Went to the NCVO policy forum seminar on Thursday about commissioning research. It wasn’t as dry as it sounds, and well-attended by some interesting charities I’d never met before. The highlight for me though was to hear that when Age Concern commissioned some research recently, it opted for the bidder that didn’t tick all the boxes – and there were bidders that did. Instead, it went for the bidder that had a strong background in the field, came up with a different design for the research brief, and was likely to take longer than the others. I felt refreshed that an organisation was going for quality, laced with a bit of imagination, rather than tick-boxes.
The tea-talk at the seminar felt like a BLF funding application support group. Many of us were in the throes of this somewhat cumbersome process, and a few wistfully observed that the BLF might benefit from attending such a seminar in future. Given the volume of applicants, couldn’t there be an early weed-out process before having to fill in everything? I’ve found parts of the BLF application form pretty stimulating – nothing like focusing on outcomes to really test why you want to do something. But at this stage wasn’t sure why the BLF really needed our independent referee’s date of birth. Couldn’t that come later if it looks like we’re in with a chance?
