In parallel with the setting of rounds, it can be very useful,  from the perspective of both the decision-making group and applicants, to set minimum and maximum award levels. This is another way to manage demand and to ensure that the funds are distributed across a range of projects or initiatives, hopefully delivering impact across the various Fund purposes and priorities. However, in small communities it may of course be the case that there are a very few potential groups and projects to fund, or that those that do exist are looking to deliver one or two large, transformational projects. In such cases, a high maximum grant level, or none at all, may be appropriate.

Factors influencing the minimum level of award include the existence (or not) of other small funds that may meet demand for smaller amounts of money and the amount of time and effort involved in assessing and administering very small amounts of funding versus their likely impact. Micro grants can be made available, allowing individuals, non-constituted groups, as well as constituted groups to apply for smaller amounts of funding, perhaps up to £500. If micro grants are to be a feature of the Fund, then a sensible minimum award level for funding proposals to the main Fund would be the upper or limit of those micro-grants.

Factors influencing the maximum level of award are shown in the diagram below. It may be possible to arrive at an estimate of the likely type and size of project for which funds will be sought, based on the Fund purposes/priorities and identification of current local projects in the pipeline. If large capital projects will be supported, for example, then larger grants will be appropriate.

Green box with white text in top corner reads 'key considerations in setting the maximum level of award' . Four cogs make up the diagram, with text in their center. Cog 1: "Likely number of funding proposals" Cog 2: "Number of rounds (set in conjunction with award size)" Cog 3: "Size of fund" Cog 4: "Likely size & type of projects looking for funder."

Local intelligence is key here, on the number and sophistication of local applicant bodies and whether they have projects in development already, and which require funding.

Remember, it is possible to review and adjust the upper and lower grant limits in light of demand once the Fund has been award making for some time. If, for example, the Fund is experiencing regular requests for grants at the upper limit and is underspent year-on-year, this might be sufficient evidence for increasing the upper grant limit.