Conditions of Award

Requesting an applicant to fulfil certain conditions is common in grant-making. However, it is important for the decision making group to be clear about why they might use conditions, and about when they are appropriate and necessary, as opposed to simply creating further obstacles for the applicant to overcome (and which many small community group are unlikely to be able to).

Many funders have a standard set of terms and conditions of grant, which form in effect a grant ‘contract’ between the funder and the awardee. This can help ensure that those receiving community benefit funding, and therefore the Fund as a whole, are complying with the terms and conditions of the Agreement with the Fund donor. For example, they might state the responsibilities of awardees to publicise or acknowledge the source of the funding in any publicity material about the funded project and in their accounts.

If an award is being considered but the decision making group have some outstanding concerns about the project or the applicant organisation, they may wish to set some specific (further) conditions they feel are necessary. These can be required to be fulfilled at the most appropriate stage of the project:

  • Before any grant payment is made – for example provision of evidence that all matched funds have been secured, that planning consent has been given, or that the selected building contractor has current professional indemnity insurance
  • At some specific point or frequency during project delivery, for example, that an interim report on project progress to be provided six months from the start date, or
  • Once the project is complete – for example a condition about reporting back specific information on the project outcomes or achievements, above that required as part of any standard terms and conditions.

The decision making group should be clear about the difference between a condition of award and feedback (see section 5.2 below), and which is most appropriate to use in the circumstances. If setting conditions, the group must be clear about how they will know whether the condition has been met – what evidence would demonstrate that? Where possible, written evidence should be required form any relevant third party (such as the consent notice from the planning authority, or letters of award form other funders), in others it may be that a note of confirmation from the awardee is all that can be reasonably expected.

If the decision making group finds itself setting a significant number of conditions, this is likely to be a sign that they are shoring up a weak funding proposal, and it is worth considering whether rejection or deferral would be more appropriate. If they are supportive of the project in principle, then it may be a deferral is more appropriate, asking the applicant to re-submit at a later date and once the identified weaknesses have been addressed.