Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 28 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.Sign up
Look at whether there are any "no strings" funding sources to assist with the move #547
Without taking a position on whether DoES would wish to be involved with funding applications it might be helpful to document if there are any relevant funding sources available for DoES activities.
If not then the whole question obviously becomes much easier to answer.
Initial thoughts are that minimal requirements would be:
Actions that funding would support might include contributions towards
Man in a van etc.
Furniture and fittings, tooling for the workshop
Providing a space for people to be technology innovators in the North West
Providing a platform for DoES affiliated businesses, or those making use of DoES services, to engage with young people (and perhaps older people) wishing to embark upon a career in the technology industries.
May involve training, project work, internships, apprenticeships.
I found this range of funds which looks like it might be the type of thing
I Am Digital
"iAMDigital is a £1m fund from Nominet Trust and Creative England, investing in organisations working to increase digital inclusion and digital skills in England"
"What does the fund offer?
Who is eligible?
Tackling the barriers limiting people's digital capabilities: lack of access, skills, confidence and motivation
To be eligible your organisation must:
Although if we wanted to get an application into iAMDigital we'd have to do it by Monday !!!
I don't know if this is suitable for DoES, if there is a wish to pursue this, or if it is achievable, but I figure if you don't ask you don't get so am happy to try to work on an application for Monday with others if there's an interest in doing this
I don't know if this is any use: Lottery cash
https://www.beehivegiving.org/ - funding finder tool
http://www.internetsociety.org/what-we-do/grants-awards/beyond-net-funding-programme - you'd have to be member of internet society
https://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/uk-wide/funding - this can be used for all sorts of things, talk to Liverpool Transition Network who can put you in touch with groups that have used it
https://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/powertochange - bigger version of above
BTW, in terms of funding/grants/whatever, the aim is generally to accelerate something. Depending on funding supplier, that would either be more permadesks (accelerate capacity to bring in more money) or workshop space/equipment (accelerate better features available to community).
EDIT: Also, one other avenue to pursue is a repair/upcycle space (completely new aspect to DoES), particularly if it factors training locals to repair stuff or learn a trade.
A note for anyone else, this came out of a conversation at the Organisers meeting (for which there are no notes yet), around one-off funding to support the move. We've also discussed previously crowd-sourcing (inc spacehive) for this area.
Alex - I agree, interest free loan not quite so good right now. It's also worth checking eligibility at the start, as though we're non-profit, we're not a charity and we could technically take out funds if we choose. Just an FYI.
Awards for All could be interesting. I think it's the only lottery fund we could be eligible for without a much bigger programme with staff etc, focusing in a particular direction. I know it reasonably well (I did 8 of them last summer), and I think it would be a stretch to match their target areas, but we should look properly. They will (all) have monitoring requirements and outcomes, and so that will be the interesting conversation ;). We should def. look.
The others are new to me. May I suggest that the starting point (for any application really, and to know whether we would meet the funding criteria) would be to identify:
It might be there are smaller pots that don't require this, but all but a handful would want at least an idea of these. Happy to talk with anyone wanting to get stuck in, if useful.
(We'd also want to agree as a team before actually making any bids. :)
Somewhere. I was doing this and got rather stuck (and a knowledge/discovery level). The primary question is can we be a charity and still be DoES in all we are. I need to go back to LCVS for help. If you wanted to come with me - always welcome. The other question was limited by guarantee rather than share, which is where we run into issues. Not sure there is much on github, but I can update it shortly.
Just a quick note to say that if you do want to have a look at applying for some one off funding to support us as we move, that could be great.
I absolutely don't want to us to be gatekeepers or stop anything happening on this.
Making a note of interest free loan type stuff wouldn't be the worst idea. Interest free certainly better than not interest free! And if anything is "only" offering match funding then it may still be an option, could run alongside crowdfunding perhaps (or other funding if we were successful with that).…
On 28 Jul 2017, at 17:58, Steve ***@***.***> wrote: @ajlennon <https://github.com/ajlennon> I've emailed Liverpool CVs to ask for a new appointment, or additional support, and copied you in. Thanks. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#547 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABqa0qO3khTEApt1j--1f_naIteb9CTks5sShNRgaJpZM4OmZvI>.
Interest free certainly better than not interest free! Yes, that's definitely true. :) On 28 Jul 2017 8:17 p.m., "John McKerrell" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: Making a note of interest free loan type stuff wouldn't be the worst idea. Interest free certainly better than not interest free! And if anything is "only" offering match funding then it may still be an option, could run alongside crowdfunding perhaps (or other funding if we were successful with that).
On 28 Jul 2017, at 17:58, Steve ***@***.***> wrote: @ajlennon <https://github.com/ajlennon> I've emailed Liverpool CVs to ask
for a new appointment, or additional support, and copied you in. Thanks.
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <https://github.com/
DoESLiverpool/somebody-should#547#issuecomment-318707582>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe- auth/AABqa0qO3khTEApt1j--1f_naIteb9CTks5sShNRgaJpZM4OmZvI>.
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#547 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AImqx_XKYAwX8QC8CD3B36p6ZRxf9rBAks5sSjPhgaJpZM4OmZvI> .
On the lottery side I think Awards for all is the only option for DoES at the moment. They look for track record delivering funded programmes for their other strands. They, and most funders now are willing to fund constituted cic's as well as registered charities. So there's less incentive from a funding perspective to take on the additional regulatory burden of a formally registered charity.
There are often small pots available from places like the community foundation too. The tricky bit would be finding one that was prepared to cover move costs. Funders look for community benefits and generally numbers of beneficiaries. There's a lot of does activity that could potentially be fundable but organisation moves, like a lot of core costs, are difficult to fund.
I don't think there's been much movement on it for some time.
I'm torn as to whether to leave this open or close it - if there are no-strings funding options available, then it makes sense to keep this live for the future. However, given that Christmas is fast approaching and we'll be moving within a few weeks after that, the idea of us being able to get an application in and accepted before that is pretty unlikely.
That one almost felt applicable "Be able to demonstrate experience of working in and/or with disadvantaged communities." surely the whole of Liverpool counts these days? I guess they'd actually want more specific examples which we probably couldn't provide, and this is supposed to be for "projects" rather than general running costs, so it would require someone being willing to actually run a project.