 , Iss. 2

Hayman, R. (2016) 'Unpacking civil society sustainability: looking back, broader, deeper,
forward', Development in Practice Vol. 26 , Iss. 5.

Herman, R.D, and Renz, D (2008) Advancing Non-Profit Organizational Effectiveness

Research and Practice. Non-Profit Management and Leadership 18 (4), pp 399 - 415

Hobcraft, J., & Sigle-Rushton, W. (2009). Identifying Patterns of Resilience Using

Classification Trees. Social Policy and Society, 8(1), 87-98

Hopgood, R., Cairns, B., Aiken, M. and Firth, L. (2016) Thinking about sustainability.
London: IVAR

52
Howard, J; Grimshaw, L; Lipson, B; Taylor, M and Wilson, M (2009) Alternative approaches
to capacity building - emerging practices abroad. London: Capacity Builders

Huang, J., Buchanan, P. and Buteau, E. (2006) In search of impact: Practices and
perceptions in foundations provision of program and operating grants to nonprofits. The
Center for Effective Philanthropy.

Hung, C. and Ong, P. (2012) 'Sustainability of Asian-American non profir organizations in US

Metropolitan Areas', Non-Profit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 41 (6) 1136-1152

Hunter, D. (2006) Using a theory of change approach to build organizational strength,

capacity and sustainability with not-for-profit organizations in the human services sector,
Evaluation and Program Planning 29 (2), 193-200

IVAR. (2010) BIG and small: Capacity building, small organisations and the Big Lottery Fund.
IVAR: London

IVAR. (2011) Beyond money: funding plus in the UK. London: IVAR

IVAR. (2012) Duty of Care: the role of trusts and foundations in supporting voluntary
organisations through difficult times. London: IVAR

IVAR. (2013a) Turning a Corner: transition in the voluntary sector. London: IVAR

IVAR. (2013b) Thinking about Core Funding. London: IVAR

Johnson, M. W., Christensen C. M., and Kagermann, H. (2008) 'Reinventing Your Business
Model', Harvard Business Review 86, no. 12

Jones, M. L, (2001), 'Sustainable organizational capacity building: is organizational learning

a key?',
The International Journal of Human Resource Management Vol. 12 , Iss. 1,2001

Kale, P., Singh, H. and Raman, A. P. (2009) 'Don't Integrate Your Acquisitions, Partner with
Them', Harvard Business Review, Dec. 2009

Kanter, R. M. (2013) 'Surprises Are the New Normal; Resilience Is the New Skill', Harvard
Business Review, July

53
Kara, H. (2014) Third Sector partnerships and capabilty building: what the evidence tells
us.Birmingham: TSRC

Kelly, K. D., Caputo, T. and Jamieson, W. (2005) 'Reconsidering sustainability: some

implications for community-based crime prevention', Critical Social Policy Vol 25, Issue 3,
pp. 306 - 324, First published date: June-29-2005

Kennedy, J. and Sharp, C. (2015) Getting Better by Design. Evaluation of a programme to

support the voluntary sector in Scotland. London: THE FUND

Leviton, L., Herrera, C., Pepper, S., Fishman, N. and Racine, D. (2006) Faith in Action:
Capacity and sustainability of volunteer organizations, Evaluation and Program Planning
29, 201207

Light, P. C. (2004) Sustaining Nonprofit Performance: The Case for Capacity Building and the
Evidence to Support It. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution

Local Giving. (2015) Local Charity and Community Group Sustainability Report.London:
Local Giving

Lowndes, V. and McCaughie, K. (2013) 'Weathering the perfect storm ? Austerity and
institutional resilience in English local governance', Policy & Politics, 41(4): 553549.

Loza, J. (2004) BusinessCommunity Partnerships: The Case for Community Organization

Capacity Building, Journal of Business Ethics 53(3), 297-311

Macmillan, R. (2007) Understanding the idea of grant dependency in the in the voluntary
and community sector voluntary and community sector, People, Place & Policy Online 1/1,
pp. 30-38

Macmillan, R. (2013) 'Demand led capacity building, the Big Lottery Fund and market
making in third sector support services', Voluntary Sector Review 4 (3), 385 - 394

Macmillan, R. and Ellis Paine, A. (2014) Building capabilities in the voluntary sector: what
the evidence tells us. Birmingham: TSRC

Mandeville, J. (2007) 'Public Policy Grant Making: Building Organizational Capacity Among
Non -Profit Grantees', Non-Profit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 34 (4) pp 491 - 509

54
Mathieu R. Despard, M. R. (2016) 'Strengthening Evaluation in Nonprofit Human Service
Organizations: Results of a Capacity-Building Experiment', Human Service Organizations:
Management, Leadership & Governance Vol. 40 , Iss. 4

McKinney, R. and Kahn, H. (2004) 'Lottery Funding and Changing Organizational Identity in
the UK Voluntary Sector', Voluntas 15 (1) p1 - 19

Millesen, J. and Bies, L. (2007) Nonprofit Capacity Building: Who is Doing What for Whom
and to What End? Journal of non-profit management 18-26

Millesen, J. and Bies, L. (2007) 'Nonprofit Capacity Building: Who is Doing What for Whom
and to What End?' Journal of non-profit management pp. 18-26

Minzner, A., Klerman, J., Markovitz, C. and Fink, B. (2013) 'The impact of capacity-building
programs on nonprofits: a random assignment evaluation', Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector
Quarterly Published online before print, DOI: 10.1177/0899764013491013

Mohaupt, S. (2009) 'Review Article: Resilience and Social Exclusion', Social Policy and
Society published online 2009

Moldavanova, A. & Holly T. Goerdel, H. T. (2017) Understanding the puzzle of

organizational sustainability: toward a conceptual framework of organizational social
connectedness and sustainability, [ONLINE] Forthcoming Special Issue on Sustainable
Public Management, 1-27, Public Management Review

Moxham, C. (2014) Help or Hindrance? Examining the Role of Performance Measurement

in UK Nonprofit Organizations Public Performance & Management Review 342-354

NCVO (ND) The Sustainable sun tool: steps to sustainability, NCVO and Triangle Consulting.
London: NCVO

NEF (2012) Doing Services Differently: Local Innovations for Disabled People and their
Families. London: NEF

Padilla, L., Staplefoote, L. and Gonzalez Morganti, K. (2012) Financial Sustainability for
Nonprofit Organizations RAND Corporation

Power to Change (2016) Hundreds of local services transferred in to community hands in

2016.London: Power to Change

55
Pratt, B. (2016) 'Special issue overview: civil society sustainability', Development in Practice
Vol. 26 , Iss. 5.

Reid, M. and Gibb, A. (2004) 'Capacity building in the third sector and the use of
independent consultants: evidence from Scotland' A paper presented at the International
Society for Third Sector Research 6th International Conference, Ryerson University,
Toronto, July 11-14 2004

Rivenbark, W. C. & Menter, P. W. (2006) Building results-based management capacity in

nonprofit organizations: The Role of Local Government, Public Performance &
Management Review Vol. 29 , Iss. 3

Rocket Science (2014) Final Evaluation of the Supporting Change and Impact Fund. London:
Rocket Science

Roseanne M. Mirabella, R. M. (2001) A Symposium Introduction: Filling the Hollow State,

Public Performance & Management Review Vol. 25 , Iss. 1

Saldanha, C. (2006) 'Rethinking Capacity Development' International Public Management

Journal Volume 7(2): 15-42.

Shared Intelligence (2010) Sustainable models of support services. London: Capacity

Builders

Shaw, K. and Maythorne, L. (2012) 'Managing for local resilience: towards a strategic
approach', Public Policy and Administration Vol 28, Issue 1, pp. 43 - 65

Sobeck, J. and Agius. E. (2007) Organizational capacity building: Addressing a research and
practice gap, Evaluation and Program Planning 30 237246

Social Enterprise UK (no date) Sustaining Change: Learning About the Impact of Big
Lotterys Funding on Social Enterprises. London: Social Enterprise UK

Spreitzer, G.M., & Porath, C. (2012) 'Creating sustainable performance', Harvard Business
Review, January-February, 92-99.

Stafford, J. (2012) 'Recession, resilience, resources and relationships', Voluntary Sector

Review 3 (2), pp 257 - 263

Stevens, S.K. (2002) Nonprofit Lifecycles: Stage-Based Wisdom for Nonprofit Capacity, Long
Lake Minnesota: Stagewise Enterprises Inc

56
Valentinov, V.; Vacekov, G. (2015) 'Sustainability of Rural Nonprofit Organizations: Czech
Republic and Beyond', Sustainability 7, 9890-9906.

Vickers, M. H. & Kouzmin, A. (2001) '"Resilience" in organizational actors and rearticulating

"voice": Towards a humanistic critique of New Public Management', Public Management
Review Vol. 3 , Iss. 1

Woodward, J. and Kinsella, K. and South, J. (2013) Evaluation of the HSCVF Bursary Scheme.
Project Report. Centre for Health Promotion Research, Leeds Metropolitan University

York, P. (undated) The Sustainability Formula: How Non-profit Organizations can Thrive in
the Emerging Economy. TCC Group.

Yun, J.J.; Yigitcanlar, T. (2017) 'Open Innovation in Value Chain for Sustainability of Firms',
Sustainability 9, 811.

57
Appendix A. Search terms and results

We undertook a systematic search of the literature on organisational sustainability. This

involved a search of academic journals from 2000 onwards using Google Scholar with the
following search terms:

Sustainability OR Sustainable OR Diversification OR Diversify OR Resilience OR

Resilient OR Capacity OR Capability OR Funding OR Fund OR Model OR Stability OR
Partner OR Partnership OR Leadership OR Leaders OR Skills OR Knowledge

AND

voluntary sector OR community sector OR third sector OR civil society OR

charity OR voluntary organisation OR frontline organisation OR social
enterprise OR non-profit organisation OR not-for-profit organisation OR non-
governmental organisation OR grantee

We excluded the term Sustainable development from the search to avoid identifying the
extensive research on environmental and ecological sustainability.

We also searched the following specific journals and portals for relevant content, again from
2000:

Non-Profit Management and Leadership;

International Studies of Management and Organisation;
Voluntary Sector Review;
Non Profit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly;
Voluntas;
Journal of Accounting and Public Policy;
Critical Social Policy;
Public Policy and Administration;
Social Policy and Society;
Public Management Review;
Policy and Politics;
Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership & Governance;
Sustainability;
Third Sector Knowledge Portal.

58
In the search of journals, over 30,000 articles of potential interest were identified. These
were refined and logged, and narrowed to 117. We identified a comparatively limited
amount of research that had been undertaken to examine the impact and outcomes of
support that aims to improve organisational sustainability (31), with many focused on
assessing capacity-building interventions14 (37), resilience of organisations (14) or the
impact of funder-plus models of support (9).15 Much of the literature referred to in this
chapter is therefore drawn from studies and evaluations of capacity-building programmes
and initiatives. While we have already established that having built capacity within
organisations is not the same as having built organisational sustainability, but rather a
mechanism which organisations can employ (see section 1.3), there is nonetheless a great
deal of transferable and useful insight from these studies which will be drawn out
throughout this chapter.

14
The term capacity-building is used as distinct from capability-building support.
15
These figures only include academic literature.
59
Appendix B. Diagnostic tools to support organisational sustainability
This is a list of the different diagnostic tools and health checks we identified in the review that sought to help VCSE organisations become more
sustainable. The number and type of diagnostics is changing constantly so this table inevitably presents a moving picture. If you are aware of
any additional diagnostics tools and mechanisms which could be used to support organisations to improve their sustainability, please email
myles.kunzli@ncvo.org.uk.
Funder Programm Website Amount Target Focus Dates
e audience
Esmee AIM http://www.aim- Most Small & General Open
Fairburn sustainabili museums.co.uk/content/aim_sustainability_grant_scheme/ 3K-5K medium sustainabil (started
Foundatio ty grant museums ity 2006)
n/ scheme that are
Associatio AIM
n of members
Independ (<300K/y
ent r)
Museums
Esmee Social https://www.esmeefairbairn.org.uk/social-investment Min. All Social Open
Fairburn investment investme investmen
Foundatio to charities nt 60K t start-up
n
Esmee Mergers https://www.esmeefairbairn.org.uk/other-ways-we-fund- Max All Merger Open
Fairburn mergers 15K (started
2012)

60
Foundatio
n
Locality Bright http://mycommunity.org.uk/funding-options/bright-ideas- Up to Communit Communit Open
(consortiu Ideas Fund fund/ 20K + y group y business (2016 -
m with 15 days start-up 2018)
Power to tailored
Change) support
City Stepping https://www.citybridgetrust.org.uk/what-we-do/social- <50K All Social Open (but
Bridge Stones investment/stepping-stones-fund/ (London) investmen current
Trust Fund t start-up round
closed)
City Strengtheni https://www.citybridgetrust.org.uk/what-we-do/grant- ? All Capacity- Open
Bridge ng making/what-we-fund/strengthening-londons-voluntary- (London) building /
Trust London's sector/ Financial
Voluntary managem
Sector ent
City Social https://www.citybridgetrust.org.uk/what-we-do/social- >100K All Social Open
Bridge Investment investment/social-investment-fund/ (London) investmen
Trust Fund t start-up
BLF Local https://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/global- <100K Small & General Active
Sustainabili content/programmes/england/local-sustainability-fund medium sustainabil (but
ty Fund orgs ity closed to
applicatio
ns)
61
BLF Big http://www.bigpotential.org.uk/ 20K- Larger Social Open
Potential 75K organisati investmen
(England) and ons t start-up
150K-
500K
Access - Growth https://access-socialinvestment.org.uk/growth-fund/ Loans of All Social Open
the Fund up to investmen
foundatio (England) 150K t start-up
n for
social
investmen
t
Power to Power to https://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/powertochange 50K- Communit Communit Open
Change Change 300K y y business
(BLF) Trust businesses start-up
(England)
Francis Step http://www.fcsct.org.uk/step-change/ All Strategic Open
Scott Change previous developm
Charitable Grants grantees ent
Trust in Cumbria
Lloyds Enable https://www.lloydsbankfoundation.org.uk/our- <15K Income Strengthe Open
Bank grants programmes/enable 25K-1m n & grow
Foundatio
n

62
Organisation / Name of tool Web address Online Descriptor Paid Target Target Level of Focus of
provider / face- for / audience sector support support
to- face free
ACOSVO Board Skills Audit http://www.acosvo.org.uk/sites/ Online Health Free All All Self- Leadership &
default/files/Board%20Skills%20A check assessmen governance
udit%20%28template%29_0.doc t
ACOSVO Succession http://www.acosvo.org.uk/sites/ Online Checklist Free All All Self- Leadership &
readiness default/files/pictures/Succession assessmen governance
checklist %20Planning%20Checklist.pdf t
Big Lottery Fund VCSE Strength http://vcsestrengthchecker.org.u Online Diagnostic Free Small & All Self- Overview
Checker (2017) k/ medium assessmen
t
BOND Health check https://www.bond.org.uk/effecti Online Health Free All Internation Self- Overview
veness/organisational-health check al assessmen
developme t
nt
CASS CCE Tools for Success https://knowhownonprofit.org/to Online Diagnostic Free All All Self- Overview
ols-for-success/self_assessment assessmen
t
Charity Charity https://www.gov.uk/government Online Checklist / Free All All Self- Leadership &
Commission Commission: CC8 /uploads/system/uploads/attach guidance assessmen governance
Internal Financial ment_data/file/585893/CC8_Che t
Controls Self cklist.pdf
Checklist for
Charities (2012)

63
Charity 15 questions https://www.gov.uk/government Online Checklist / Free All All Self- Leadership &
Commission trustees should /publications/charity-trustee- guidance assessmen governance
ask (2017) meetings-15-questions-you- t
should-ask/charity-trustee-
meetings-15-questions-you-
should-ask
Clinks Take your http://www.clinks.org/sites/defa Online Health Free >100K Criminal Self- Overview
temperature. A ult/files/basic/files- check justice assessmen
brief downloads/Clinks%20Take%20yo t
organisational ur%20temperature%20July%2020
health check 13.pdf
(2013)
Crawley CVS Health check http://www.crawleycvs.org/servi Online Health Free All All Self- Overview
ces-organisation.php check assessmen
t
Cumbria CVS Organisational https://www.google.dk/url?sa=t& Online Health Free Small All Self- Overview
health check rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&c check assessmen
d=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahU t
KEwior6Lbn5XUAhXClSwKHSIkAgk
QFggtMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2F
cumbriacvs.org.uk%2Fwp-
content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F
04%2FCVS-Health-Check-getting-
started.docx&usg=AFQjCNHoOFR
CEMgCVSbRYgrSWiSWJi-
eAw&sig2=wtXaYLghoL8BAPV9kN
wF_w

64
Developing Governance http://www.diycommitteeguide.o Online Health Free All All Self- Leadership &
Governance health check rg/download/governance-health- check assessmen governance
Group (2016) check t
Development Fit for Purpose http://locality.org.uk/wp- Online Diagnostic Free All Community Self- Service /
Trusts Association (2008) content/uploads/Fit-for- enterprise assessmen business
Purpose.pdf orgs. t model
(re)design

Foundation for Simple income http://www.thefsi.org/wp- Online Diagnostic Free All All Self- Other
Social expenditure risk content/uploads/2012/08/Simple assessmen
Improvement profiler -Income-Expenditure-Risk- t
Profiler.xls
Framework Organisational http://www.framework.org.uk/w Online Diagnostic Cost All All Facilitated General
assessments p- & F2F overview
content/uploads/organisational-
assessments-in-template-
signed1.pdf
Greater GRIPP online http://www.gripp.org.uk/how.ht Online Diagnostic Free All All Self- General
Merseyside (2013) m assessmen overview
ChangeUp t
Hall Aitken Social Enterprise http://www.hallaitken.co.uk/com Online Diagnostic Cost All All Self- Service /
Diagnostic Tool ponent/option,com_docman/Ite & F2F assessmen business
(2007) mid,10/gid,72/task,doc_downloa t model
d/ (re)design

65
Inspiring Impact Measuring Up! http://inspiringimpact.org/measu Online Free All All Self- Skills /
ringup/ assessmen capability
t dev.

Kensington and Health check https://www.kcsc.org.uk/news/h F2F Health Free All All Self- General
Chelsea Social ealthchecks-small-voluntary-and- check assessmen overview
Council community-organisations t
Locality Early warning http://locality.org.uk/wp- Online Free Small Community Self- Overview
guide (financial content/uploads/Early-Warning- groups assessmen
health-check) Guide_Final-2012.pdf t
McKinsey Organisational http://mckinseyonsociety.com/oc Online Diagnostic Free All All Self- Overview
Capacity at/ assessmen
Assessment Tool t
NCVO Sustainable https://www.ncvo.org.uk/68- Online Diagnostic 1,95 All All Self- Training &
funding health content/practical- & F2F 0 for assessmen consultancy /
check support/consultancy/850- orgs t General
sustainable-funding-health-check <1m overview
NCVO The income https://www.ncvo.org.uk/images Online Tool Free All All Self- Skills /
spectrum /documents/practical_support/fu assessmen capability
nding/sustainable- t dev.
funding/NCVO%20Income%20Spe
ctrum.pdf
NCVO (Funding Funding options https://www.fundingcentral.org. Online Diagnostic Free All All Self- Skills /
Central) tree uk/Page.aspx?SD=1779 to assessmen capability
memb t dev.
ers

66
NCVO Workforce wheel http://www.oneeastmidlands.org Online Diagnostic Free All All Self- Skills /
.uk/sites/default/files/library/ncv assessmen capability
o-workforce-wheel.pdf t dev.
NCVO Governance https://www.ncvo.org.uk/govern Online Diagnostic Free All (NCVO Self- Leadership &
wheel ance/publications/2-download- (to members) assessmen governance
publications/P193-governance- memb t
wheel ers)
NCVO Sustainable Sun https://www.ncvo.org.uk/images Online Diagnostic Free All All Self- Skills /
tool /documents/practical_support/fu assessmen capability
nding/sustainable- t dev.
funding/Sustainable%20Sun%20T
ool.pdf
NIDOS Effectiveness http://effectiveness.nidos.org.uk/ Online Health Free Small & Internation Self- Overview
toolkit check basic; medium al assessmen
full developme t
access nt
free
to
memb
ers
Northern Rock Approach http://www.nr- Online Sign- Free All All Self- Overview
Foundation summary foundation.org.uk/evaluation- posting assessmen
workbook / impact.php t
Valuing your
organisation

67
Northern Rock Organisational http://www.nr- Online Checklist Free All All Self- Overview
Foundation self-appraisal foundation.org.uk/downloads/NR assessmen
framework FTST-organisational-self- t
appraisal-framework.pdf
NOVA NOVA Assist https://www.nova- Diagnostic Free NOVA Self- Overview
wd.org.uk/assist/ (to members assessmen
memb t
ers)
NPC The little blue Online Guidance Free All All Self- Overview
book. NPCs guide assessmen
to analysing t
charities, for
charities and
funders (2010)
NPC What makes a http://www.thinknpc.org/npc_w Online Checklist Free All All Self- Overview
good charity? hat-makes-a-good-charity_final- assessmen
interactive/?post-parent=18116 t

Pact Organisational http://www.pactworld.org/sites/ F2F Diagnostic Free All Internation Facilitated Overview
capacity default/files/OCA%20Handbook_ (facilita al
assessment ext.pdf ted) developme
nt
Pay and Health Checks http://www.cnet.org.uk/news/st Online Health Free All All (in West Self- Skills /
Employment ory/HC/ check Yorkshire) assessmen capability
Rights Service t dev. (HR
focus)

68
NCVO (PQASSO) Pqasso Essentials https://www.ncvo.org.uk/practic Online Quality 1,50 All All Self- Training &
al-support/quality-and- & F2F standard 0- assessmen consultancy /
standards/pqasso/pqasso-quality- 5,60 t and Overview
mark 0 facilitated
Reslient Resilience http://www.resorgs.org.nz/image Online Benchmar Free All All Self- General
Organisations Benchmark Tool s/stories/pdfs/resiliencebenchma king assessmen overview -
rksmanager.pdf t& reslience
facilitated
Rocket Science Distance- http://rocketsciencelab.co.uk/str Online Diagnostic Free All All Self- Training &
travelled tracking engthening-organisations/ assessmen consultancy /
tool t Overview
Rocket Science VCS Assist Tool http://rocketsciencelab.co.uk/str Online Diagnostic Free All All Self- Training &
engthening-organisations/ assessmen consultancy /
t Overview
SIDA The Octagon. A http://www.sida.se/contentasset F2F Diagnostic Free All Internation Self- Overview
tool for the s/d4779ce3e8e54b20b1258b577 al assessmen
assessment of aa83a54/the-octagon_1742.pdf developme t
strengths and nt
weaknesses in
NGOs
Social Enterprise Key performance http://www.socialenterprisework Online Free All All Self- Overview
Works tools s.org/benchmarking/?page_id=6 assessmen
t

69
Social Enterprise People http://www.socialenterprisework Online Free All All Self- Skills /
Works Management s.org/benchmarking/?page_id=7 assessmen capability
t dev. (HR)

Social Enterprise Finance http://www.socialenterprisework Online Free All All Self- Skills /
Works management s.org/benchmarking/?page_id=10 assessmen capability
t dev. (finance)

Social Enterprise C3 Quick Perform http://www.socialenterprisework Online Diagnostic All All Self- Overview
Works and Perform s.org/benchmarking/ assessmen
Diagnostic t
(online)
TCC group Core Capacity http://www.tccccat.com/about- Online Diagnostic Free All All (US- Self- Overview
Assessment Tool the-ccat based) assessmen
t
The 5 capability The 5 capability http://ecdpm.org/publications/5c F2F Diagnostic Free All Internation Self- Overview
model of ECDPM model of ECDPM s-framework-plan-monitor- al assessmen
evaluate-capacity-development- developme t
processes/ nt
The Root Change The Root Change http://www.rootchange.org/abou F2F Diagnostic Free All Internation Facilitated Overview
tool Tool (2009) t_us/resources/publications/OCA al
%20MANUAL_Short_RC_7-20- developme
11.pdf nt

70
Universalia and Institutional and http://www.betterevaluation.org Online Diagnostic Free Self- Overview
International Organisational /resources/guides/mapping_stak assessmen
Development Assessment eholders/enhance_org_perform t
Resource Centre Model (IOA
Model) (1999)
USAID Organisational https://usaidlearninglab.org/sites Online Diagnostic Free All Internation Self- Overview
capacity /default/files/resource/files/ocaw al assessmen
assessment ithfacilitatorsguidewithnupas7.10 developme t
(2010) .2015.pdf nt
Voluntary Impact How healthy us http://www.voluntaryimpact.org. Online Health Free All All Self- Overview
Northamptonshir your uk/healthcheck/ check assessmen
e organisation? t

Voluntary sector Charity health http://www.voluntarysectortraini F2F Health 25- All All Self- Training &
training check day ng.org.uk/en/courses/event/300/ check 220 assessmen consultancy
Charity-Health-Check-Day t
Voluntary Norfolk Income Spectrum http://www.voluntarynorfolk.org. Online Guidance Free All All Self- Skills /
Tool uk/data/Sust_Fund/sust_fund_lo / assessmen capability
w_res.pdf Diagnostic t dev.
Voluntary Norfolk New Product http://www.voluntarynorfolk.org. Online Diagnostic Free All All Self- Skills /
New Market Tool uk/data/Sust_Fund/sust_fund_lo assessmen capability
w_res.pdf t dev.

WaterAid GTF Capacity http://www.wateraid.org/ng/~/m Online Diagnostic Free All Internation Self- Overview
Needs edia/Publications/Governance- al assessmen
Assessment Tool and-transparency-fund-capacity- developme t
needs-assessment-tool.pdf nt

71
WCVA Governance http://www.wcva.org.uk/media/ Online Health Free All All (Wales- Self- Leadership &
health check 258953/governance_health_chec check led) assessmen governance
(2013) k.pdf t
Wellspring Organizational http://survey.organizationalmapp Online Diagnostic Free All All (US) Self- Overview
Advisors mapping tool ingtool.com/download/ assessmen
t

72
Appendix C. Funding programmes focused on increasing organisational sustainability
This is a list of The Funding programmes we identified in the review that sought to help VCSE organisations become more sustainable.

Funder Programme Website Amount Target Focus Dates

audience
Esmee AIM http://www.aim- Most 3K- Small & General Open
Fairburn sustainabilit museums.co.uk/content/aim_sustainability_grant_sch 5K medium sustainabilit (started
Foundation y grant eme/ museums y 2006)
/ scheme that are
Association AIM
of members
Independe (<300K/yr)
nt
Museums
Esmee Social https://www.esmeefairbairn.org.uk/social-investment Min. All Social Open
Fairburn investment investme investment
Foundation to charities nt 60K start-up
Esmee Mergers https://www.esmeefairbairn.org.uk/other-ways-we- Max 15K All Merger Open
Fairburn fund-mergers (started
Foundation 2012)
Locality Bright Ideas http://mycommunity.org.uk/funding-options/bright- Up to Community Community Open (2016
(consortiu Fund ideas-fund/ 20K + 15 group business - 2018)
m with days start-up

73
Power to tailored
Change) support

City Bridge Stepping https://www.citybridgetrust.org.uk/what-we- <50K All (London) Social Open (but
Trust Stones Fund do/social-investment/stepping-stones-fund/ investment current
start-up round
closed)
City Bridge Strengthenin https://www.citybridgetrust.org.uk/what-we-do/grant- All (London) Capacity- Open
Trust g London's making/what-we-fund/strengthening-londons- building /
Voluntary voluntary-sector/ Financial
Sector manageme
nt
City Bridge Social https://www.citybridgetrust.org.uk/what-we- >100K All (London) Social Open
Trust Investment do/social-investment/social-investment-fund/ investment
Fund start-up
Big Lottery Local https://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/global- <100K Small & General Active (but
Fund Sustainabilit content/programmes/england/local-sustainability-fund medium sustainabilit closed to
y Fund orgs y application
s)
Big Lottery Big Potential http://www.bigpotential.org.uk/ 20K- Larger Social Open
Fund (England) 75K and organisatio investment
150K- ns start-up
500K

74
Access - the Growth https://access-socialinvestment.org.uk/growth-fund/ Loans of All Social Open
foundation Fund up to investment
for social (England) 150K start-up
investment
Power to Power to https://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/powertochange 50K- Community Community Open
Change Change 300K businesses business
(BLF) Trust start-up
(England)
Francis Step Change http://www.fcsct.org.uk/step-change/ All previous Strategic Open
Scott Grants grantees in developme
Charitable Cumbria nt
Trust
Lloyds Bank Enable https://www.lloydsbankfoundation.org.uk/our- <15K Income Strengthen Open
Foundation grants programmes/enable 25K-1m & grow

75
 Appendix D. Forms of support to increase organisational sustainability
This is a list of the different types of support we identified in the review that sought to help VCSE organisations become more sustainable. As
with the diagnostics we identified, there are new forms of support that are being developed. If you are aware of any additional examples of
support which could be used to support organisations to improve their sustainability, please email myles.kunzli@ncvo.org.uk.

Organisation Description of Web address Audience Face- Type of Focus

support to- face support
/
online
/
report
NCVO Certificate in https://www.ncvo.org.uk/2-content/346-certificate-in- All Online Consultancy Financial
Sustainable financial-sustainability & F2F sustainability
Funding
NCVO Income https://www.ncvo.org.uk/images/documents/practical_supp All Online Diagnostic Financial
Spectrum: ort/funding/sustainable- sustainability
Helping You funding/NCVO%20Income%20Spectrum.pdf
Find the Right
Income Mix
NCVO Sustainable https://www.ncvo.org.uk/images/documents/practical_supp All Online Diagnostic Financial
Sun Tool: ort/funding/sustainable- sustainability
Steps to funding/Sustainable%20Sun%20Tool.pdf
Sustainability
NCVO NCVO https://knowhownonprofit.org/funding/commissioning/cons All Online Report Consortia dev.
consortia ortia
guidance

76
NCVO Voluntary https://knowhownonprofit.org/funding/commissioning/cons All Online Report Consortia dev.
sector ortia/NCVOConsortiaStrongerTogetherSeptember2016.pdf
consortia:
stronger
together
(2016)
NCVO Innovating to https://knowhownonprofit.org/studyzone/innovating-to- All Online Training (4 x General
survive and survive-and-grow online sustainability
grow (online videos) (survival &
course) growth)
NCVO How to be https://knowhownonprofit.org/studyzone/how-to-be- All Online Training (4 x Organisationa
resilient resilient online l resilience
(KnowHow) videos)
NCVO Strategy and https://knowhownonprofit.org/organisation/strategy All Online Guidance Strategic
planning planning
(KnowHow)
NCVO Managing https://knowhownonprofit.org/studyzone/managing-change- All Online Training (4 x Managing
change in your in-your-non-profit online change
non-profit videos)
(KnowHow)
NCVO Strategy made https://knowhownonprofit.org/studyzone/strategy-made- All Online Training (4 x Strategic
easy easy-simple-steps-to-producing-your-strategic-plan online planning
(KnowHow) videos)
NCVO Sustainable https://www.ncvo.org.uk/68-content/practical- All F2F Consultancy Financial
funding health support/consultancy/850-sustainable-funding-health-check sustainability
check
(consultancy)

77
NCVO Sustainable https://blogs.ncvo.org.uk/2017/05/04/sustainable-funding- All Online Blog Financial
funding round- round-up-may-2017/ sustainability
up (monthly
blogs)
NCVO Introduction to https://knowhownonprofit.org/studyzone/introduction-to- All Online Training (x 3 Financial
sustainable sustainable-funding sessions) sustainability
funding
(KnowHow)
NCVO How to merge https://knowhownonprofit.org/how-to/how-to-merge All Online Public wiki Merger
organisations
NCVO How to decide https://knowhownonprofit.org/how-to/how-to-decide-who- All Online Public wiki Merger
who's in is-in-charge-of-a-merger
charge of a
merger
NCVO How to carry https://knowhownonprofit.org/how-to/how-to-carry-out-a- All Online Public wiki Merger
out a successful-merger
successful
merger
NCVO Financial https://www.ncvo.org.uk/training-and-events/events- All F2F Training day Financial
intelligence for listing/1758-financial-intelligence-for-trustees-oct-2017 sustainability
trustees
NCVO How to https://knowhownonprofit.org/how-to/how-to-acheive- All Online Public wiki General
support the sustainability sustainability
sustainability (survival &
of funded growth)
projects

78
NCVO A financially https://www.ncvo.org.uk/images/documents/policy_and_res All Online Report Financial
sustainability earch/funding/financial-sustainability-review-of-the- sustainability
review of the voluntary-sector-july-2015.pdf
voluntary
sector
Zurich Future proof. https://www.zurich.co.uk/_/media/dbe/united- All Online Report General
Ensuring the kingdom/docs/charity/support-and-resources/future-proof- sustainability
sustainability guide.pdf (survival &
of your charity growth)
BVSC Growing https://www.bvsc.org/event/funding-focus-half-day- All F2F Training Financial
financial conference-growing-financial-sustainability-voluntary-sector (half day - sustainability
sustainability 2012)
in the
voluntary
sector
WCVA and Sustainable http://www7.open.ac.uk/oubs/research/pdf/Sustainable_Fu All Online Report Financial
OU funding - nding.pdf sustainability
learning
through action
(2008)
VONNE Building future https://www.vonne.org.uk/news/building-future- Orgs. <1m F2F Training Financial
sustainability sustainability and http://www.futuresustainability.org/ sustainability
but also
general
sustainability

79
Voluntary Sustainable http://www.vai.org.uk/wp- All Online Guidance Financial
Action funding toolkit content/uploads/2011/07/110707-Sustainable-Funding- sustainability
Islington (2011) Toolkit.pdf
Voluntary What is https://www.va- All Online Guidance Financial
Action East sustainable er.org.uk/images/Downloads/Sustainable_Funding.pdf sustainability
Renfrewshire funding or
sustainable
income?
One What is http://www.onewestminster.org.uk/files/onewestminster/w All Online Guidance Financial
Westminster sustainable hat_is_sustainable_funding.pdf sustainability
funding?
Women's Introduction to https://thewomensresourcecentre.org.uk/wp- All Online Guidance Financial
Resource developing a content/uploads/sustainable_funding_intro_handout_pdf.pd sustainability
Centre sustainable f
funding mix
Voluntary The http://www.voluntarynorfolk.org.uk/data/Sust_Fund/sust_fu All Online Guidance, Financial
Norfolk sustainable nd_low_res.pdf including sustainability
funding guide diagnostics
Community Developing https://www.communitysouthwark.org/sites/default/files/im All Online Guidance Financial
Southwark and ages/Developing%20a%20sustainable%20income%20approa sustainability
implementing ch.pdf
a sustainable
income
approach
High Peak How? http://highpeakcvs.org.uk/documentsfiles/how/HOW- All (orgs. Online Guidance Financial
CVS Sustainable SustainableFunding.pdf within the sustainability
funding High Peak)

80
High Peak SUSTAIN http://highpeakcvs.org.uk/?ID=177 All (orgs. Online Training, Financial
CVS project within the & F2F event, sustainability
High Peak) consultancy
Community Guide to http://www.communityimpactbucks.org.uk/data/files/Self_H All Online Guidance Financial
Impact Bucks sustainable elp_Guides/Sustainable_Funding/CIB_Sustainable_Funding.p sustainability
funding and df
financing
options
Good Finance A website to http://www.goodfinance.org.uk/ All Online Website Social
help charities investment
navigate the dev.
world of social
investment
Funding Introduction to https://www.fundingcentral.org.uk/Page.aspx?SP=6574 All Online Guidance Financial
Central sustainable sustainability
funding
Funding Exploring https://www.fundingcentral.org.uk/Page.aspx?SP=6059 All Online Guidance Social
Central social investment
investment dev.
The The Good http://www.thefsi.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Good- All Online Guidance Merger
Foundation Mergers Guide Mergers-Guide.pdf
for Social
Improvement
The The Good http://www.thefsi.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Good- All Online Report Merger
Foundation Merger Index Merger-Index.pdf
for Social
Improvement

81
The Mergers made http://www.thefsi.org/wp- All Online Guidance Merger
Foundation simple content/uploads/2013/11/Mergers_Made_Simple.pdf
for Social
Improvement
Small The Building http://www.smallcharities.org.uk/programmes/ Orgs. <1m Online Other - General
Charities Reslience income training, sustainability
Coalition Programme events, (building
matching resilience)
Small Developing a https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/developing-a-small-charity- Orgs. <1m F2F Training Financial
Charities small charities fundraising-strategy-tickets-32431962874 income sustainability
Coalition fundraising
strategy
Small Courses and http://www.smallcharities.org.uk/resources-governance- All Online Guidance Merger /
Charities training on mergers/ closing
Coalition mergers and
closing down
IoF Fundraising http://www.institute-of- All Online Guidance Financial
strategy fundraising.org.uk/guidance/introduction-to- sustainability
fundraising/fundraising-strategy/
IoF Successful http://www.institute-of-fundraising.org.uk/library/iof- All Online Guidance Financial
partnerships successful-partnerships-for-sustainable-fundraising/ sustainability
for sustainable
fundraising: a
practical guide
for charities
working with
agencies

82
NAVCA Merger case https://www.navca.org.uk/resources/71-merger-case-studies All Online Case Merger
studies studies
Locality Community http://locality.org.uk/resources/acquiring-developing- All Online Webinar; Community
ownership and community-assets-webinar/ report assets
assets webinar
Locality Making http://locality.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/Making-Buildings- All Online Report Community
buildings work work-for-Communities-ATU-DTA-2010.pdf assets
for your
community
Locality Community- http://locality.org.uk/resources/community-led-spaces/ All Online Report Community
led spaces assets
(2010)
Guardian Ensuring the https://www.theguardian.com/voluntary-sector- All F2F Event General
Voluntary sustainability network/2015/apr/24/ensuring-the-sustainability-of-your- sustainability
Sector of your charity charity-guardian-event
Network (2015)
Guardian Building https://www.theguardian.com/social-enterprise- Social Online Blog / case General
Voluntary sustainability network/2012/aug/16/funding-social-enterprise-bootstrap- enterprises study sustainability
Sector in to your growth
Network social
enterprise
(2012)
Guardian How charities https://www.theguardian.com/voluntary-sector- All Online Blog Financial
Voluntary can diversify network/2012/apr/27/charities-diversify-income-streams sustainability
Sector their income
Network streams

83
Charity Beyond http://www.cfg.org.uk/resources/Publications/~/media/Files All Online Report / Financial
Finance reserves. How /Resources/CFDG%20Publications/SV_Reserves_Final.ashx guidance sustainability
Group charities can
make their
reserves work
harder
Charity Do mergers in http://www.cfg.org.uk/resources/Document%20Library/regu All Online Report - Merger
Finance the voluntary lation-and-legal/mergers.aspx research /
Group sector provide evaluation
financial
stability for
the newly
formed
organisation?
Findings and
Recommendati
ons from
Research
DSC Building a https://www.dsc.org.uk/event/building-a-successful- All F2F Training General
successful organisation/ (half day) sustainability
organisation
The Charity The hallmarks https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the- All Online Guidance General
Commission of a successful hallmarks-of-an-effective-charity-cc10/the-hallmarks-of-an- sustainability
charity effective-charity
The Charity Charity https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/charities-and- All Online Guidance General
Commission reserves - reserves-cc19/charities-and-reserves sustainability
building
resilience (has
84
 some things in
common with
sustainability)
The Charity Collaborative https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/collaborative- All Online Guidance Merger
Commission working and working-and-mergers-an-introduction-cc34/collaborative-
mergers working-and-mergers-an-introduction
IVAR Thinking about https://www.ivar.org.uk/wp- All Online Report - General
sustainability content/uploads/2016/11/IVAR011-Sustainability- research / sustainability
Report_V6.pdf evaluation
IVAR Charities and https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/a All Online Report - Social
social ttachment_data/file/284706/social_investment.pdf research / investment
investment evaluation dev.
IVAR Strategic https://www.ivar.org.uk/strengthening-practice/strategic- All F2F Report - General
review service, review/ research / sustainability
which may evaluation
focus on
sustainability
amongst othet
things
IVAR Summary of https://www.ivar.org.uk/research-projects/sustainability/ All Online Report - General
sustainability research / sustainability
issues and evaluation
challenges,
taken from
Thinking about
Sustainability

85
IVAR Sustainability: https://www.ivar.org.uk/publication/sustainability-a-rapid- All Online Report - General
a rapid review review/ research / sustainability
evaluation
IVAR Reflecting our https://www.ivar.org.uk/reflecting-on-core-funding-and-our- All Online Blog General
own own-sustainability/ sustainability
sustainability
plan
IVAR Small https://www.ivar.org.uk/challenges-around-core-funding/ All Online Blog Social
organisations: investment
the journey to dev.
social
investment
IVAR Thinking about https://www.ivar.org.uk/research-projects/thinking-about- All Online Report - Merger
mergers mergers/ research /
evaluation
Cranfield Management http://www.cranfieldtrust.org/free-management- Orgs. F2F Consultancy General
Trust consultancy consultancy focused on sustainability;
(one of the poverty & Financial
areas being social sustainability
supported exclusion
'financial
management
and
sustainability')
Cranfield Business http://www.cranfieldtrust.org/article/2014/nov/11/cranfield Orgs. F2F Training Social
Trust planning for -trust-masterclass-you-need-shine focused on investment
social poverty & dev.

86
 investment - social
masterclass exclusion

Cranfield Essential http://www.cranfieldtrust.org/article/2014/mar/25/cranfield Orgs. F2F Training Strategic

Trust business -trust-masterclass-cash-competitors-and-wild-west focused on planning
planning - poverty &
masterclass social
exclusion
Cranfield Effective http://www.cranfieldtrust.org/article/2014/apr/30/cranfield- Orgs. F2F Training Financial
Trust financial trust-masterclass-spreadsheets-cashflow-management- focused on sustainability
planning - information-so-what poverty &
masterclass social
exclusion
Cranfield Business http://www.cranfieldtrust.org/leadership-and-strategic- Grps Online Guidance Strategic
Trust planning direction/business-planning focused on planning
resources poverty &
social
exclusion
CASS Tools for http://www.cass.city.ac.uk/faculty-and- All Online Toolkit General
Success research/centres/cce/knowledge-sharing/tools-for-success sustainability
Impact Support to http://accessimpact.org/ All Online Consultancy Training &
Measuremen enhance the and F2F ; events consultancy
t Programme measurement
of impact
within
charities

87
Big Lottery Sustainability https://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/- All Online Report General
Fund funding /media/Files/Programme%20Documents/Well%20being/pro sustainability
lessons (2014) g_well_being_sustainability_lessons.pdf
Big Lottery Exit Strategies: - https://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/- All Online Report General
Fund factors for /media/Files/Research%20Documents/er_res_exit- sustainability
success strategies_uk.pdf
Big Lottery Thematic - https://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/- All Online Report General
Fund review of /media/Files/Research%20Documents/er_them_rev_project sustainability
project _sustainability.pdf
sustainability
Big Lottery Social https://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/- All Online Report / Social
Fund investment /media/Files/Research%20Documents/Social%20Investment guidance investment
explained %20Explained_Guide.pdf dev.
Big Lottery Social https://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/- All Online Report / Social
Fund investment /media/Files/Research%20Documents/er_invest_ready_sum guidance investment
readiness mary.pdf dev.
report -
summary
Big Lottery Learning about https://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/- All Online Report - Social
Fund the impact of /media/Files/Research%20Documents/er%20social%20enter research / investment
the Big prise%20impact.doc evaluation dev.
Lottery's
funding on
social
investment

88
Big Lottery Understanding https://www.bigsocietycapital.com/latest/type/research/und All Online Report Social
Fund the capacity erstanding-capacity-and-need%20 investment
and need to dev.
take on social
investment
within the
social sector
Big Lottery Growing the https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/growing-the- All Online Report Social
Fund social social-investment-market-the-landscape-and-economic- investment
investment impact dev.
market
Big Lottery Early https://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/- All Online Report General
Fund indicators of /media/Files/Research%20Documents/er_eval_sustainability sustainability
sustainability - _report_summary.pdf
summary
Big Lottery Sustainability: https://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/- All Online Guidance General
Fund a short guide /media/Files/Publication%20Documents/pub_sustainability.p sustainability
df
Big Lottery Exit strategies: https://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/- All Online Report General
Fund factors for /media/Files/Research%20Documents/er_res_exit- sustainability
success strategies_uk.pdf
Big Lottery Thematic https://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/- All Online Guidance General
Fund review of /media/Files/Research%20Documents/er_them_rev_project sustainability
project _sustainability.pdf
sustainability

89
Big Lottery Final https://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/- All Online Report General
Fund evaluation of /media/Files/Research%20Documents/er_eval_supporting_c sustainability
the supporting hange_%20impact_jan2014.pdf
change and
impact fund
Big Lottery Better by https://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/- All Online Report General
Fund design: /media/Files/Programme%20Documents/Better%20by%20D sustainability
summary esign/Better%20by%20Design%20summary%20report%20M
report ay%202015.pdf
Big Lottery Better by https://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/- All Online Report General
Fund design: a users /media/Files/Programme%20Documents/Better%20by%20D sustainability
guide esign/Better%20by%20design%20users%20guide.pdf
Big Lottery Big and small: https://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/- Small Online Report Capacity-
Fund capacity- /media/Files/Research%20Documents/er_eval_es_cbneeds.p organisatio building
building, small df ns
organisations
and the BLF -
summary
report
CAF Consultancy to https://www.cafonline.org/charities/expert-advice All F2F Consultancy General
charities, sustainability
focusing on - resilience
matters such
as strategic
planning and
income
diversification

90
NPC Reviewing and http://www.thinknpc.org/events/reviewing-and-improving- All F2F Training Strategic
improving your your-charitys-strategy-4/ planning
charity's
strategy
Northern Foundations http://www.nr-foundation.org.uk/downloads/Foundations- All Online Report General
Rock for for-Organisational-Development-January-2007.pdf sustainability
Foundation organisational - growth
development
(2007)
Northern The crystal http://www.nr-foundation.org.uk/downloads/The-Crystal- All Online Report General
Rock ball: how do Ball-Final.pdf sustainability
Foundation TSOs see their - growth
future (2013)
Northern Journeys and http://www.nr-foundation.org.uk/downloads/Journeys-and- All Online Report General
Rock destinations: Destinations.pdf sustainability
Foundation the impact of - growth
change on
third sector
organisations
Northern Walking a http://www.nr-foundation.org.uk/downloads/Walking-a- All Online Report General
Rock tightrope: Tightrope.pdf sustainability
Foundation balancing - growth
critical success
factors in hard
times (2013)

91
Francis Scott Step Change http://www.fcsct.org.uk/step-change/ All (grant F2F Consultancy General
Charitable consultancy recipients) sustainability
Trust - growth
Lloyds Bank Facing https://www.lloydsbankfoundation.org.uk/Facing-Forward- All Online Report General
Foundation forward. How 2017.pdf sustainability
small and
medium-sized
charities can
adapt to
survive
Lloyds Bank Charity https://www.lloydsbankfoundation.org.uk/our- <1m F2F Consultancy General
Foundation mentoring programmes/charitymentoring sustainability
(includes many
elements of
sustainability)
The Baring Future advice: http://baringfoundation.org.uk/wp- All Online Report General
Foundation the content/uploads/2014/09/STVSFA8.pdf sustainability
strengthening
the voluntary
sector grants
programme
2012-2015
IVAR Merger as a https://www.ivar.org.uk/research-report/merger-as- All Online Report Merger
strategy strategy/
IVAR Story of a https://www.ivar.org.uk/research-report/story-of-a-merger/ All Online Report Merger
merger

92
ACOSVO Path to Impact http://www.acosvo.org.uk/path-impact All Online Diagnostic, General
(Scotland & guidance, sustainability
Northern training
Ireland)
City Bridge The way https://1vfva1igmeah9lhs11aj1e1d-wpengine.netdna- All Online Report General
Trust ahead. Civil ssl.com/wp- sustainability
society at the content/uploads/2016/07/SME574LondonFundersReport_Fo
heart of rWeb.pdf
London
Paul Hamyln Evaluation http://www.phf.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/PHF- All Online Report General
Foundation resource pack Evaluation-Resource-Pack.pdf sustainability
USAID Going the http://www.fhi360.org/resource/going-distance-step-step- Internation Online Guidance General
distance strategies-foster-ngo-sustainability al sustainability
developme
nt

93
Appendix E. The Common and Open Source Diagnostics project
This is the first initiative of a large and growing collective of funders (14+) and key sector helper
agencies who are exploring ways to join up (and thereby improve) their approach to supporting
VCSE organisations development of strengths and resilience.

The initiative grew out of 2 events (February 2016 and February 2017) in which funders gathered
together to share learning about their organisational development support offers and to explore the
issues in common. It was agreed that the most pressing issue to work together on was the joining
up of the various approaches to helping organisations review/diagnose the key issues that were
fundamental to their future resilience. The prime driver for this was the concern that without this
co-ordination, VCSE organisations could be faced with the prospect of being expected to use an
array of different tools, when a single and adaptive tool that would journey with them, be designed
and owned by them and be recognised across funders, would be more helpful.

A workshop in May 2017 with volunteers from the February 2017 event, was held to explore how
this could be pursued and to create a vision for success. A 2 year in-principle project skeleton was
agreed, with the first phase being to look across a number of diagnostics in more detail to examine
the level of commonality between fields of questioning, forms of posing questions and framing
answers and, functionality of analysis and reporting. This phase was led by Lloyds Bank Foundation
scholars.

A further workshop was held on the 10th October 2017 to report back on this study, which had
found a high level of commonality across the fields of questioning, but significant diversity of form
and functionality. It had also identified the need to make a diagnostic review more future-proofed,
especially in relation to cross-cutting aspects of capability such as digital.
It was agreed that the case for a common, adaptive and therefore open-source approach was strong.
Exercises during the day showed that even with different driving interests on the part of different
players (funders and providers of diagnostic tools and support), there was a shared appreciation of:

The importance of taking the vision forward with a user-led design approach to developing a
common diagnostic.
Seeking to use the best of the different tools available to inform the design.
Developing diagnostic design features and wrap-around support activities and approaches
that would:
o help to incentivise engagement with a diagnostic and catalyse autonomous
engagement into the future;
o Help users act on their diagnostic report and find the right (for them) source of
support for their next steps;
o Place power in the hands of the VCSE user and ensure they are able to reflect
without any sense of pressure or intrusion from funders, while also building the
confidence of funders that organisations are giving attention to the issues that will
matter most to their resilience;
o Develop big data insights that enable organisations to find solidarity and impetus to

94
 develop and, that help funders to understand their audience better;
o Enable peer support (e.g. via peer visits);
o Empower users to jointly reflect on what kind of support helps most with their
development journey and, to influence funders to make improvements to their
collective approach to supporting organisations development.

95