Ask a Grant Manager – September 2019

Staff Photo - Neil
Neil Shashoua – Grant Manager for the North East and Cumbria

Neil Shashoua is our Grant Manager for the North East and Cumbria. He joined the Foundation in January 2019, having worked in the voluntary and community sector in the North East and Cumbria for over 20 years and for local authorities in the region for 11 years. Neil brought with him experience of providing operational and strategic support to local, regional and national charities, mainly in the health & social care fields.

Before starting with the Foundation he ran a voluntary sector consortium, was an independent evaluator, and managed a number of projects.

“I really like helping people in organisations that do good, to problem solve, get the resources they need, and offer my support to make their charities even better.”

When not at work Neil is an active peer counsellor, volunteers as a Scout Leader in Northumberland and runs with his local club.

What are the main indicators you look for when accepting a grant application?

Great question, especially as a we have recently reviewed our grantmaking process ahead of our grants reopening for applications later this year (sign up here to be notified when they reopen).

Firstly, applicants need to be eligible for our funding – we fund only registered charities and Charitable Incorporated Organisations (CIOs) that have an income between £25,000 and £1m.

Secondly, we fund charities that are working with people who are experiencing at least one of the 11 complex social issues (CSIs) areas we have prioritised, and which are:

  • specialist – they have a strong track record of delivery, with evidence of reporting positive results. They may work more widely than our CSI areas but they need to a lot of experience and expertise in their chosen CSI area.
  • working with those in acute need: we are more likely to fund those who work with individuals at the more the serious/severe end of the spectrum of need and that have a clear way of identifying the needs of their beneficiaries.
  • working with people facing significant impact/disruption as a result of their complex social issue.

The work/interventions undertaken have the following features:

  • It is in depth, that is, working over a prolonged period with the individual.
  • It is holistic in nature and based upon a person-centred approach. The individual will have been assessed and their needs identified, with a plan of support put in place.
  • It is targeted. That is, it is not reactive. Charities know who the beneficiaries are, and they proactively seek to support them.

Finally, charities we fund support individuals via a clear pathway through their journey of change and are able to monitor and measure positive, outcome-based progression.

For more information visit our website.


Are there any restrictions on what your core funding will pay for?

Our core costs grants provide long-term funding for the day-to-day running of your charity, and/or the direct delivery of your charity’s work. We have listed what we will fund as core costs below but this list is not exhaustive. We do not fund capital projects, such as funding for a new building.

Core Costs 

Direct Delivery Costs 

Building running costs Salaries
Rent Recruitment
Utilities Sessional workers
Heating and lighting Volunteer expenses
Insurance Travel
Office costs Training
Stationery Monitoring and evaluation
IT running costs Promotion
Management costs Activity costs
Part-funding or funding of salaries
Finance/admin/back office


Do you accept applications from charitable community benefit societies?

No. We only fund charities or Charitable Incorporated Organisations (CIOs) registered with the Charity Commission, and who also have at least one year of published accounts. Charitable community benefit societies are not, as yet, regulated; for example, they are not registered with the Charity Commission.

If you’d like more information on why we only fund registered charities and CIOs, you can take a look at last month’s Ask a Grant Manager.

Have a question you want to ask our Grant Managers? Submit your questions here.

Don’t forget to subscribe to our newsletter so you can see the answers. 

Are you ready for the new 2019 Data Protection law?

Mark Burnett, CEO of data protection organisation Hope and May, writes what small and local charities might need to do to make sure they are compliant with GDPR rules in the event of a No-Deal Brexit. Read his blog below: 


john-cameron-WK0Feb8vafE-unsplashJust when you thought you had done all you needed to do about data protection, you should brace yourself as there are further changes just around the corner.

In the event of a No-Deal-Brexit, the Government has prepared new legislation which it has called the Data Protection, Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulation 2019. Yes, we are going to have our own version of the existing EU GDPR to ensure we can continue to process data separately from our Continental neighbours after we leave.

The processing of data of UK citizens will be largely unaffected. As a small charity, you may need to make some technical amendments to your current policies and, of course, the mandatory requirement to ensure that UK-based data subjects are aware of such change. However, there are far reaching consequences if you process the data of any European citizens.

The main issue that many organisations may not have considered is something called Adequacy. The EU Commission awards an Adequacy Decision to countries that are considered a safe haven for personal data, places that are considered to have a high standard of human rights, maintain political stability and have appointed supervisory authorities to regulate data processing and uphold high standards of privacy.

The UK, currently benefits from an Adequacy Decision, as do all other EU states as well as Switzerland, Canada and Japan amongst a few others. This important stamp of approval ensures the free flow of data in a similar way to the free flow of people. It fuels trade and relinquishes organisations from the burden of red tape and the cost of implementing legally binding alternatives.

If we leave the EU without a deal, we will automatically lose our Adequacy as a non-EU country. We’ll apply to get it back, of course, but these negotiations can only begin after we have left. This means that for the foreseeable future we will become a Third Country for data protection purposes and not considered adequate for processing non-UK citizen’s data.

The remedy will be a range of interim Safeguards designed to protect non-UK citizens and their data. These include things called Model Clauses and Data Sharing Agreements. The paradox is that although the UK has stated that all EU countries will be recognised on the 1st November as Adequate from its viewpoint, the EU have not reciprocated. In simple terms this means that you could send data from the UK to an EU state country such as France, but they would be breaking the law if they returned it to you.

Although the UK currently enjoys Adequacy, it doesn’t automatically mean we will regain our status and certainly not in the near future. There are hoops to jump through which is why it took Japan almost ten years to achieve theirs.

One problem concerns our surveillance laws. We have laws to enable our Government to snoop on us whenever it has a perceived need. So does the U.S. but Europe however doesn’t and has long criticised such intrusive measures. It is anticipated that the EU will pressure the UK Government to change such laws amongst other requirements, in return for an Adequacy Decision. We will watch with interest as this develops over time.

For a small charity, there are a few recommendations.

  • Firstly, make sure that any existing policies are updated in accordance with the UK GDPR requirements.
  • Review the current case for processing to include, the condition you are using (consent for example), ability to uphold data subject rights (such as the Right to be Forgotten) and principles of the law (for example, data retention) to ensure compliance is maintained.
  • Lastly, make sure your staff and volunteers are aware of their obligations to security and data sharing, and consider some training.

Regardless of Brexit, a recent survey by IT Governance revealed some startling facts about UK organisations and their compliance with Data Protection law. It reported that 79% of organisations are not compliant and fall short of their obligations. Unfortunately, smaller charities with less resource are more likely to fall into this category. It seems this isn’t about an unwillingness to comply, but more about a lack of awareness.

The research seems to suggest that in contrast to the high number of non-complaint organisations, only 25% of those questioned said they felt their knowledge of the GDPR could be improved. This reveals a stark truth that most organisations are seemingly unaware of their legal responsibilities and remain vulnerable to enforcement action and reputational damage.

Although most organisations wrote a policy or two last year, they haven’t fully implemented those policies into everyday business life. The Information Commissioner has been loud and clear about this in recent times. She said that there is little or no evidence that organisations are Accountable for their processing of personal data, even though this is a mandatory requirement of the GDPR Article 5(2). Therefore, it is clear that there is still much work to be done and that compliance is a journey and certainly not a destination.

Paul Streets: Diversity must be driven by those people we help

For equality, diversity and inclusion to be meaningful, it should run right through a charity’s approach and outlook.


As a sector we have rightly turned the Equality, Diversity and Inclusion spotlight on ourselves and been found wanting. Various commentators and organisations – including the Association of Charitable Foundations – have pointed to the lack of diversity on the boards of trusts and foundations; and concerns have been raised about the make-up of panels at sector conferences and, more broadly, about the lack of diversity at senior levels in the sector.

But if we look only at what is visible, we see only the tip of the Iceberg. Although what we ‘see’ matters we must focus on ensuring it affects what we ‘do’.

At Lloyds bank Foundation, we recently defined our own commitment to addressing inequalities and promoting greater diversity and inclusion in work, how we do it and how we communicate. We believe that to do this effectively we need to ensure our approach is grounded in the experiences, concerns and challenges of the charities we support and the people they reach.

As part of our journey, we spoke to Alison Moore, chief executive at Refugee Women Connect (RWC), one of our partner charities. It supports women asylum seekers and refugees to help bring about social justice and equality to some of the most vulnerable in society. Moore shared her thoughts on what EDI means to them.

She told us that creating a women-only safe space to begin the process of getting help is essential to RWC. “A concern for us is the wider dispersal that now takes place, meaning asylum seekers will be moved to areas outside of main cities with no support or specialist service providers, putting them at further disadvantage,” says Moore. In response, the charity has expanded its reach and the support it offers in response.

It also gains the input of its service users, some of whom regularly volunteer and provide suggestions for service development. Last year, RWC employed two previous service users who received their status and recently both staff and service users attended the ‘All Women Count’ lobby in Parliament together.

Moore says they found the experience really empowering. “This isn’t just about us as an organisation working to bring about change, but also to create a movement for women refugees and asylum seekers to be part of the debate, to lead on the discussion and to have the tools and resources to fight for their equality,” Moore adds.

Her reflections demonstrate that for EDI to be meaningful, it should run right through a charity’s approach and outlook. It’s also key to improving services.

The women at RWC need more than a women-only space to feel safe: they need the support of a charity that understands and responds to the cross section of the issues they face. The lesson to us all is that it’s not enough to just have the right people in the right places: we must respond to, and be driven by, the needs of those we exist for.

That’s quite a journey for charitable trusts and foundations that often embody the power and privilege of society’s structural inequalities.  But we’re beginning by looking to many of those we fund as exemplars of what it should mean. We hope they hold us to account when we miss the mark.

Lloyds Scholar Beulah: ‘The Foundation does so much more than just award grants’

file (2)
Lloyds Scholar Beulah Amponsa

Beulah Amponsa is a Lloyds Scholar – a unique social mobility programme run by Lloyds Banking Group which partners with leading universities across the UK. It offers students from lower income households a complete package of financial support, at least one paid internship, a business mentor and the opportunity to develop their employability skills, boosting future career prospects.

Beulah recently finished a 10-week placement with Lloyds Bank Foundation. Read her blog below:


When I found out that I would be interning with the Foundation, I wasn’t too sure what it would involve and the full extent of what they did. I thought that the Foundation was just another division of the bank and that they just give grants to charities.

This might be a common misconception among the general public who are not involved in the sector. Despite having explained it to interns and family members, some didn’t understand what the Foundation does or how integral their role is in the charity sector.

It has now been 10 weeks and I am grasping how crucial the role of the Foundation is in allowing charities to thrive and continue to do the work that they are doing.

So many of the charities that the Foundation aims to support are ones that tackle complex issues that have a substantial impact to those affected and their wider peer groups.

The Foundation continues to enable those working to overcome these issues to make a difference in their communities by putting the needs of these charities at the centre of its work.

I don’t know much about other grant makers, but I know that the amazing work the Foundation does means it can do even more than award grants. They also develop charities beyond covering costs; giving charities the opportunity to gain access to expert Lloyds Banking Group employees, developing their work and boosting their income streams with a view to making small and local charities sustainable.

Whilst here, I conducted research into the attitudes and preferences of Generation Z and  small and medium charities (SMCs), wrote a report and presented my findings. So, in 10 weeks, I have become a researcher, interviewer, survey creator and presenter. I had never done any of those things before this placement.

I have found out that awareness of SMCs is needed among Generation Z but even though that is the case, Gen Z still show an interest in supporting charities in their local communities. Money might not be something they have a lot of, but they do want to give; if not money, then time and they want to give in a way that is convenient and impactful.

My project has given me the opportunity to learn more about my generation, share my learning with others and contribute to the work of the Foundation, the Banking Group and charities.

‘Grantmakers need to be flexible to better support small and local charities’


Research & Learning Manager for Lloyds Bank Foundation, Alex Van Vliet, reflects on how grantmakers can improve monitoring and reporting to better support small and medium charities.

Running a small charity can feel like a constant balancing act of competing demands and spinning plates. The investment and support of a funder can help, but we can also hinder. Too often our approach to reporting and monitoring become yet another thing to worry about on an ever-growing to-do list.

Last year Lloyds Bank Foundation joined a group of grant-making foundations and grant-funded charities over a series of workshops to think critically about how grant monitoring and reporting works – or sometimes doesn’t. Does it drive accountability? Does it incentivise learning and improvement?

After some candid and challenging discussions, we agreed six principles to make reporting more meaningful and – hopefully –  mutually beneficial:

  1. Funders must explain why they have awarded a grant
  2. Funders and funded organisations are clear about what grant reporting will look like
  3. Funders are clear about the type of relationship they would like to have with the organisations they fund
  4. Funders only ask for information they need and use, and question whether they need bespoke reporting
  5. Funders give feedback on any grant reporting they receive and share their thoughts on the progress of the work
  6. Funders describe what they do with the information they obtain from funded organisations

Signing up to these principles was a timely prompt for the Foundation to reflect on our processes. Do they live up to our values as a grantmaker, to be a partner to the charities we fund?

Staff Photo - Alex VV
Research & Learning Manager for Lloyds Bank Foundation, Alex Van Vliet 

Under our new strategy, we made some significant changes to the way we ask charities to report each year. We started by reducing the amount of bespoke reporting we ask of grantees, instead focusing only on asking them how they have progressed against the objectives they themselves set. We want our monitoring to be based on the same management data that charities use to track their impact or report to their board: measure once, report twice.

In taking this approach we want to recognise each charity we fund tackles a complex social issue in their own way, and our monitoring approach has to value that difference. For example, we know that many of our grantees seek to support people into safe and suitable housing. The way they do that, however, can be as varied as our 700 grantees. For instance:

  • Providing victims of domestic abuse with immediate emergency refuge accommodation
  • Training young people with learning disabilities to learn the skills they need to live independently and sustain a tenancy
  • Providing people moving from rough sleeping into temporary accommodation with the practical support they need to apply for private tenancies

Any one of these would be considered a good outcome for housing – but will be defined, measured and reported in a different way. Being flexible on measurement approaches doesn’t mean that we’re compromising our standards – we set firm thresholds for our outcomes framework. In taking this approach, we are seeking to balance focus on the long-term goal with an open mind on how that might be achieved. In other words, we’re measurement pluralists.

The small and local charities we fund get this implicitly – responding to local context and local need with local knowledge in their DNA.

The small and local charities we fund get this implicitly – responding to local context and local need with local knowledge in their DNA. A charity housing rough sleepers in Doncaster shouldn’t look the same to a charity housing rough sleepers in Dagenham.

To me, this speaks to a broader point about the role of charities in social change. To value civil society – the belief that charities and the voluntary sector can help make change happen in the world – is to recognise we can elicit change in different ways. In other words, we’re change pluralists.


Working with Coronation Street and Hollyoaks to break the silence

DC SW and Cast

Duncan Craig, Chief Executive Officer of Survivors Manchester, writes how his charity is helping to reach out to survivors of male sexual abuse through working with the makers of Coronation Street and Hollyoaks. Producers from both primetime television programmes, watched by millions across the UK, have been working on powerful, groundbreaking storylines in recent years which have helped to break the silence on male sexual abuse. Lloyds Bank Foundation has been supporting the charity since 2017 and awarded its most recent grant worth £40k in February. 

Five years ago, Survivors Manchester worked with production company Lime Pictures and Channel 4 to tell a ground-breaking story on long-running soap Hollyoaks about the rape of one of its characters, John Paul McQueen. While Hollyoaks did cover male sexual abuse in 2002, that was in a late night special whereas this was going to be broadcast in the primetime 6.30pm slot.

No one could have predicted what would have come from that partnership, especially the Government’s announcement of the first ever Male Rape Support fund. I guess in some way we contributed to changing a small corner of the earth.

The relationship with Hollyoaks and its makers, Lime Pictures, remained firm and they were always on call to help us out with raising awareness of the issues affecting male survivors of sexual abuse, rape and sexual exploitation. In fact the actor who played John Paul, James Sutton, became one of our amazing ambassadors and has been a huge supporter of ours over the years.

Working on and being connected to such a powerful story helped Survivors Manchester stick in people’s minds. A few years later the Executive Producer of Coronation Street made contact and asked to meet. One meeting turned into another, a presentation at a story and script conference followed and the result was the incredibly powerful story of the rape of David Platt at the hands of Corrie newcomer Josh Tucker. This storyline touched a nerve with audiences. After the show was broadcast, National Male Survivor Helpline saw a 1700% increase in calls. Our charity also saw a 64% increase in direct requests for support.

The development of David’s story was influenced in part by the real life experience of another of our ambassadors, Sam. Together we read through and commented on scripts, talked to writers, worked with cast members and directors, and ended up in front of many cameras and journalists ourselves as the press took hold of the story.

Seeing the input we had come to life in the longest running soap in the world was incredible but it was the personal stories of men breaking their silence directly because of what they’ve seen on their television screens that we received on social media, on email and even from people directly that had the biggest impact on us as individuals. For me, as a male survivor who set up and now runs a male survivor organisation, whose first ‘proper job’ 26 years earlier was on Coronation Street felt like something had come full circle. 26 years previously I WAS the silent survivor at Coronation Street and now 26 years later I AM the vocal survivor helping Coronation Street tell a story that is helping men break their silence. I get goose bumps just writing that.

Similarly, when I talk about the next story we worked with our friends at Hollyoaks, I get shivers of pride. Their Exec Producer had been so inspired by seeing the Crewe and Man City ex-footballers stand outside court as paedophile Barry Bennell was convicted of numerous counts of sexually abusing boys during his reign as a professional football coach that he felt he needed to do something. I had seen the same footballers appear on the BBC’s Victoria Derbyshire programme and talk about their experiences in a way I’d never heard before. I was so inspired by one of those men, Steve Walters, that I reached out to offer my hand of support and he returned the offer becoming another of our ambassadors. Steve stated publicly on numerous occasions times the writers got it so right that it felt like he was reading parts of his life story. The #BreakTheSilence football abuse storyline we developed and that played out on Hollyoaks was not only a massive hit with audiences but won numerous awards. But possibly the most important part of that whole process was that we managed to get the first ever ISVA (Independent Sexual Violence Advisor) role shown on a soap. That meant that so many more survivors themselves better understood the type of support that is available to them from when they report abuse to the police through to appearing at court.

I was once asked what was the point of getting involved in these dramas and shouldn’t I focus my attention on services? But the simple answer is this is me drawing attention to services. I’m helping storytellers tell stories that show the public what help is available and that male survivors exist. I want to empower male survivors out there who are watching these shows to break the silence.

We will continue to help these stories be told and just recently ITV announced a new story was in development with Survivors Manchester which we’re incredibly excited about.

If we’re going to change the world for male survivors, we need to first change the view the world has about male survivors. A big thank you to long-running soaps like Coronation Street and Hollyoaks because they give us the platform to challenge perceptions, reach new audiences and help break the silence.

Ask a Grant Manager – August 2019

Staff Photo - Clare
Clare Rance – Grant Manager for the South West

Clare Rance is our Grant Manager for the South West of England. Before joining Lloyds Bank Foundation in April 2016, Clare held Grant Manager roles at Devon and Dorset Community Foundations and delivered local grant programmes on behalf of national funders including the Big Lottery Fund, Comic Relief and the Dulverton Trust.  Previously she has worked in development roles in the public sector with a focus on strategic partnerships and community strategies.  She has spent most of her working life in the West Country and other roles have included District Manager for Oxfam and Researcher at Exeter Archaeology.

When not working she spends time with her young family exploring the local beaches and cycling in the New Forest. This year she did the couch to 5k programme and has just signed up for her second 10k run!

Q: Do you fund community interest organisations?

I’m assuming you are referring to Community Interest Companies (CICs)?

Our approach as a Foundation has always been to support registered charities and more recently Charitable Incorporated Organisations (CIOs).  A registered charity is regulated by the Charity Commission and is required to prepare and submit an annual report and accounts.  Registering as a CIO allows an organisation to be both a charity and a company, with the same reporting requirements as registered charities.  Checking these reports forms an important part of our due diligence process when we are making decisions about whether to invest in an organisation.

Our grant-making processes are reviewed regularly by our trustees. However, as CICs do not have the same robust reporting mechanisms as charities and CIOs, our trustees have decided that the Foundation would not fund them.


Q: We are seeking funding to upgrade our IT systems which we rely on to support our volunteers and families and which provides data to help secure funding for our service. Can I apply for a grant for the cost?

The good news is that we do fund IT costs under our core cost grants programme.

If your charity is already funded by us, you are eligible for this type of support under our Enhance programme.  Your Grant Manager would be able to match you with approved providers that could help you to identify your upgrade requirements, to supply and help you implement specific database options and provide IT hardware (PCs, laptops and tablets).  We may also be able to provide you with specific digital support through our Lloyds Banking Group mentoring programme, which might be useful to consider as you work through the upgrade.

If you are not a current grantholder, you can apply for our Enable development grants before 31 August. If you would like to apply for core funding, you will need to wait until our core grants reopen in November before you can check your eligibility and apply. You can sign up here to be notified by email when grants reopen.

Have a question you want to ask our Grant Managers? Submit your questions here.

Don’t forget to subscribe to our newsletter so you can see the answers. 

National vision starts at a local level


One year on from the launch of the Community Wealth Fund Alliance, Public Affairs Officer at Lloyds Bank Foundation, Rachel Cain, writes about the importance of putting communities at the heart of key decision-making on how money is spent locally. The idea is gaining traction across the third sector and is backed by 150 organisations. 

As Brexit looms there is a profound need for a positive vision for the future. A movement is building around the idea of a Community Wealth Fund – a national, long-term initiative which starts with communities at a local level.

The Brexit conversation has highlighted and intensified the divisions that exist within communities. The phrase ‘left-behind communities’ is thrown around without much interrogation into its meaning and how to change things for the better – further alienating and dividing communities in the process. We know that there are places which aren’t benefiting from economic growth. We know that there are areas where jobs are scarce and uncertain, and where transport links are lacking. We also know that many communities have lost important social infrastructure – the places to meet which are vital for building the bonds that hold people together. Where is the vision for change?

Small and local charities like the ones we fund are often created with, by and for the communities they exist to serve. They are distinct in how they build trust, act as a foundation for change and take a person-centred approach which allows people to determine what they need to move forward.

These issues play out first and foremost at a local level and this is where change must start. One of the biggest challenges people face is feeling a lack of choice and control to shape and be part of the communities they live in. Civil society has a vital role to play in this. Small and local charities like the ones we fund are often created with, by and for the communities they exist to serve. They are distinct in how they build trust, act as a foundation for change and take a person-centred approach which allows people to determine what they need to move forward. They bring new resources into the community and act as the ‘glue’ which brings people and services together.

Staff Photo - Rachel
Public Affairs & Programmes Officer Rachel Cain

But even where this community infrastructure exists, it is underfunded and overstretched. Smaller charities in particular have lost up to 44% of their funding from public bodies at a time when demand is rising, leading to closure or reduced services. To realise a positive vision, there needs to be long-term strategic funding, targeted to the communities which need it most.

This is the vision of the Community Wealth Fund. An idea backed by an alliance of voluntary, public and private sector organisations. The campaign is calling for a new multi-billion-pound endowment, created from dormant assets, to invest in the communities where disadvantage is most acute. This fund will provide strategic funding focused on building capacity and infrastructure. The funding could come from the next wave of dormant assets from insurance and pension policies, bonds, stocks and shares, matched with investment from larger companies. Most importantly, local people will lead the way this fund is spent, reflecting  what positive change in their area should look like.

A year since its launch, the Community Wealth Fund Alliance has been backed by 150 organisations across sectors and regions, and the idea is gaining traction. The answer to a positive vision for the future lies with the people who know their community best – they just need the funding and opportunity to put it into action. Read more about the idea, the research behind it and how you can get involved by signing up to join the alliance.

Paul Streets: Look to small charities for reparation-based approaches to rehabilitation

Small and local charities are keen to revamp the government’s failed Transforming Rehabilitation programme and support offenders.


The Government’s new Prime Minister and cabinet have been appointed with a clear focus on Brexit, but with myriad other tough issues to face in service to their electorate.  One of the more complicated and nuanced is Criminal Justice – a key priority for Lloyds Bank Foundation and the charities we support.

In his final speech as Justice Secretary David Gauke pointed out what those who work with offenders had known for years: ‘if all offenders who currently receive prison sentences of less than six months were given a community order instead, we estimate that there would be around 32,000 fewer proven reoffences a year’. As Robert Buckland takes up the mantle let’s hope he doesn’t leave it till his last month to reach the same conclusions, given that Mr Gauke leaves office with historically high prison numbers: at 92,000 twice that of 1990.

At the Foundation we’re taking a more targeted, upstream approach to justice issues, including working with the Howard League to reduce the number of women arrested, as well as aiming to do more to influence the new probation system being developed. The small charities we work know the flaws and failings of ‘Transforming Rehabilitation’ first hand – a venture condemned by the Justice Select Committee in 2018 as having ‘failed to open up the probation market’, or for offering ‘through the gate’ support that was inflexible and ‘merely signposting.’

With so many small and local charities keen to revamp the system it’s not enough to fund them to rehabilitate ex-offenders – it’s time to stem the cycle – to divert and reduce people entering the system in the first place. We’ve had a huge number of expressions of interest from charities to undertake specific work. This reflects the hugely diverse nature of work across the sector, including work focused on specific communities who are over-represented including: BAME groups; Care leavers; Gypsy and Roma communities; or on preventative work and alternative approaches like restorative justice.

In a recent opinion piece from the Economic and Social Research Council Professor Fergus McNeill argues for a better balance between ‘retribution’ and ‘reparation’ based approaches. He notes the truth we see in work we fund – which chimes with David Gauke’s comments that we should ‘look past the offence ‘to the person and the complex needs that contribute to keeping them trapped in a cycles of crime’ – that the ‘wrongdoings’ which result in criminalisation are often associated with wrongs against perpetrators in their earlier lives. One particularly stark observation is that people who were ‘looked after’ by the state as children are 13 times more likely to end up in prison.

Seen in this light, the role of small charities like Leicestershire Cares, which I visited and which works with both care leavers and ex-offenders, is critical in ensuring that people who leave both forms of institutional care get the support they need. Sometimes that’s support for the most simple – but symbolic – of things. One of the prisoners they’d managed to secure employment for told me the thing that made the biggest difference to his life was being able to ‘buy birthday presents for his grandchildren’.

McNeill’s piece notes that whilst offending itself breaks relationships and tears at our social fabric, as with care leavers, the fabric itself is torn because it is already ‘weak and worn thin by these other wrongs’. Given this the repair, like the tear, must be relational. Small local charities like Leicestershire Cares and the West Yorkshire Chaplaincy are best placed to understand this. Let’s hope the new Justice Secretary understands that too when he launches the ‘reformed’ ‘Transforming Rehabilitation’ programme.

‘Decision makers must not turn their backs on local domestic abuse experts’

Business Manager for HARV Amanda Elwen

Hyndburn and Ribble Valley (HARV) Domestic Violence Team is a charity that has been providing services to vulnerable children and families since 1998. Amanda Elwen, Business Manager for HARV, has written an open letter to officials, calling on them to turn their attention to the urgent need within domestic abuse services and to give a voice to specialists on Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG).

In response to the demand and strain upon domestic violence services, generic victims services were established. Amanda Elwen highlights the shortcomings of such services and the importance of supporting VAWG specialists. Read Amanda’s heartfelt open letter below:

Dear Commissioners, Policy Makers and Decision Makers,

Did I do something wrong? Did I speak too loud? Did I not behave appropriately? Do I not conform to your expectations?

You see, our relationship has deteriorated recently. For the last twenty-five years, I have dedicated my life to supporting thousands of women and children who have suffered abuse. My charities have delivered hundreds of contracts and independent evaluations suggest we have done a good job.

Recently, it seems that you think that you no longer need me and I have to say after 25 years, this hurts a little bit. You had a party the other evening and you didn’t even invite me, you invited lots of your new friends. I’m no longer invited around your table and you don’t even let me have the scraps anymore.

But you still expect me to keep doing what I have always done and sometimes when you need me for something, like an equality impact assessment, you promise me, one day it will get better.

I hang on your promises in the hope that things might change. I stay a little longer in the hope that I may get invited around your table once again. But you don’t call and you leave me with very little option. To survive or not to survive. Well surprise, surprise, we chose survive. You see, when you leave a woman with nothing, you leave them in very dangerous territory. But courage calls to courage everywhere. We survived by developing businesses that generate enough profit to enable us to continue to provide frontline services to women and children.

Let me say that again. In the 21st century, specialist VAWG services have to establish businesses to generate enough profit to then provide women and children with the services that are necessary for them to survive. How many women’s charities have we seen close this year alone? And at a time where demand for our services are greater than ever. Our sector is not valued, and we are being discarded and thrown to the margins. This is about respect. Respect at every level. You see, when women are respected, they do not need protection. If you need heart surgery, you go to a heart surgeon. If you need a tooth extracting, you go to a dentist. If you are raped, violated, coerced, harassed, assaulted, abused, humiliated, forced or exploited then who would you want to help you? If you have nowhere to live and have lost your children as a result of violence who would you want to help you? If it was your sister, mother or wife, who would you want to help them?

The answer is not a generic victims service. The answer is I want the very best, I want the expert, I want the people who understand the complexity of the situation and have the experience to know how to best support me and my family. I want the people who are available when I need them, the people who will fight for justice and stand by my side.

Women and children are still coming to us, the demand for our services haven’t changed and while women and children continue to line up for help, I urge you to find ways to get the VAWG specialists back around the table where key decisions are being made.