Foundation Practice Rating Logo

Skip to Content

Criteria

 

The criteria for assessing foundations are outlined here. Our aim is to be as consistent as possible year on year, subject to suggestions made in our annual consultation of stakeholders.

 

Diversity

CriterionUsed in other ratings/rankings/self-assessment tools/guidance?
The foundation presents information about eligibility, funding priorities etc. in a variety of different formats, such as videos, PDFs to reach a wider audience. Web accessibility in Mind, UK Government
The foundation accepts proposals for funding in a range of different formats (online, video, by post, etc.)UK government guidance on accessible formats
The foundation makes it possible to submit funding proposals in a range of different formats.2No
The foundation publishes a breakdown of the diversity of its staff (with respect to gender, ethnicity and disability only).[3] GlassPockets / Racial Equality Index
The foundation publishes a plan with targets improve the diversity of its staff.4Racial Equality Index
The foundation publishes a breakdown of the diversity of its trustees (with respect to gender, ethnicity and disability only).[4] GlassPockets / Racial Equality Index
The foundation publishes a plan with targets improve the diversity of its trustees.5Racial Equality Index
The foundation publishes information on any pay gaps (gender, ethnicity, disability).[5]Racial Equality Index
The foundation has made a public commitment to be a Living Wage Employer.3No
The foundation has made a public commitment to be a Living Wage Funder3No
The foundation publishes its recruitment policy for board members.No
The foundation publishes its recruitment policy for staff.3No
The foundation publishes its information in a Welsh language format if it funds in WalesUK government: Welsh language standards
The foundation publishes data about the diversity of its grantees or applicants

Accountability

CriterionUsed in other ratings/rankings/ self-assessment tools/guidance?
The foundation publishes information on who its staff are, including their biographies, on its website.[2]GlassPockets
The foundation publishes information on who its trustees/board members are, including their biographies, on its website.GlassPockets
The foundation cites the criteria on which its funding decisions are made.No
The foundation says who makes the funding decisions in its organisation.No
The foundation offers accessible ways to get in contact (e.g., text relay, BSL or other).No
The foundation provides a mechanism for comments, complaints (feedback).BBB Wise Giving Alliance, Standards for Charity Accountability
The foundation publishes any feedback it receives from grant seekers and/or grantees.GlassPockets
The foundation publishes any actions it will take to address this feedback.No
The foundation provides a mechanism to report malpractice concerns (whistleblowing).GlassPockets
The foundation publishes any analysis of its own effectiveness. GlassPockets / BBB Wise Giving Alliance, Standards for Charity Accountability
The foundation publishes some information of what it is doing differently as a consequence of this analysis.No
The foundation cites any evidence that it has consulted the communities it seeks to support in determining its funding priorities.No
The foundation publishes its investment policy.GlassPockets & ACF Transparency & Engagement
The foundation provides any comment/explanation about their payout ratesNo

Transparency

CriterionUsed in other ratings/rankings/self-assessment tools/guidance?
The foundation publishes any information about a time frame for funding decisions. This must be explicit dates, not statements like ‘twice a year’.No
The foundation states how to apply for funding.[1] No
The foundation publishes any information about its funding priorities.GlassPockets & ACF Transparency & Engagement
The foundation is explicit about what it will not fund.2 No
The foundation provides explicit mechanisms to ask questions about funding.GlassPockets & ACF Transparency & Engagement
The foundation publishes any eligibility criteria for what it funds.2GlassPockets & ACF Transparency & Engagement
The foundation publishes any information about a time frame for funding decisions.2 No
The foundation cites a time frame in which it will disburse funds to a successful applicant.2No
The foundation publishes any information on who or what it funded.GlassPockets
The foundation provides its data on awarded grants in a download-able (open) format that doesn’t require payment to access (.xlsx, .csv. .jstor, or .txt)No
The foundation publishes success rates for its funding.2No
The foundation publishes information about any grant reporting requirements for its grantees.No
The foundation publishes information about branding requirements for its grantees.No
The foundation provides contact information on its website. No

Year Three

  • The criteria and exemptions applied  are largely the same as previous years, with some small adjustments:

    Time limits to information used. If information relating to a criterion is present but more than three years old, it did not count toward a score, except for information on how foundations have consulted with communities they seek to help and how that influenced their strategies, which was limited to five years. The rationale is that three years is a usual strategic cycle and information older than that is likely to be out of date and not a reliable source of information on the foundation’s current priorities/ processes for applicants.

  • Information gathered and analysed but currently not scored – if disclosed:  Diversity information on grantees or applicants
  • Transparency of programmes about their eligibility criteria, decision-makers, and time-frames for with funding. This year we assessed the proportion of a foundation’s funding that have those, rather than the proportion of programmes that have them. This is to avoid a situation where a foundation would be marked down if it had (for example) one very large and transparently run programme and several less transparent but much smaller programmes.

Year Two

Following the consultation, the criteria applied are largely the same as the previous year with some adjustments to the exemptions summarised here:

  • Foundations under 5 staff are exempt from diversity plan criteria
  • Changed from exemption for foundations under 10 staff. Rationale: 10 demographically identical staff would be something applicants would find it useful to know and understand how this is regarded by the trustees.

See the exemptions page for more detail.

Information gathered and analysed but currently not scored – if disclosed:

  • Social class of staff and trustees
  • Lived experience of staff or trustees
  • Demographic information on applicants

Eliminated criteria

We also omitted during the scoring process some criteria which proved unworkable, as described above. The table below shows these eliminated questions, the reason, and the stage at which they were eliminated.

QuestionReason for eliminationStage of elimination
Does the foundation fund any research (stand-alone research, not monitoring and evaluation of grantees that deliver services for other funding)?Very few foundations did ‘research’ and research was difficult to defineAfter benchmarking, before main data collection
If yes, write a brief description of the research they fund (e.g. ‘health’, ‘medical’, ‘environmental’ or other) or write ‘N/A’ if the foundation doesn’t fund research.Same as aboveSame as above
Does the foundation explicitly ask potential grantees not to contact them (e.g. statements such as ‘Please read the FAQs, we are too busy to answer the phone’)?This was a ‘negative’ question (this would have taken away points). Too subjective for accuracy in the data collectionScoring stage
If the foundation publishes a breakdown of the diversity of their staff, what is that breakdown?The original intention was to compare the reported diversity of staff to national or regional demographics of the foundation. This proved too difficult because of the wide range of communities served. Also very few reported the staff breakdownScoring stage. Eliminated from scoring, but data still collected
If the foundation publishes a breakdown of the diversity of their board/trustees, what is that breakdown?Same as aboveScoring stage. Eliminated from scoring, but data still collected
Does the foundation publish its pay policy (such as tax, sickness, holiday entitlement, maternity, paternity, shared parental leave or other)? ‘N/A’ if there are no staff.Could not reliably collect data on this, as it was only clear for foundations that had a live job advertisement during the assessment periodScoring stage
The owner of this website has made a commitment to accessibility and inclusion, please report any problems that you encounter using the contact form on this website. This site uses the WP ADA Compliance Check plugin to enhance accessibility.